Share to Facebook Share to Twitter Bookmark and Share
File #: 2020-224    Version: 1 Name:
Type: Consent Status: Agenda Ready
File created: 4/2/2020 In control: City Council
On agenda: 4/7/2020 Final action:
Title: STATUS OF THE LITIGATION BETWEEN RICHARD RAND AND MAYOR PRO TEM JAMES DEAR AND THE CITY OF CARSON-RECEIVE AND FILE THIS STATUS REPORT (CITY COUNCIL)
Date Ver.Action ByActionResultAction DetailsMeeting DetailsVideo
No records to display.
Report to Mayor and City Council
Tuesday, April 07, 2020
Consent


SUBJECT:
Title
STATUS OF THE LITIGATION BETWEEN RICHARD RAND AND MAYOR PRO TEM JAMES DEAR AND THE CITY OF CARSON-RECEIVE AND FILE THIS STATUS REPORT (CITY COUNCIL)

Body
I. SUMMARY

Rand Resources, LLC and Carson El Camino, LLC filed their complaint against the City, Mayor Pro Tem James Dear, Leonard Bloom, and U.S. Capital, LLC in November 2014, related to allegations of a breach of contract, fraud, misrepresentation and various other causes of action related to an Exclusive Agency Agreement Rand had in connection with representation of City before the NFL.
The case had been stayed while it was appealed first to the Court of Appeal, and then to the California Supreme Court, which remanded back to the Court of Appeal for further proceedings, which in turn remanded the case back to the Superior Court.
Recent "law and motion" proceedings before the Los Angeles County Superior Court has resulted in important litigation victories for both the City and the Mayor Pro Tem. We write to brief the City Council and the community on these important rulings. In short, the Court has fully dismissed the Mayor Pro Tem in his individual capacity from the lawsuit, and the action against the City is now reduced to one simple garden variety breach of contract cause of action.


II. RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation

CONSIDER this status report from the Office of the City Attorney.
RECEIVE and FILE the report.


Body
III. ALTERNATIVES

TAKE such action the City Council deems appropriate consistent with the requirements of law.


IV. BACKGROUND

Upon the return of this lawsuit to the Superior Court from the California Supreme Court, our office simultaneously filed two (2) motions in that court:
(a) a motion for "judgment on the pleadings" with respect to the three so-called "fraud" causes of action alleged in the First Amended Complaint against the City. This type of legal procedure essentially argu...

Click here for full text