In a legal battle that could reshape business agreements, We Dog Care, LLC has filed a lawsuit against West Coast All-Pro, LLC. The complaint was lodged on October 30, 2025, in the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara. The case accuses West Coast All-Pro of fraud and seeks to reform a contract based on both unilateral and mutual mistakes.
The plaintiff, We Dog Care, LLC, is a California-based limited liability company operating a dog daycare and boarding business at 351 Lincoln Avenue in San Jose. The defendant, West Coast All-Pro, LLC, is a Texas-based automotive body-shop business that operates out of the same property. According to the complaint, the dispute centers around lease agreements for this property. Initially leased by LaMantia 2002 Living Trust to West Coast All-Pro in 2013 for three years without renewal options, the lease continued on a month-to-month basis after its expiration in December 2016.
In September 2021, We Dog Care entered into an agreement with LaMantia 2002 Living Trust to purchase the property. As part of securing financing for this purchase, We Dog Care required a formal one-year lease with West Coast All-Pro without renewal rights. However, when West Coast All-Pro’s CFO transmitted the new lease in November 2021—referred to as the “2021 Lease”—it included two unauthorized five-year renewal options not approved by either We Dog Care or LaMantia.
We Dog Care alleges that these additions were made fraudulently by West Coast All-Pro to secure long-term below-market rent from them as the incoming landlord. Michael LaMantia signed this altered lease under false pretenses believing it was merely an extension with updated terms. This deception came to light when West Coast All-Pro exercised one of these unauthorized renewal options in November 2022.
We Dog Care’s complaint outlines several causes of action: fraud against West Coast All-Pro for altering the lease terms; reformation of contract due to unilateral mistake where LaMantia was misled about the contents; and reformation due to mutual mistake since neither party intended those renewal clauses. They seek general damages exceeding $35,000 along with special damages according to proof and punitive damages under Civil Code §3294.
The plaintiff also requests court orders reforming the 2021 Lease by removing unauthorized provisions and awarding attorney fees alongside other just reliefs deemed appropriate by law.
Representing We Dog Care are attorneys Ronald R. Rossi (SBN 43067), Missy M. Cornejo (SBN 281242), and Paulina Li (SBN 328500) from Rossi Hamerslough Reischl & Chuck located at Suite #200 on The Alameda Street within San Jose city limits where they can be reached via phone or email provided above while presiding over this matter will be Judge Y Chavez under Case ID number:25CV479028
Source: 25CV479028_We_Dog_v_West_Coast_County_of_Santa_Clara_California.pdf
