2014-00170267-CU-CO

Ram Gopal vs. Nissim Lanyadoo

Nature of Proceeding: Motion for Summary Judgment and/or Adjudication

Filed By: Foster, Daniel J.

Defendants Nissim Lanyadoo and Nissim Lanyadoo by Ben Lanyadoo as Conservator of the Person and Estate of Nissim Lanyadoo’s (collectively, “Lanyadoo”) motion for summary judgment or, in the alternative, summary adjudication is CONTINUED on the Court’s own motion to January 22, 2019.

Plaintiffs Ram Gopal (“Gopal”) and Ravinder Kaur’s (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) operative Second Amended Complaint alleges cause of action against Lanyadoo for breach of contract, negligent nuisance, constructive eviction, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and intentional breach of the covenant of quiet use and enjoyment.

Lanyadoo’s motion for summary judgment/adjudication sets forth 20 issues, predicated upon the same legal bases: the entire lawsuit against Lanyadoo, and each cause of action therein, is barred by the doctrine of judicial estoppel for Gopal’s failure to disclose this lawsuit in Gopal’s bankruptcy and, if any claims are not judicially estopped, Plaintiffs lack standing because any claims belong to the bankruptcy trustee.

On August 26, 2014, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of California granted Gopal a discharge of debt under section 727 of Title 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code. On August 29, 2014, Gopal’s bankruptcy was closed pursuant to the Bankruptcy Court’s “Final Decree.”

In opposition to this motion, Plaintiffs have presented evidence that Gopal recently reopened his bankruptcy on November 29, 2018, and submitted amended schedules listing this action against Lanyadoo. Gopal has also filed a motion to abandon with the Bankruptcy Court, which is set for hearing on January 9, 2019. The motion to abandon asks the trustee to abandon this claim against Lanyadoo and permit Gopal to pursue the action.

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs have requested a continuance of this motion until after the hearing in the Bankruptcy Court on their motion to abandon. The Court finds that a continuance is warranted in light of the issues raised in the motion and the reopening of Gopal’s bankruptcy, submission of amended schedules, and motion to abandon. Until the trustee determines whether this action is an asset of the bankruptcy estate, it is unclear whether or not Plaintiff has standing to proceed or if the claim belongs to the trustee. Further, although Lanyadoo contends on reply that a continuance will unduly prejudice them, Lanyadoo does not specify the prejudice or indicate why a continuance of the trial date could not be obtained.

The parties are ordered to file a Joint Status Report following the January 9, 2019, hearing in the Bankruptcy Court indicating the outcome of the hearing and the trustee’s determination on Plaintiff’s motion to abandon. Such Joint Status Report shall be filed no later than January 11, 2019.

Given the imminent trial date of February 4, 2019, the Court vacates the present trial date. This case is referred back to the Trial Setting Process for selection of new Trial and Mandatory Settlement Conference dates. All counsel (including parties appear in

pro per) shall confer and agree upon trial and settlement conference dates. Available dates can be obtained on the court’s website at , or by recorded message at 916-874-6098. Plaintiffs’ counsel must notify the court of the selection of Mandatory Settlement Conference and Trial dates within 60 days of the date of this order by completing the request form at . If the parties have not agreed on dates by the 60th day, court staff shall assign Mandatory Settlement Conference and Trial dates that are next available, unless an extension of time has been granted by the appropriate Case Management Program Judge.