Case Number: BC645864 Hearing Date: December 26, 2017 Dept: 47

Rex Glensy v. Philippe Diaz, et al.

MOTION TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF CROSS-COMPLAINT

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant Rex Glensy

RESPONDING PARTY(S): Cross-Complainants Phillipe Diaz and Sceneries Entertainment Corp.

STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS:

Plaintiff alleges that Defendant has failed to pay Plaintiff for legal services rendered.

Defendants Philippe Diaz and Sceneries Entertainment Corp. filed a cross-complaint alleging that Plaintiffs represented Defendants and himself and another party to a financing agreement for a film, failing to act in the best interests of Defendants/Cross-Complainants as clients, resulting in a breach of fiduciary duty.

Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant Rex Glensy moves to strike portions of the Cross-Complaint.

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Rex Glensy’s motion to strike ¶ 36 and the Prayer for Relief, Page 11, line 9, ¶ 2 of the Cross-Complaint re: punitive damages is DENIED.

DISCUSSION

Motion To Strike

The motion to strike ¶ 36 and the Prayer for Relief, Page 11, line 9, ¶ 2 re: punitive damages is DENIED. The Cross-Complaint sufficiently alleges facts to justify a finding of “malice” as that term is defined in Civil Code § 3294(c)(1) to include conduct which is intended to cause injury to Plaintiff, and despicable conduct carried on with a willful and conscious disregard of the rights of others. Here, the Cross-Complaint adequately alleges that Cross-Defendant Glensy worked against his own clients’(cross-complainants herein) interests in cooperation with Nemeth so that Nemeth could obtain a greater ownership percentage in Cinema Libre, the company which held the option to purchase the film adaptation rights. See, e.g., Cross-Complaint, ¶ ¶ 14-17, 20-30.

Cross-Defendant Glensy is ordered to answer the Cross-Complaint within 20 days.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: December 26, 2017 ___________________________________

Randolph M. Hammock

Judge of the Superior Court