Mesce

Mesce v. Madalow CA4/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 15, 2024D082133California3,094 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rubin, J.

I. INTRODUCTION

Based on their judgment against George Mattia (George),1 Carol

Mesce2 and Vanz, LLC (collectively Appellants) sued Talal Madalow and Ibtisam Madalow (the Madalows), claiming a superior interest in real property the Madalows obtained from George’s mother, Shalah Mattia (Shalah). The trial court granted the Madalows’ motions to strike portions of Appellants’ complaint and to expunge a lis pendens Appellants recorded against the disputed property. Finding the Appellants’ complaint deficient without the lis pendens, the trial court also granted the Madalows’ motion for judgment on the pleadings. On appeal, Appellants claim the trial court erred on all three motions. We dismiss the appeal regarding the expungement order because that order is not appealable, and Appellants did not seek timely writ review. We affirm the trial court’s other two rulings. Any error regarding the motion to strike is either abandoned or harmless and the trial court properly granted the motion for judgment on the pleadings.

II. BACKGROUND

On April 3, 2014, Appellants sued numerous defendants for fraud and conversion (2014 Action). The complaint alleged George employed a fraudulent scheme in…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.