Incentax

Incentax v. Gan CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 18, 2024G063917California3,303 words

Opinion

Opinion

Delaney, J.

Filed 12/18/24 Incentax v. Gan CA4/

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

INCENTAX, LLC,

Plaintiff and Respondent, G063917

v. (Super. Ct. No. CIVSB2210175)

GEOFFREY THOMAS GAN et al., OPINION

Defendants and Appellants.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Bernardino, Joseph T. Ortiz, Judge. Affirmed. Hill, Farrer & Burrill, Clayton J. Hix, and Erika A. Silverman for Defendants and Appellants. Umberg Zipser, Mark A. Finkelstein and Ethan Feng, for Plaintiff and Respondent. Geoffrey Thomas Gan and his company GTG Consulting LLC (collectively “Appellants”) appeal from a trial court’s order denying their motion to compel respondent…

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.