Sukumar

Sukumar v. Air Machine Com SRL

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 11, 2013D060743California7,221 words

Opinion

Opinion

Filed 3/11/13 Sukumar v. Air Machine Com SRL

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

PONANI N. SUKUMAR, et al., D060743

Plaintiffs and Appellants,

v. (Super. Ct. No. 37-2007-00052071-

CU-BC-NC)

AIR MACHINE COM SRL, et al.,

Defendants and Respondents.

APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Earl H. Maas,

III, Judge. Affirmed.

Ponani Sukumar and his physical rehabilitation clinic, Southern California Stroke

Rehabilitation Associates (together Sukumar), appeal orders dismissing Panatta Sport

SRL (Panatta) and Air Machine Com SRL (COM) from the action for lack of personal

jurisdiction. Sukumar contends the trial court erred when it granted the separate motions

to quash of Panatta…

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.