NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL ... - California Courts

5 downloads 38 Views 10KB Size Report
Feb 20, 2013 ... TestMasters damages for defamation against Triplett, Riley, and ... TestMasters' Director of Research and Development (LSAT score of 172,.
Filed 2/20/13 Robin Singh Educ. Services v. Blueprint Test Preparation CA2/7

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SEVEN ROBIN SINGH EDUCATIONAL SERVICES, INC., Plaintiff and Respondent,

B204775 and B211422 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. Nos. BC330098, BC346066, BC347174)

v. BLUEPRINT TEST PREPARATION, LLC, et al., Defendants and Appellants.

ROBIN SINGH EDUCATIONAL SERVICES, INC., Plaintiff and Appellant,

B218775 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. Nos. BC330098, BC346066, BC347174)

v. BLUEPRINT TEST PREPARATION, LLC et al.,

ORDER MODIFYING OPINION AND DENYING REHEARING (NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT)

Defendants and Appellants.

THE COURT: It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on January 23, 2013 be modified as follows:

1.

On page 3, the second sentence of the last paragraph, the name “Riley” is

deleted and replaced with “Teti” so the sentence reads: Defendants also appeal from the portion of the judgment awarding TestMasters damages for defamation against Triplett, Riley, and Blueprint, while Teti appeals from the punitive damages award against him. 2.

On page 71, the sentence beginning with “TestMasters’ two expert

witnesses, Singh and Rachel Vincent,” is modified to read: Two of TestMasters’ expert witnesses, Singh and Rachel Vincent, TestMasters’ Director of Research and Development (LSAT score of 172, in the 99th percentile), gave their opinions that creating Blueprint’s course materials would have taken defendants or anyone else years to create and that defendants could not have developed their written course materials in the time they claim they did. 3.

On page 86, footnote 46, the words “Singh’s girlfriend and” are to be

inserted between the words “Naim,” and “in-house counsel” so the sentence reads: 46.

At the jury trial Sharon Naim, Singh’s girlfriend and in-house counsel for TestMasters, testified that she sent over 100 cease and desist letters to TestMasters students, threatening to sue them if they sold their books on the Internet.

4.

On page 108, the second sentence in the Disposition, “$592,260.45” is

changed to “$703,410.65” so the sentence reads: The January 24, 2008 order awarding TestMasters $703,410.65 in monetary sanctions is affirmed. There is no change in judgment. Robin Singh Educational Services, Inc.’s petition for rehearing is denied.

___________________________________________________________________ PERLUSS, P. J. ZELON, J. SEGAL, J.*

*

Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.