Ngo v. Tran CA2/4

Filed 4/24/23 Ngo v. Tran CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

KAM NGO, B322843

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. 21STCV17075) v.

HENRI HAI TRAN et al.,

Defendants and Appellants.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Steven J. Kleifield, Judge. Reversed and remanded. Prosperous Law Group, David T. Tran and Kristin Cable, for Defendants and Appellants. Law Offices of Edward C. Ip & Associates, Edward C. Ip and Christine A. Chou, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

INTRODUCTION This appeal is from an order imposing monetary sanctions. At respondent’s request, the trial court sanctioned appellants for bringing an unsuccessful motion for reconsideration under Code of Civil Procedure section 1008.1 However, to obtain such sanctions, respondent had to follow procedural steps set forth in section 128.7. Respondent did not do so. Therefore, we reverse.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND This appeal involves a straightforward issue of law. We recite only those facts necessary to explain our decision. Appellants Henry Hai Tran and his d/b/a/ company HD Construction (whom we will refer to collectively as “HD Construction”) and respondent Kam Ngo were parties to a construction contract. In May 2021, Ngo sued HD Construction. HD Construction recorded a mechanics lien and cross-complained. In December 2021, Ngo petitioned to release the mechanics lien. In January 2022, the trial court granted that petition. HD Construction then moved for reconsideration. In Ngo’s opposition to the motion for reconsideration, he asked “that monetary sanctions be awarded to Plaintiff[] and paid by Defendants and their attorney for reasonable fees associated with Plaintiff having to file this Opposition and attend this hearing in the amount of $5,257.00 plus filing fees in the amount of $61.65.” Ngo cited section 1008, subdivision (d) as the basis for this request.