In a contentious legal battle that has spanned multiple states and nearly two decades, the Weinstock Family Trust has filed a complaint against Daniel J. Shaw and other associated parties, challenging debt collection activities related to a real estate development project. The Weinstock Family Trust filed the complaint in the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara on April 22, 2022, targeting Daniel J. Shaw and his affiliates.
The origins of this dispute trace back to a Washington real estate development project involving SV 261, LLC (Developer) and Developers Surety & Indemnity Company (Surety). In 2007, Surety issued a surety bond for the project with an indemnity agreement signed by Developer and several affiliated entities and individuals as indemnitors. Following Developer's default under this agreement, Surety sued in Washington state court and obtained a judgment in September 2014 against Michael Weinstock, Marissa Weinstock, and the Weinstock Family Trust among others. This judgment was subsequently entered as a sister state judgment in California in October 2014.
By November 2016, Sunnycove Capital Inc. (Sunnycove) had acquired the Washington Judgment through multiple assignments. Five years later, Sunnycove began collection activities against Michael and Marissa Weinstock, Allyson Weinstock (their adult daughter), and the Weinstock Family Trust. The plaintiffs allege that these collection efforts are unlawful because they claim the underlying debt had been extinguished.
The defendants responded with an anti-SLAPP motion under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 to strike down the complaint. They argued that their actions were protected as constitutionally protected petitioning or speech activity related to enforcing the Washington Judgment in California courts. The trial court sided with the defendants on September 1, 2022, agreeing that their actions were protected under the anti-SLAPP statute and that plaintiffs failed to show a probability of prevailing on their claims due to litigation privilege under Civil Code section 47(b).
Plaintiffs are seeking various forms of relief including a permanent injunction to halt further debt collection practices by defendants and compel them to return any wrongfully collected funds. They also seek judicial declarations stating that the obligation under both judgments has been extinguished and damages for conversion, intentional infliction of emotional distress, financial elder abuse (on behalf of Michael Weinstock), along with violations of Business and Professions Code section 17200.
The Case ID is H050438.