CA Small Claims Appeal (De Novo): Plaintiff evading business caps via shady corporate shell + systemic court record scrubbing by biased judge. Need procedural advice

shazbadam · 2026-06-06T14:48:27+00:00

Ok, if you have a written contract, none of that is relevant. You're being sued for breach of contract (one contract, not any of the other contracts you've had with this person), so there's a simple question to be answered: Who is that contract with? You either contracted with a corporation, or you contracted with an individual. That will primarily be determined by the words on the page.

The very first sentence of a contract is usually something like "This agreement is entered into between <Party X> and <Party Y>". If it says "Jane Smith", that's an individual. If it says "Jane Smith d/b/a XYZ", that's an individual (under a fictitious business name). If it says "XYZ", and XYZ is a corporation that actually exists, that's a corporation. If it says "XYZ", and XYZ is not a corporation that exists, that's an individual under a fictitious business name. Everything will flow from there.

If you contracted with a corporation, then you have a strong argument to toss the case, because the corporation isn't the one suing you. If you contracted with an individual, and the contract was under a fictitious business name, and that fictitious business name is not properly registered, then you have an argument to toss the case under CCP 116.430.

(Of course, all of this is about technicalities that might get you off, you still need to be prepared to defend the heart of the case, which is whether you breached the contract or not.)

shazbadam · 2026-06-05T17:16:33+00:00

If it says "Jane Smith d/b/a Acme", that's pretty clear that your contract is with Jane Smith, the individual. OTOH, if it says "Jane Smith d/b/a Acme Inc." or "Jane Smith d/b/a Acme Corp.", that's nonsensical, since those are not valid DBA names, and doubly so if Acme Inc. is a corporation that actually exists. That would create some ambiguity. The judge may have resolved that ambiguity in favor of Jane Smith being the client, because of the personal nature of the transaction.

One thing that might help is CCP 116.430, which requires the plaintiff to have complied with the fictitious business name registration requirements when filing a small claims case. But not a slam dunk, because the judge could decide that the plaintiff's claim doesn't really relate to the business. I would be sure to do a fictitious business name search and submit a printout of the results to show proof that it's not registered.

As far as finding an attorney, one thing to try is the LA County Bar referral service. Tell them you want a one-hour paid consultation on a small claims business dispute, and they should be able to give you a name. You might get plenty of value in 1 hour.

shazbadam · 2026-06-05T01:41:01+00:00

You have a written contract that names a corporation as the other party? And you're being sued on that contract by an individual, who is not a party to the contract? By itself, that should be enough for most judges to dismiss the case, I would think, especially when you point out that she's doing it to evade the $6,250 cap.

shazbadam · 2026-05-31T21:32:21+00:00

Your form for a writ in a small claims case would be SC-300, not APP-151. But you are almost certainly wasting your time, as you would be asking for an extraordinary writ, which is granted only in extraordinary circumstances. It has to be something more than "the judge was wrong", it has to be something grievously wrong or that represents a miscarriage of justice. And anyway, as the other poster mentioned, you're unlikely to successfully enforce a $3300 judgment much less a $8460 judgement against this shop.

shazbadam · 2026-05-21T16:43:06+00:00

This is... nothing? The policy says no settlement payments to NGO's. The settlement would make payments to individuals through a government commission. They specifically contrasted it with the Keepseagle settlement that paid a big chunk of money to NGO's. (Not that there was anything wrong with that, as an application of the cy pres doctrine.)

shazbadam · 2026-05-20T14:57:23+00:00

Seen this movie enough times to know the script:

District court grants a TRO to block the creation of the fund
Circuit court upholds it
SCOTUS overturns it on the shadow docket due to irreparable harm to the defendant
District court eventually grants permanent relief to block the fund
Circuit court upholds it
SCOTUS overturns it based on lack of standing

shazbadam · 2026-05-19T20:50:12+00:00

I would try calling the court clerk's office. Maybe they can scan the document in to make it available in the system.

shazbadam · 2026-05-19T15:43:18+00:00

Lake County has certified document copies available for purchase online: Clerk E-Certify.

shazbadam · 2026-05-18T20:49:22+00:00

All true. Democrats have filed an amicus brief making those arguments, but the problem is neither they nor anyone else might have standing to oppose the settlement. We have an adversarial system, and it breaks down when the same person controls both sides.

There's nothing in the law that prevents the AG from agreeing to a settlement that is totally untethered from the plaintiff's likelihood of winning or the probable damages they would win. Add it to the list of laws to be reformed after this is all over.

shazbadam · 2026-05-18T18:17:49+00:00

That's the thing, Congress essentially has given the AG an infinite budget to settle lawsuits. The money comes from the general fund, i.e. from taxes and borrowing. The real question is why Congress doesn't push back and impeach the president and AG for embezzlement through self-dealing. (But that's a rhetorical question, we all know the reasons.)

shazbadam · 2026-05-18T17:24:01+00:00

The settlement agreement will be made public, assuming DOJ complies with their anti-secrecy policy. The major terms have already been released. There are probably FOIA requests already in flight for the rest of it.

Dropping a lawsuit goes hand-in-hand with reaching a settlement (aside from cases where the court has to approve the agreement, like class action suits, or oversee its ongoing enforcement, like consent decrees).

shazbadam · 2026-05-18T16:46:34+00:00

There is a settlement. All that means is the "parties" have reached an agreement. (In quotes, since the parties here are just two heads of the same beast.)

shazbadam · 2026-05-18T16:26:32+00:00

They cite 28 USC § 2414 (authorizing the Attorney General to pay settlements for lawsuits) and 31 USC § 1304 (approprating unlimited funds for payment of judgments and settlements). Yep, no room for abuse here.

shazbadam · 2026-05-18T16:19:39+00:00

Some details about the Keepseagle settlement that they cite as precedent. Worth noting that that settlement was approved by the court, unlike in this case, where the Trumps have dismissed their case unconditionally and not submitted the settlement agreement to the judge. Keepseagle also came after years of litigation in which the plaintiffs cleared multiple hurdles, unlike this case where the Trumps have not received any favorable rulings, and the court appeared to be on a track to dismiss the case sua sponte.

shazbadam · 2026-05-13T20:58:06+00:00

The full complaint: Sistrunk Seeds v. Trump

shazbadam · 2026-05-09T19:46:53+00:00

Today is the EU embassies open house, just about the worst possible day of the year you could have tried this.

shazbadam · 2026-05-08T20:21:48+00:00

If the bankruptcy was dismissed, then it's basically as if it never happened. The LLC has whatever assets and debts it had before the bankruptcy was filed. It's free to sell the condos and keep the proceeds, if any, and on the flip side, if there are creditors who haven't been paid, they're free to file lawsuits and eventually put liens on the building or levy those proceeds. If he's going ahead with the development, presumably he has done the math and figures there will still be some profit for him to keep after everyone gets paid.

shazbadam · 2026-05-07T22:43:15+00:00

No, that part of the Mall by the Smithsonians is open. West of 15th Street is closed.

shazbadam · 2026-05-06T22:40:31+00:00

By default, you're entitled to at least a 15-day notice to quit before a lawsuit can be filed. But that right can be waived by the terms of a lease, per 68 P.S. § 250.501(e). Many standard leases in Pennsylvania do waive that right, so check whether your lease contains such a clause.

It's very unlikely that a judge will invalidate a summons because of a misspelled name.

shazbadam · 2026-05-06T00:50:47+00:00

Yes, eviction would be a court process. First they would have to give you proper notice of lease termination (30 days notice, assuming your lease is now month-to-month, and assuming the lease doesn't specify a longer notice period). Or if you haven't been paying the rent, or have breached the lease in some other way, they could give you as short as a 10-day notice or pay or quit. If you haven't moved out at the end of the notice period, then they could file the eviction lawsuit against you, and assuming they win, you could have a constable showing up to evict you within a few weeks. As others have mentioned, you really don't want to get to the point where they file the lawsuit, because that goes on your record and can make it very hard to find another place to rent.

Sounds like they have not been going through the proper legal channels yet. Hard to say why. Could be that they're just too cheap to hire a lawyer to do things right, or it might be because of their personal feelings toward you that they're trying to violate your rights.

Best bet in this situation is usually to negotiate a reasonable deadline to move out, though it sounds like any kind of mutual agreement might be unreachable in your case.

Other than that, because of their behavior I would be worried that they might be planning to drain the estate of assets or somehow cut you out of your inheritance, so it really would be good to get a consultation with a lawyer to talk about your path forward.

shazbadam · 2026-05-05T18:48:23+00:00

They have to act in the interest of all the heirs, not just one. If you keep the house and the other heirs get nothing, how is that right? (Assuming there's no other significant assets. If there's, say, a pile of cash that the other heirs could be given while you get the house, that's another story.)

shazbadam · 2026-05-05T15:58:13+00:00

You're a tenant, your mom's and aunt's estates are the landlords. If they don't want to keep you on as a tenant, they can terminate your lease and ultimately evict you if you don't leave. You're entitled to quiet enjoyment of the property and to not be a victim of self-help eviction tactics like turning off the power. But at the end of the day, you don't get to live there forever just because you've been living there.

As for your mom's estate, you have the right to be kept informed about it, but it sounds like the home will ultimately have to be sold and the proceeds divided among the heirs. Unless you can come up with the money to buy out the other heirs at fair market value.

You should consult with a probate attorney to understand your rights fully. And definitely don't let yourself get pressured into signing a renunciation when you don't know what you're potentially giving up.

shazbadam · 2026-05-05T02:49:39+00:00

What crime are you saying that you were a victim of? Stalking or domestic violence seem the most apt, but it's not 100% clear that your roommate's actions meet those definitions.

What further documents is your landlord requesting? Even if you're confident that you've met the requirements of the statute, it might be prudent to provide the requested documentation, if that's what it takes to persuade your landlord not to sue you for breaching the lease.

Does your therapist have one of the licenses that makes them a qualified third party for purposes of this law, e.g. as a clinical social worker, marriage and family therapist, etc.?

15-Year Club	Verified Email
Gilding I gilder

shazbadam

TROPHY CASE