Hamada

Hamada v. Valgardson CA2/7

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 17, 2015B252714California5,490 words

Opinion

Opinion

Filed 2/17/15 Hamada v. Valgardson CA2/

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

LEIKO HAMADA et al., B252714

Plaintiffs and Appellants, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. SC120488) v.

RICHARD VALGARDSON,

Defendant and Respondent.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Allan J. Goodman, Judge. Affirmed. Koletsky, Mancini, Feldman & Morrow, and Susan L. Caldwell for Plaintiffs and Appellants Leiko Hamada and Julian Mehra. No appearance by Respondent. ____________________ Leiko Hamada and her adult son, Julian Mehra (collectively the Hamada parties), appeal from the order entered after the trial court granted Richard Valgardson’s motion to quash the summons and complaint served…

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.