Apr. 21, 2016
Sharon Ben-Shahar Mayer
See more on Sharon Ben-Shahar MayerBird, Marella, Boxer, Wolpert, Nessim, Drooks, Lincenberg & Rhow PC | Los Angeles
Using the scant available case law on the doctrine of necessary and indispensable parties, Mayer won dismissal for her client, whom she contended should never have been sued in the fallout from a major fraud case involving a man known as the Bernie Madoff of Beverly Hills.
"Ezri Namvar was a big deal in the Persian Jewish community here," Mayer said of the man currently imprisoned after his conviction for having stolen $21 million from his Namco Capital Group's customers. Investors in the asset management firm claimed he owed them $1 billion.
Among the investors was plaintiff Parviz Lavi, who sued Mayer's clients, a real estate partnership and its general partner, as alleged co-conspirators with Namvar through a convoluted series of transactions that left it unclear who owned what. After Namvar and his firm were forced into bankruptcy, Lavi dismissed them from the case and focused his attacks on Mayer's clients.
"We filed a series of demurrers, claiming the case should not proceed against our clients alone because Namvar and Namco were necessary and indispensable parties," Mayer said. "There isn't much legal precedent to go on, but it is clear that if two entities have competing ownership claims, both must be parties to any litigation."
Lavi argued that his case was distinguishable, but to no avail. After nine years of litigation, three trial judges and six different versions of Lavi's complaint, a trial judge sustained Mayer's final demurrer without leave to amend, and an appellate court affirmed it in December 2015.
"It was great to see justice being done after so many years," she said.
John Roemer
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390
Send a letter to the editor:
Email: letters@dailyjournal.com