Array
(
)
Search by Keyword:
Start Date:
End Date:
Tip: Wrap text in quotation marks when searching for phrases (e.g. "motion to dismiss").

776 Results

Clear Search Parameters x
Location: Contra Costa x
Judge: Treat, Charles S x 
Array
(
)
SELECT * FROM wp_posts WHERE (post_type = 'attachment') AND ID IN (SELECT object_id FROM wp_term_relationships WHERE term_taxonomy_id IN (SELECT term_id FROM wp_term_taxonomy WHERE taxonomy = 'wpmf-category' AND parent IN (SELECT term_id FROM wp_terms WHERE term_id = 231)) AND term_taxonomy_id IN (SELECT term_id FROM wp_term_taxonomy WHERE taxonomy = 'wpmf-category' AND term_taxonomy_id = 326)) AND (true) AND (true) ORDER BY post_title DESC LIMIT 450,50
Array
(
)
2019.12.13 Motion to Strike Punitive and Exemplary Damages 520
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.12.13
Excerpt: .... Ford Motor Co., 119 Cal.App.3d 757, 826‐828, overruled on other grounds in Kim v. Toyota Motor Corp. (2018) 6 Cal.5th 21, 37 n.6.) A limited statutory exception is set forth in Civil Code § 3294(d), as follows: “Damages may be recovered pursuant to this section in an action pursuant to Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 377.10) of Title 3 of Part 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure based upon a death which resulted from a homicide for which t...
2019.12.13 Demurrer 662
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.12.13
Excerpt: ...n, which the Court denied. (The Court has received no Order After Hearing thereon, however.) That result is not necessarily dispositive of this demurrer, however, because the denial rested in part on matters shown in the evidence on the motion, but not pleaded in the complaint – notably the point that plaintiff was in arrears in her payments even before the 2010 transfer of the HELOC (and cessation of sending monthly notices). The Court rejects...
2019.12.13 Motion to Strike Demand for Attorneys' Fees 159
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.12.13
Excerpt: ...gument lacks merit. The Court interprets § 435.5 as applying only when a given party brings two successive motions to strike. RJNs. Argabright's request for judicial notice of documents filed in other actions is granted. The Gannons' request for judicial notice of Argabright's answer in this action is denied as superfluous; the pleadings in this action are before the Court as a matter of course. However, the Court appreciates the courtesy of pro...
2019.12.13 Motion to Compel Further Responses 159
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.12.13
Excerpt: ...a previous lawsuit on the same subject matter. In that case the Court ordered the Gannons to provide specified discovery, concluding that they had waived objections by failing to respond timely. The Court commented: The Court was informed at a CMC earlier this week that plaintiffs served responses late last week, including some objections. If the scope or merit of the objections were at issue, that would require a new discovery motion; indeed, it...
2019.12.6 Motion to Strike 590
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.12.6
Excerpt: ...ainst a long list of its subcontractors and suppliers to this action – some, the Court determined, with good reason; but others, including Villara, not so. The only dispute between Thompson and Villara themselves is Villara's claim to collect what it says is a substantial sum Thompson owes it. The Court, after lengthy inquiry, determined that that claim has no factual connection to the Thompson‐LTC dispute, except that LTC is withholding the ...
2019.12.6 Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay Proceedings 170
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.12.6
Excerpt: ...tore located at 1340 North Main Street. Defendant Jennifer Meza was the store manager and plaintiff's supervisor. Defendant Nick Botsford was Plaintiff's supervisor and district manager. Plaintiff alleges defendants were aware of his disabilities at all relevant times. Plaintiff alleges that at various times throughout his employment, Defendants denied reasonable accommodations. One of the accommodations requested by plaintiff's healthcare provid...
2019.12.6 Demurrer, Motion to Strike 329
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.12.6
Excerpt: ...as to the parallel demurrer of the Mt. Diablo USD. Any amended complaint shall be filed and served on or before January 10, 2019. If plaintiff elects not to amend, defendants' time to answer the remaining parts of the case will run from then. If plaintiff contests the tentative to seek leave to amend claims as to which leave is denied, she should appear at the hearing prepared to discuss in detail how she proposes to amend and how the proposed am...
2019.12.6 Demurrer 652
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.12.6
Excerpt: ...heir answers by January 3, 2020. Defendants Stroud Development and Alexander Stroud filed nearly identical demurrers to the FAC and filed a joint reply. The Court's ruling below applies equally to the two demurrers. Meet and confer process Plaintiff argues that the meet and confer process was insufficient because Alexander Stroud (acting as a self‐represented party) did not call Plaintiff's attorney, but only sent an email. Plaintiff is correct...
2019.12.6 Demurrer 339
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.12.6
Excerpt: ... the tentative to seek leave to amend, he should come to the hearing prepared to explain how he proposes to amend as against the Police Defendants and why it will be sufficient. The FAC arises from two incidents occurring on August 7, 2018. Only the second incident, however, has to do with the Police Defendants. Plaintiff alleges that defendant Torchia, a Tri Delta bus driver, “called the Brentwood Police and falsely reported that [plaintiff] w...
2019.11.22 Demurrer, Motion to Strike 160
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.11.22
Excerpt: ... third parties and others that Jane Doe is a slut, meaning unchaste. These facts are sufficient to support a claim for punitive damages against defendant Russell for her personal actions even in the absence of her being responsible for the actions of defendant Cesar Gracie. The court rules as follows regarding the demurrers of defendant Russell: 12. TIME: 9:00 CASE#: MSC19‐01160 CASE NAME: DOE VS. GRACIE HEARING ON DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT FILED B...
2019.11.22 Motion for Summary Judgment, Adjudication 299
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.11.22
Excerpt: ...ht on the questions previously posed. The Court may not have been as clear as it intended in one respect, however: It was inviting the parties to identify and elaborate on evidence already filed, arguments already made, and undisputed/disputed facts already cited, in the original motion papers. It did not intend to invite either side to expand its arguments and factual assertions to include new matter – only to better explain what had already b...
2019.11.8 Demurrer 570
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.11.8
Excerpt: ...ckground Plaintiff has second or third mortgage interests in multiple properties owned by defendant real estate developer Kevin Hampton. (Complaint, 8:16‐17.) In 2004, plaintiff became inspired by Hampton, and therefore began investing with him, due to Hampton's strong vision to redevelop properties in Richmond and surrounding areas in a booming real estate market. (Complaint, 2:18‐23.) Plaintiff successfully received repayments from Hampton ...
2019.11.8 Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens 596
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.11.8
Excerpt: ...to partition real property. Plaintiffs, the Nelsons, were the two‐thirds owners of the property; defendant Riley was the one‐third owner. In October 2018 the Court (Judge Fenstermacher) entered an order granting plaintiffs' motion to partition the property by private sale. The order determined the parties' shares in the property, and directed that a referee would be appointed to conduct the sale. The referee was appointed by subsequent order....
2019.11.8 Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens 652
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.11.8
Excerpt: ...red per CRC 3.1110(f) and Local Rule 3.42. In the future, all filings must be properly tabbed. CONTRA COSTA SUPERIOR COURT MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT: 12 HEARING DATE: 11/08/19 ‐ 11 ‐ Standing Schmier asserts that he is a holder of deeds of trust on 728 Laurel Drive and 3269 Judith Lane. (Schmier RJN 3‐6.) Code of Civil Procedure § 405.30 allows a “nonparty with an interest in the real property affected” by a lis pendens to “app...
2019.11.8 Motion for Preliminary Injunction 662
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.11.8
Excerpt: ...but not in the body of the Complaint), (4) negligence, and (5) unfair business practices (violation of Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 et seq.). Plaintiff's present motion, however, does not invoke either of the latter two causes of action as support for a preliminary injunction, and their substantive content is essentially derivative of the claims plaintiff makes for breach of contract and § 2937. Legal Standard The ruling on an application for prel...
2019.3.29 Motion for Summary Judgment, Adjudication 580
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.3.29
Excerpt: ... Court rules on procedural and evidentiary issues as follows.  Summary Adjudication. The District purports to seek summary adjudication as alternative relief. However, the District's papers are not organized with reference to individual causes of action as is required when seeking such relief. (CRC 3.1350(b) and (d).) Further, the District's attempt to seek summary adjudication is undercut by the District's own argument that the Complaint's th...
2019.3.22 Demurrer 572
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.3.22
Excerpt: ...o weeks after that date. The first cause of action alleges that Wireless Buybacks failed to defend John Snyder, and later plaintiff as his successor, in the Sprint Action. The Court is now in a better position to assess this argument, after defendants belatedly provided a copy of the original Sprint complaint (although the Court notes that neither side has provided Sprint's first amended complaint). The demurrer to this cause of action is overrul...
2019.3.22 Demurrer 812
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.3.22
Excerpt: ...ion, and injunctive relief. There are a number of important flaws in these causes of action, both individually and collectively – starting with plaintiff's entire disregard for the rules of pleading claims against public entities, and for the statutory limits on the availability of such claims. The Court need not address each cause of action or each defect separately, however, for there is a single dispositive principle that shows not only that...
2019.3.22 Motion for Appointment of Expert 709
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.3.22
Excerpt: ... then threw out on anti‐SLAPP grounds. Defendant Shane, seeking the best way to resolve this impasse, proposes that the Court should appoint its own expert surveyor under Evidence Code § 730. Each side has already obtained a professional boundary survey, but the two surveys reach different results. Shane posits this as a “tie‐breaker” survey. The problem is that a neutral survey is not certain to resolve anything. Indeed, frankly, it is ...
2019.3.22 Motion for Summary Judgment 092
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.3.22
Excerpt: ...y incorrect. The notice of motion does not state each issue on which summary adjudication was sought as required by CRC 3.1350(b). In addition, the issues identified in the separate statement do not appear to be issues that are appropriate for summary adjudication. (CCP 437c(f)(1) [“A party may move for summary adjudication as to one or more causes of action within an action, one or more affirmative defenses, one or more claims for damages, or ...
2019.3.22 Motioon for Reconsideration 350
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.3.22
Excerpt: ...her method such as e‐mail is agreed). Defendant's demurrer is put back on calendar for April 19, 2019, at 9:00 a.m. Plaintiffs' opposition is due on April 5. Defendant's reply, if any, is due on April 12. Plaintiffs file what they caption as a motion for reconsideration under Code of Civil Procedure § 1008. Considered as such, it cannot be granted because of the intervening entry of final judgment. E.g., Safeco Ins. Co. v. Architectural Facade...
2019.3.15 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings 862
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.3.15
Excerpt: ...or the Court's ruling on the merits. Defendant attaches certain bankruptcy documents in support of two propositions: (1) that plaintiffs and defendants have agreed to the figure for the loan balance as of the date of sale, and; (2) that certain issues were litigated in bankruptcy court in December 2018 and January 2019, and should not be relitigated here. The first proposition is moot, because plaintiffs again stipulate to the loan balance in the...
2019.3.15 Motion to Strike Complaint 970
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.3.15
Excerpt: ...raud‐based counts in the original complaint, holding that a claim of fraud in connection with a medical malpractice case is legally viable only if it is alleged that the defendants actually knew of the falsity of the statements they allegedly made. The Court allowed leave to amend to allow plaintiff to make that allegation, if he could. He has now done so, alleging expressly that “Defendant Toma knew the ‐ 8 ‐ representations were false w...
2019.3.8 Motion for Relief from Default Judgment 430
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.3.8
Excerpt: ...t doubt on that account but provides no admissible evidence.) Plaintiff argues that defendants did not act diligently in seeking relief. At first cut, though, defendants' explanation suggests that the delay in filing this motion was likewise attributable to the same asserted problems with Mr. Judson. The motion, however, is not accompanied by a proposed answer or other response, as required by the statute. “Application for this relief shall be ...
2019.3.8 Motion for Summary Adjudication 389
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.3.8
Excerpt: ... provide any tabs for its exhibits, in clear violation of CRC 3.1110(f) and Local Rule 3.42. Plaintiff, on the other hand, provided so many tabs for exhibits and CONTRA COSTA SUPERIOR COURT MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT: 12 HEARING DATE: 03/08/19 ‐ 3 ‐ exhibits to the exhibits that the tabs were of limited usefulness. For example, there are four tabs labeled “Exhibit A”. The Relation of the Parties, and Substance of the Lawsuit Plaintif...
2019.3.1 OSC Re Preliminary Hearing 370
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.3.1
Excerpt: ...d he wants them to be part of the record in this case, he must immediately serve and file them. In these lodged papers, plaintiff complains that the Opposition was not served on him by email or fax and that he wants additional time. However, the file does not reflect any order requiring service by email or fax. Therefore, under Code of Civil Procedure § 1005(c), service by overnight delivery was sufficient. Furthermore, Code of Civil Procedure �...
2019.3.1 Motion for Reconsideration of Order Sustaining Demurrer 862
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.3.1
Excerpt: ...rious defects. The third page of the notice of motion, presumably containing a statement of the relief requested and the signature block of plaintiffs' counsel, is missing. The opening memorandum is 20 pages long, without leave of court and without a table of authorities. (CRC 3.1113(d) and (f).) The deposition excerpts submitted with the reply papers are set out within the text of counsel's declaration, rather than in the manner prescribed by th...
2019.3.1 Motion for Monetary and Other Sanctions 422
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.3.1
Excerpt: ...ed not to disclose or retain any social media content not directly relevant to whether or not plaintiffs were engaged in BHO manufacturing. Seterus must refrain from reviewing any particular content any further than is reasonably required to ascertain whether it is responsive. This case arises from a tragic explosion occurring during plaintiffs' uncle's manufacture of butane honey oil, in which plaintiffs were badly burned. They assert premises l...
2019.3.1 Motion for Attorney Fees 322
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.3.1
Excerpt: ...s detailed at length in the Court of Appeal's first ruling, of August 23, 2017. To make a long story short, in 2007 the County (specifically the Department of Conservation & Development, Building Inspection Division – hereinafter DCD) issued two Notices To Comply to petitioner homeowners, asserting that there were permitting problems with their use and occupancy of two adjoining properties in Oakley. The DCD never proceeded with any administrat...
2019.3.1 Demurrer 150
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.3.1
Excerpt: ... Amended Complaint by April 2, 2019. First Cause of Action (Civil Code §§ 2923.5, 2923.55). Leaving aside the question of which of these two statutes applies (one being on the books in 2018, the other in 2019), the only violation alleged is that Select did not give plaintiff notice that he could request various documents. The allegation of harm to plaintiff resulting from this lack of notice is in ¶ 16(a)(1): “The failure to provide Plaintif...
2019.2.22 Motion for Stay of Action or Stay of Discovery 469
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.2.22
Excerpt: ... a formal stay of the case because of Fifth Amendment concerns. They note that Mr. Martin has been charged with a felony arising from the same alleged facts. They further note that while Ms. Martin has not been charged, the complaint accuses her of potentially criminal acts, with which she could still be charged. This kind of problem is usually handled at Case Management Conferences rather than by formal motion. Plaintiffs have not opposed the mo...
2019.2.22 Motion for Summary Judgment 084
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.2.22
Excerpt: ...entify each cause of action or issue on which they seek summary adjudication as required by CRC 3.1350(d). The separate statement does not follow the format requirements set forth in CRC 3.1350(h). In addition, the separate statement does not cite to specific evidence following each fact. Instead, each fact is followed by citations to the entire declaration of Athan Magganas and the complaint. No specific paragraphs in the declaration or complain...
2019.2.22 Motion for Preliminary Injunction 592
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.2.22
Excerpt: ... filings. (See CRC 3.1110(f).) The numerous exhibits to the Complaint, the Ex Parte Application, and the Reply are all untabbed. This has caused the Court's staff considerable inconvenience.  RJN. Defendants' unopposed request for judicial notice of recorded documents is granted.  Reply. The Court has exercised its discretion to consider plaintiff's reply papers, despite their being filed one court day late. Plaintiff is directed to comply ...
2019.2.22 Motion to Set Aside Dismissal 429
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.2.22
Excerpt: ...or June 1, and the order after hearing was filed on June 29. The Court noted then that plaintiffs and their then‐counsel, Mr. Boasberg, had entirely ceased participating in the case, including their failures to respond to discovery, to obey several orders compelling discovery responses, to pay court‐ ordered sanctions, and to oppose the terminating‐sanctions motion. It later transpired that Boasberg was suspended, and then disbarred. That w...
2019.2.22 Motion for Protective Order and Return of Docs 289
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.2.22
Excerpt: ...ndant company (Garaventa Enterprises, or GE), but concerned about his position there. He asked GE's general counsel, Bonnifield, who told him that he was an at‐will employee. Colvis then met with attorneys from the Downey Brand firm, his present litigation counsel. At issue on this motion is the e‐mail traffic from that 2015 consultation, which occurred between Downey Brand attorneys and Colvis's work e‐mail address at GE. In 2018 GE and it...
2019.2.22 Demurrer, Motion to Strike 005
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.2.22
Excerpt: ...hs 6‐8, 13, 129, 150, 152, and 153, because they contain improper allegations against these individuals. That portion of the motion is denied, because these allegations remain proper to support claims against defendant on an agency theory. 3. TIME: 9:00 CASE#: MSC16‐01005 CASE NAME: BRENNON B. VS. WCCUSD HEARING ON DEMURRER TO 2nd Amended COMPLAINT FILED BY WEST CONTRA COSTA UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, et al. * TENTATIVE RULING: * Defendant scho...
2019.2.15 Demurrer 072
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.2.15
Excerpt: ...so named as a defendant. Several of the complaint's causes of action are asserted only against the employee defendants (Demeter, Milton, and Herrero), and those causes of action have not been demurred to. With one exception, the Court sustains the employee defendants' demurrers to all challenged causes of action, with leave to amend, for the same reasons stated on Guaranteed's demurrer (Line 6). The exception is the 11th cause of action, for “i...
2019.2.15 Motion to Strike or Tax Costs 282
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.2.15
Excerpt: ... ‐ recover all her post‐offer costs, and her reasonable expert witness costs incurred after the offer. The Court rejects plaintiff's assertion that the § 998 offer was not made in good faith. Plaintiff attempts no serious factual showing that the expert witness fees incurred were unreasonable. This was an expert‐intensive case. Plaintiff made a six‐figure § 998 offer of her own, and asked the jury to award a seven‐figure verdict. Plai...
2019.2.15 OSC Re Preliminary Injunction 460
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.2.15
Excerpt: ... First Cause of Action for violations of Civil Code § 2923.6. The version of the statute in effect during 2018, when the alleged violations took place, did not prohibit dual tracking. Further, plaintiffs have failed to show a “material” HBOR violation because they have failed to offer evidence that they qualified for a loan modification, and that an appeal from the denial of their application for a loan modification would have been successfu...
2019.2.8 Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement 800
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.2.8
Excerpt: ... they have seen in the settlement agreement has affected their Opposition. On or before March 1, 2019 the moving parties may file and serve a Supplemental Reply Brief responding to the Supplemental Opposition Brief. None of the supplemental briefs may exceed three pages. This case concerns an alleged failure to disclose problems affecting a house in Alamo that plaintiff purchased. Plaintiff filed suit on August 31, 2018, and a first amended compl...
2019.2.8 Motion for Summary Judgment, Adjudication 570
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.2.8
Excerpt: ...rty at issue. CDC sent an e‐mail giving notice of its intention to contest the tentative, raising several issues addressed in the briefs and the tentative. (That's not a criticism of CDC; that's what contesting a tentative is for.) At the actual hearing on January 18, however, CDC chose not to go into any of the points mentioned in its e‐mail. Instead, it raised an argument it concededly had not mentioned at all in CONTRA COSTA SUPERIOR COURT...
2019.2.8 Motion to Quash Service of Summons 209
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.2.8
Excerpt: ...tice are unopposed and granted. Defendant must file and serve an answer within 30 days. Plaintiff argues that personal jurisdiction exists for two reasons. First, defendant appeared at a case management conference and a restraining order hearing. (Code of Civil Procedure § 410.50(a) [general appearance is equivalent to personal service].) Second, defendant satisfies the “minimum contacts” required for California jurisdiction based on purpose...
2019.2.8 Motion to Strike 052
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.2.8
Excerpt: ...be brought to strike any “irrelevant, false, or improper matter inserted in any pleading”. (Code of Civil Procedure § 436.) When ruling on a motion to strike, a court applies the same rules as applicable to a demurrer: The court may consider only matters shown on the face of the complaint or of which it may take judicial notice. (Code of Civil Procedure § 437(a); see Circle Star Center Associates, L.P. v. Liberate Technologies (2007) 147 Ca...
2019.2.8 Motion to Strike 740
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.2.8
Excerpt: ... ‘aris[e] from' protected activity in which the defendant has engaged. [Citations.] If the defendant carries its burden, the plaintiff must then demonstrate its claims have at least ‘minimal merit.' [Citations.]” (Park v. Board of Trustees of California State University (2017) 2 Cal.5th 1057, 1061.) Background On August 29, 2018, Plaintiff Paul Hantke as trustee of the Alex W. Hantke Survivor's Trust (“Hantke”) filed a lawsuit against R...
2019.2.8 Petition to Compel Arbitration 610
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.2.8
Excerpt: ...s are directed to tab their exhibits in all future filings. (See CRC 3.1110(f).) Respondent's RJN. Respondent's request for judicial notice is granted. Res Judicata. The present petition is barred by res judicata. (See petitioners' Exhibit 2 [8‐1‐18 order denying arbitration in Case No. N18‐0674].) Prior orders denying arbitration must generally be given res judicata effect. (See Lounge‐A‐Round v. GCM Mills, Inc. (1980) 109 Cal.App.3d 1...
2019.2.8 Demurrer 209
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.2.8
Excerpt: ...e § 338(a).) It requires the defendant to have “engaged in a pattern of conduct the intent of which was to follow, alarm, place under surveillance, or harass the plaintiff.” (Civ. Code § 1708.7(a)(1).) To establish this element, the plaintiff “shall be required to support his or her allegations with independent corroborating evidence.” (Id.) Plaintiff pleads actions in 2016 and 2017 that, if proven, would support a stalking claim within...
2019.2.1 Demurrer 860
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.2.1
Excerpt: ...ts have not filed an answer as to the other causes of action, they shall file and serve such answer on or before February 15, 2019. This case arises out of plaintiff's claim that defendants rented her uninhabitable premises at 1300 Roosevelt Ave., #420, Richmond, an apartment complex known as The Hacienda. General Rules Applicable to Claims against Public Entities California public entities are liable only as provided by statute. (Eastburn v. Reg...
2019.2.1 Motion for Preliminary Injunction 210
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.2.1
Excerpt: ... negotiate toward a possible resolution. This time there has been no stipulation. Neither, however, has defendant filed any opposition to the motion for preliminary injunction. Repeated calls to the attorneys have given no better information. Plaintiffs' counsel has stated simply that the matter is going forward, and defendant's counsel has not responded to messages. CONTRA COSTA SUPERIOR COURT MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT: DEPARTMENT HEARING ...
2019.2.1 Motion for Reconsideration 849
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.2.1
Excerpt: ...he forum for the original evidentiary hearing, that would properly qualify as new and different facts under § 1008 only if there were a showing why this fact could CONTRA COSTA SUPERIOR COURT MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT: DEPARTMENT HEARING DATE: 02/01/19 ‐ 7 ‐ not have been adduced at the evidentiary hearing. But as it stands, the newly adduced fact is not properly before the Court at all, because it would not show what DMV would have ne...
2019.2.1 OSC Re Preliminary Injunction 460
Location: Contra Costa
Judge: Treat, Charles S
Hearing Date: 2019.2.1
Excerpt: ...vailing on the First Cause of Action for violations of Civil Code § 2923.6. The version of the statute in effect during 2018, when the alleged violations took place, did not prohibit dual tracking. Further, plaintiffs have failed to show a “material” HBOR violation because they have failed to offer evidence that they qualified for a loan modification, and that an appeal from the denial of their application for a loan modification would have ...

776 Results

Per page

Pages