Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Guan v. Ran

Court of Appeals of Virginia

April 9, 2019

Alice Jin-Yue Guan, Petitioner,
v.
Bing Ran, Respondent.

          Circuit Court No. CL07003662

         Upon a Petition for Review Pursuant to Code § 8.01-626

          Before Judges Petty, Alston and Senior Judge Annunziata

         In a matter of first impression, this Court concludes that we do not have jurisdiction to review an injunction that is not effective due to movant's failure to post a bond. Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for review.

         BACKGROUND

         Alice Jin-Yue Guan filed a petition for review pursuant to Code § 8.01-626 of an order granting temporary injunction entered February 27, 2019 by the Circuit Court for the City of Alexandria (the "order"). The order is part of a complex litigation involving the parties' divorce and the effect of an amended property settlement agreement on the ownership rights and management responsibilities for AdSTM, a company created and owned by the parties. The entirety of the order was as follows:

         ORDER GRANTING TEMPORARY INJUNCTION

         THIS MATTER came to be heard upon the Defendant's Motion for Entry of Rule to Show Cause and For Temporary Injunction filed against the Plaintiff, ALICE JIN-YUE GUAN.

         AND IT APPEARING to the Court that the following relief should be granted; it is, hereby, ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED as follows:

         1. A temporary injunction against the Plaintiff is hereby granted enjoining her from having any contact with any AdSTM employees, attorneys and/ or clients as well as enjoining her from having any physical access to any of AdSTM's offices and properties.

         2. Plaintiff is hereby ordered to immediately return any funds or properties of AdSTM that she may have improperly acquired, and to immediately close any AdSTM accounts she has improperly opened.

         3. Plaintiff is enjoined from representing to third parties that she is the 51% majority shareholder of AdSTM, as she is 49%.[1]

         AND THIS CAUSE IS CONTINUED, Entered this 27 day of February, 2019.

         The order was signed by the circuit court judge. Guan petitioned this ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.