Viriyapanthu

FACTS

The operative cross-complaint features 15 causes of action against 20 cross- 2 defendants, including Suriel. Viriyapanthu contends his former employees, in conjunction with others, misappropriated funds from Viriyapanthu’s legal practice. Complications ensued for Viriyapanthu, including various lawsuits and state bar complaints by clients. Viriyapanthu accuses many of the cross-defendants of deeds amounting to fraud, extortion, and conspiracy. But there is very little mention of Suriel in the operative pleading. Paragraph 14 alleges Suriel is a resident of San Diego County. Paragraphs 52 and 53 indicate Suriel (a lawyer) was involved in filing a class action lawsuit against Viriyapanthu alleging the theft of client funds by Viriyapanthu. Along with other specified cross-defendants, Suriel “made a substantial contribution to furtherance of the lawsuit and was aware . . . that the lawsuit lacked merit.” Viriyapanthu alleges improper motives for this lawsuit and claims the suit was dismissed on March 27, 2012. Viriyapanthu cites these facts in support of a malicious prosecution cause of action against Suriel and others.

1 All statutory references are to the Code of Civil…