Harlem

Harlem v. Corben CA2/6

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 4, 2026B339187California1,472 words

Opinion

Opinion

Baltodano, J.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

In 2023, Krisp and other individuals (collectively Respondents) filed a lawsuit against Corben and others in Santa Barbara County. The lawsuit alleged, among other things, that Corben and other defendants1 breached their obligations and intentionally made false misrepresentations related to a joint

1 The other defendants are not party to this appeal. venture agreement to operate a commercial marijuana farm in Santa Maria purportedly owned by Corben’s entity, Equal 7 LLC, and split the profits. Respondents sought the return of their investment and punitive damages after Corben allegedly failed to share profits with them. In March 2023, Respondents personally served Corben with the lawsuit and a notice of punitive damages in the amount of $1,000,000. Corben then communicated with Respondents’ counsel and agreed to produce financial records and participate in settlement discussions in exchange for Respondents’ agreement to not request Corben’s default. Based on Corben’s representations that no defendant lived in Santa Barbara County, the parties stipulated to transfer the action to Los Angeles County. But Respondents could not file the stipulation…

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.