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

2530 Results

Location: San Mateo 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 = 242))) AND (true) AND (true) ORDER BY post_title DESC LIMIT 2450,50
Array
(
)
2018.7.31 Motion to Lift Stay 882
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.31
Excerpt: ...the order to arbitration or until such earlier time as the court specifies. (C.C.P. sec. 1281.4.) The court previously ordered that the parties submit Plaintiff's non‐PAGA claims to arbitration after Defendant Binary Capital Management, LLC (“Binary”) moved to compel arbitration. (See Baker Decl., Exhs. 2, 3.) Plaintiff then proceeded to pay AAA's arbitration filing fee. (Baker Decl., paras. 5, 6, and Exhs. 5, 6.) Binary apparently became i...
2018.7.31 Motion to Compel Further Responses 433
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.31
Excerpt: ...is interrogatory, limited to prior incidents (dating back three years before Plaintiff's alleged incident) in the women's department of the Macy's in question. “PREMISES” is defined in the interrogatories to mean the entire Macy's store, which is overbroad given that the alleged incident occurred in the women's department, which itself is sizeable. Defendant's relevance argument lacks merit. Evid. Code § 210 (broadly defining relevant eviden...
2018.7.31 Motion to Compel 514
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.31
Excerpt: ...ndants concede they have no breach of fiduciary duty claim against Plaintiff and do not intend to assert one, appears outside the scope of permissible discovery as to this responding party. Code Civ. Proc. § 2017.010. Plaintiff's request for monetary sanctions is DENIED. If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court, pursuant to Rule 3.1308(a)(1), adopted by Local Rule 3.10, effective immediately, and no formal o...
2018.7.31 Motion to Strike 647
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.31
Excerpt: ...d the omission, but expressly directed Defendant BSI, “In the future, Defendant must comply with the meet and confer requirement prior to filing a motion to strike. (See Code of Civ. Proc. 435.5.)” (Minute Order, April 11, 2018 (last paragraph). Instead of meeting and conferring in person or by telephone, Defendant BSI merely sent a letter. The supporting declaration does not indicate any attempt to meet in person or by phone, as specified by...
2018.7.30 Demurrer 844
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.30
Excerpt: ...ers, Inv. v. Municipal Court (1978) 21 Cal.3d 724. Therefore, on the court's own motion, the complaint is stricken with 30 days' leave to file an amended pleading if plaintiff retains an attorney. The demurrer is moot. If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court, pursuant to Rule 3.1308(a)(1), adopted by Local Rule 3.10, effective immediately, and no formal order pursuant to Rule 3.1312 or any other notice is re...
2018.7.30 Motion to Compel 494
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.30
Excerpt: ...) Defendant's Motion to Compel Documents Responsive to Defendant's requests for production of documents (set one and two), is GRANTED. Plaintiff is to produce all responsive documents, to the extent any exist, as to these requests. Alternatively, as Defendant proposed, Plaintiff may instead provide a signed verification that the documents provided by CrossDefendant Nordeman are the only documents that exist responsive to Defendant's requests. (3)...
2018.7.27 Motion for Protective Order 530
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.27
Excerpt: ...version for the Court's signature. Defendant correctly notes that cases should normally be prosecuted under the parties' true names. Code Civ. Proc. § 367. However, this rule is not absolute. Courts have authority to permit the use of pseudonyms in various circumstances, such as where doing so is necessary to protect against harassment, injury, embarrassment, and social stigmatization. See, e.g., Does I thru XXIII v. Advanced Textile Corp. (9th ...
2018.7.27 Motion to Compel 322
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.27
Excerpt: ...t the scope of these requests to information pertaining to conduct similar to the allegations in Plaintiff's Complaint. Plaintiff also agreed to limit the timeframe from January 1, 2010 to the present. (Decl. Loh ¶ 7, Exhibit 3.)  GRANTED as to Request for Production (Set One), Request No. 18 and Request for Production (Set Two), Request No. 57. Defendant iPASS, INC. is ordered to serve full and complete, verified responses to the foregoing d...
2018.7.27 Motion to Strike 450
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.27
Excerpt: ...August 31, 2018 at 9:00 a.m. in the Law and Motion Department so that the parties may meet and confer. Defendant is required to file, no later than 7 days prior to the new hearing date, a code‐compliant declaration stating either (1) the parties have met and conferred in person or by telephone and (a) the parties have resolved the objections raised in the motion, which shall be taken off calendar or (b) the parties did not reach an agreement re...
2018.7.27 Demurrer 619
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.27
Excerpt: ...ntially completed on September 19, 2007. (5th Am. Complaint ¶ 51.) Therefore, the deadline was September 18, 2017. Plaintiff named the AC&H for the first time in the Third Amended Complaint, which was filed October 24, 2017, one month after the 10‐year deadline. Plaintiff contends that AC&H was timely named in June 22, 2017, when Plaintiff substituted AC&H for Doe 16. The argument lacks merit. “Even if a plaintiff meets the other requirement...
2018.7.27 Demurrer 096
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.27
Excerpt: ... the subject property. Thus, the two year statute of limitations under Code of Civil Procedure section 339(1) does not apply to Defendant. Although section 339(1) “generally” applies to claim for professional negligence (Thomson v. Canyon (2011) 198 Cal. App. 4th 594, 606), the limitations periods of sections 337.1 and 337.15 are specific to claim for design defects in the construction of real property. Sections 337.1 and 337.15 apply to a cl...
2018.7.27 Motion for Good Faith Settlement 865
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.27
Excerpt: ...tion of plaintiff's total recovery nor defendant's proportionate share of that liability. If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court, pursuant to Rule 3.1308(a)(1), adopted by Local Rule 3.10, effective immediately, and no formal order pursuant to Rule 3.1312 or any other notice is required as the tentative ruling affords sufficient notice to the parties. ...
2018.7.26 Motion to Strike 733
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.26
Excerpt: ...LEAVE TO AMEND. Plaintiff has not established that he is entitled to recover punitive damages. (See Gov. Code § 818 [“Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a public entity is not liable for damages awarded under Section 3294 of the Civil Code or other damages imposed primarily for the sake of example and by way of punishing the defendant.”.) The motion to strike the relief sought in paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of the Relief Sought & Compensa...
2018.7.26 Motion for Summary Adjudication 928
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.26
Excerpt: ...for “Wrongful Trustee Sale,” the claim lacks merit for multiple reasons, first because Eagle Vista played no part in the trustee's sale. Plaintiff contends the banking entities that foreclosed upon and sold Plaintiff's home, whom Plaintiff has dismissed from the case with prejudice, lacked the authority to foreclose and failed to comply with various statutory requirements pertaining to a non‐judicial foreclosure sale. This argument/cause of...
2018.7.26 Demurrer 733
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.26
Excerpt: ...les of Court, Rule 2.112, including by separately listing each cause of action, its nature, and the defendant to whom it is directed. The demurrer based on failure to comply with the claims presentation requirement in the Government Claims Act (Gov. Code §§ 900, et seq.), is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND for Plaintiff to allege facts to support such compliance. Although Plaintiff generally alleges he complied with the claims presentation requir...
2018.7.26 Demurrer 213
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.26
Excerpt: ...ubstantive allegation is that Old South performed services for which it received payment from Crosscomplainants. The allegations, if proven, could support a jury's finding that Old South was a party to the implied‐in‐fact contract with Cross‐complainants. Demurrer to the fourth cause of action (unfair business practice) is overruled. A corporate plaintiff may not bring a representative suit under the Unfair Competition Law. (Linear Technolo...
2018.7.25 Motion for Summary Adjudication 076
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.25
Excerpt: ...mplaint (TAC). On 2‐8‐18, when Defendants filed the motion, the operative Complaint was Plaintiff Ryce's First Amended Complaint (FAC), filed 3‐17‐17. Thereafter, on 3‐18‐18, Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint (SAC), and then on 6‐13‐18, filed a Third Amended Complaint (TAC), which currently serves as the operative pleading. Defendants have filed a Demurrer to the TAC, which is set for a hearing on 8‐21‐18. The TAC sup...
2018.7.24 Motion to Compel Further Responses 460
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.24
Excerpt: ...vice of the verified responses, or any supplemental verified response, or on or before any specific later date to which the parties agree in writing, or the propounding party waives any right to compel further response. (C.C.P. sec. 2030.300(c).) The court lacks jurisdiction to order further response where a motion to compel is not timely filed. (Vidal Sassoon, Inc. v. Sup. Ct. (1983) 147 Cal.App.3d 681, 685.) There is no dispute that Plaintiff s...
2018.7.24 Motion to Strike 134
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.24
Excerpt: ...bd. (a).) Further, NICOLOSI does not specify in the Notice of Motion or Points and Authorities that the motion is based on any judicially noticeable matter. (Id. section. 437, subd. (b.)) Even if the Court were to consider the matters set forth in the moving Declaration of Franck, the Court would find that the Roe amendment is not necessarily improper. Although L & J possibly knew the name “Axalta” when filing the cross‐complaint, the oppos...
2018.7.23 Motion for Reconsideration 778
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.23
Excerpt: ...ation was made before, when and to what judge, what order or decisions were made, and what new or different facts, circumstances, or law are claimed to be shown.” (See Code of Civ. Proc. § 1008(a).) Further, notwithstanding this procedural defect, Plaintiff has not presented any new or different facts, circumstances or law to warrant reconsideration of the Order. Defendant's request for judicial notice is GRANTED. If the tentative ruling is un...
2018.7.23 Motion for Attorney Fees 708
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.23
Excerpt: ...urt previously ruled on Defendant's motion to tax costs, the judgment had not been satisfied as of the time Plaintiff claimed costs. Plaintiff filed the present motion on June 26, 2018. There is no evidence before the court that Defendant satisfied the judgment before Plaintiff filed the present motion. Therefore, the motion is timely. Plaintiff's motion sets forth a prima facie showing of hours incurred for enforcement of judgment, as well as ea...
2018.7.20 Demurrer 412
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.20
Excerpt: ...even if it did, the FAC would still state a cause of action for unlawful detainer. Defendant shall Answer the Complaint within five (5) days of Notice of Entry of this Order. If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court, pursuant to Rule 3.1308(a)(1), adopted by Local Rule 3.10, effective immediately, and no formal order pursuant to Rule 3.1312 or any other notice is required as the tentative ruling affords suffi...
2018.7.20 Motion for Judgment 897
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.20
Excerpt: ...ired by Code Civ. Proc. § 439, which requires that the parties (or their attorneys, if represented) actually speak to each other, or make a genuine attempt to speak to each other, either in‐person or by phone, regarding the substance of the motion. An exchange of correspondence does not suffice. Attorney Pappas' 5‐ 15‐18 declaration (filed 5‐17‐18) does not comply with this requirement. It refers only to two emails, and provides no ind...
2018.7.20 Motion for Summary Judgment, Adjudication 123
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.20
Excerpt: ...o comply with CRC Rule 3.1350. Defendants set forth 109 facts that they contend are material for disposing of the entire complaint. (See Moving Separate Statement at pp.1‐22.) Defendants then repeat the same 109 facts and same evidence in support of summary adjudication as to the second through tenth causes of action (but not the first cause of action). This style of Separate Statement, while convenient for the moving party, violates the requir...
2018.7.19 Demurrer 557
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.19
Excerpt: ...was filed on July 12, 2018, there was insufficient time to consider the matter prior to the current hearing date. As a result, the hearing on the demurrer is continued to July 26, 2018. If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court, pursuant to Rule 3.1308(a)(1), adopted by Local Rule 3.10, effective immediately, and no formal order pursuant to Rule 3.1312 or any other notice is required as the tentative ruling af...
2018.7.19 Demurrer 541
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.19
Excerpt: ...on. If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court, pursuant to Rule 3.1308(a)(1), adopted by Local Rule 3.10, effective immediately, and no formal order pursuant to Rule 3.1312 or any other notice is required as the tentative ruling affords sufficient notice to the parties. ...
2018.7.19 Motion to Tax Costs 708
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.19
Excerpt: ...n May 4, 2018 as payment for the judgment. In support, Defendant relies on Gray1 CPB LLC v. SCC Acquisitions, Inc. (2015) 233 Cal.App.4th 882 (“Gray”). In Gray, the debtor tendered a cashier's check for more than the amount owed on the judgment, and the creditor proceeded to file a Memorandum of Costs After Judgment and then cashed the cashier's check. The Gray court held that if the judgment creditor is presented with a check for the full am...
2018.7.19 Joinder, Motion to Compel 534
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.19
Excerpt: ...ge log, and the hearing on Defendant PriceWaterhouseCoopers' Joinder in the same motion, is continued to Aug. 3, 2018 at 9 a.m. in the Law & Motion Dept. In part due to documents being filed under seal, the Court has not had sufficient time to review LocusPoint's Reply papers. No later than July 25, 2018, each party may (but is not required to) file an additional brief not exceeding two pages, further addressing the following issues: (a) how many...
2018.7.18 Demurrer 008
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.18
Excerpt: ...or breach of contract is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. Code Civ. Proc. §430.10(e). Separate and apart from Plaintiff's third‐party beneficiary claim (see Second Cause of Action), the FAC does not properly allege the existence of any written or oral contract between Plaintiff and Manor. Plaintiff argues the HOA's CCRs and/or Bylaws constitute a “three‐party contract” between Plaintiff, the HOA and Manor because they reference the HOA's r...
2018.7.18 Motion for Attorney's Fees 246
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.18
Excerpt: ...5 lodestar enhancement, for a total of $56,895.00. Of the $37,930.00 attorneys' fees, Plaintiff seeks $10,155.00 for work performed by the Knight Law Firm (“Knight firm”) and $27,775.00 for work performed by Hackler Daghighian Martino & Novak, P.C. (“HDMN”). In opposition, Defendants FCA US LLC and KTP Cars, Inc. (“Defendants”) object to both the hourly rates and the claimed time spent by the attorneys. 1. THE KNIGHT FIRM a. Hourly ra...
2018.7.18 Motion to Compel Discovery Responses, for Sanctions 588
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.18
Excerpt: ...f Civ. Proc. §§2030.300, subd. (b) [interrogatories], 2033.290, subd. (b) [admissions] and 2031.310, subd. (b)(2) [documents].) Failure to comply with this requirement constitutes a “misuse of discovery.” (Id. §2023.010, subd. (i).) Defendant's motion fails to comply with this requirement. The correspondence between Defendant Goldbeck and Plaintiff do not satisfy the meet‐andconfer requirement because Defendant Goldbeck is not the party ...
2018.7.17 Motion for Summary Judgment, Adjudication 369
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.17
Excerpt: ...the hearing date. If the notice is served by overnight delivery, the notice period shall be increased by two court days. The court cannot cure a notice defect by continuing the hearing. Instead, the notice period must begin anew. Robinson v. Woods (2008) 168 Cal.App.4th 1258, 1268‐1268. Although plaintiff has not objected to the lack of statutory notice, a waiver of the notice period should not be inferred from silence. Urshan v. Musicians' Cre...
2018.7.17 Motion to Strike 483
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.17
Excerpt: ...fendant HASKEW, the Complaint alleges, or at least strongly implies, that a portion of damages caused by Clark might have been avoided or mitigated if Defendant HASKEW had discovered Clark's wrongful acts and reported them to the Plaintiff's Board sooner than Plaintiff eventually learned of Clark's acts. To this extent, at least some of the losses litigated in the Clark Litigation were possibly avoidable and are alleged to flow from the alleged n...
2018.7.17 Motion to Transfer 489
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.17
Excerpt: ... Friday, June 15, 2018, instead of Monday, June 18, 2018. Plaintiff still had time to timely file and serve an opposition though, and has not established any prejudice from the shortened notice. Nevertheless, Plaintiff did not substantively oppose the motion, and therefore the motion is continued to allow Plaintiff time to file a substantive opposition. Plaintiff's supplemental opposition is to be filed and served by August 3, 2018. Defendant's s...
2018.7.16 Motion to Compel 987
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.16
Excerpt: ...weighs James Jin Qing Li's (“Li”) privacy objection. J.P. Morgan Chase Bank is ordered to provide the records requested in Plaintiffs' subpoena that was issued on February 14, 2018. (See Plaintiffs' Revised Exh. 1.) (2) The motion as to the subpoena to Wells Fargo is DENIED. Plaintiffs have not established that the subpoena was served on all of the individuals and/or entities identified in the subpoena. Plaintiffs served a “Notice to Consum...
2018.7.16 Motion to Compel Arbitration, to Stay 420
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.16
Excerpt: ...ani Decl., on 3‐14‐16, Plaintiff Cassidy signed an agreement requiring the arbitration of employment‐related disputes. Plaintiff's asserted claims here fall within the parties' agreement, which is enforceable. Armendariz, supra, 24 Cal.4th 83. Accordingly, the motion is granted, and the case is STAYED pending resolution of the arbitration. Code Civ. Proc. Sect. 1281.4. Plaintiff's Opposition disputes defense counsel's contention that Plaint...
2018.7.16 Motion to Compel 594
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.16
Excerpt: ...lished the service. If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court, pursuant to Rule 3.1308(a)(1), adopted by Local Rule 3.10, effective immediately, and no formal order pursuant to Rule 3.1312 or any other notice is required as the tentative ruling affords sufficient notice to the parties. ...
2018.7.9 Demurrer 640
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.9
Excerpt: ...Environmental Services, Inc., Langan Engineering Environmental Surveying and Landscape Architecture DPC dba Langan Engineering Environmental Surveying and Landscape Architecture, Treadwell & Rollo, Inc. and T&R Consolidated, Inc. (collectively “Defendants”) to the First Amended Complaint of Plaintiff KB Home South Bay, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) is ruled on as follows: Demurrer to the Fourteenth Cause of Action for Successor‐in‐Interest Corpo...
2018.7.9 Motion to Compel Further Responses, for Sanctions 203
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.9
Excerpt: ...��76, 82, 93‐94, 99, 105‐106, 111‐112, 117‐118, 129‐130, 135, 147‐148 and for sanctions is GRANTED‐IN‐PART and DENIED‐IN‐PART. The 27 interrogatories at issue are sufficiently relevant to the asserted claims. Although not the primary basis of its Opposition papers, the County argues the 27 disputed interrogatories here have only marginal relevance to “whether Mr. Sedillo was having improper relationships with his clients.”...
2018.7.9 Motion for Sanctions 275
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.9
Excerpt: ...fs to file the motion. (Minutes, January 10, 2018.) No trial date was pending, and Plaintiffs' motion was for the purpose of setting a trial date. Therefore, the motion also was not filed for the purpose of delay. The grounds for the motion to reset trial date were not asserted in bad faith or frivolously. At the time of the motion, this case had not been included in the coordinated action, and no trial date was set in this Court. Presently, the ...
2018.7.9 Motion to Vacate Dismissal, to Enter Judgment 272
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.9
Excerpt: ... that dismissal should be vacated under Code of Civil Procedure section 473. (See Declaration of Dubowski, para. 11.) Therefore, the ground for this motion is that dismissal was entered by “mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §473, subd. (b).) The motion shows no “mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.” The parties stipulated in writing to entry of dismissal, and the Court entered t...
2018.7.6 Motion for Leave to File Complaint 802
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.6
Excerpt: ...such as oversight, inadvertence, neglect, mistake or other cause, are insufficient grounds to deny the motion unless accompanied by bad faith.” (Silver Organizations Ltd. v. Frank (1990) 217 Cal. App. 3d 94, 99 [permitting crosscomplaint on “eve of trial”].) The provision for allowing of compulsory cross‐complaints “shall be liberally construed to avoid forfeiture of causes of action.” (CCP § 426.50.) A “strong showing of bad faith...
2018.7.6 Motion for Summary Judgment, Adjudication 369
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.6
Excerpt: ...e time for service is increased by “two court days.” (Code of Civ. Proc. § 437c, subd. (a)(2).) The 75th calendar day before the July 6, 2018 hearing date was April 22, 2018, a Sunday. Adding “two court days” extends the service deadline to Thursday, April 19, 2018. Defendant served this motion on Friday, April 20, 2018, one day too late. “The statutory language regarding minimum notice is mandatory, not directive.” (Urshan v. Musici...
2018.7.5 Motion for Order 080
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.5
Excerpt: ...onic service. If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court, pursuant to Rule 3.1308(a)(1), adopted by Local Rule 3.10, effective immediately, and no formal order pursuant to Rule 3.1312 or any other notice is required as the tentative ruling affords sufficient notice to the parties. ...
2018.7.5 Motion to Seal 600
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.5
Excerpt: ...o less restrictive means to protect the privacy interest. Absent sealing, the private information would be publicly available. If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court, pursuant to Rule 3.1308(a)(1), adopted by Local Rule 3.10, effective immediately, and no formal order pursuant to Rule 3.1312 or any other notice is required as the tentative ruling affords sufficient notice to the parties. ...
2018.7.2 Demurrer 042
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.2
Excerpt: ...use of Action for Equitable Contribution is OVERRULED. Defendant argues that equitable contribution does not apply because Plaintiff and Defendant are not coobligors, focusing on the allegation that Plaintiff never had, and does not have a duty to defend CrossChannel in the underlying suit. (See Comp. ¶ 30.) However, Plaintiff also alleges that both Plaintiff and Defendant issued policies to CrossChannel, that Plaintiff agreed to provide a defen...
2018.7.2 Demurrer 769
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.2
Excerpt: ...ation on the Merits. In the First Action (Case No.16 CIV 02108), the Court sustained demurrer without leave to amend. Judgment, however, was never entered. Regardless, Plaintiff filed a Dismissal with Prejudice on August 29, 2017. The voluntary Dismissal with Prejudice satisfies the “judgment in prior action” requirement. (Roybal v. Univ. Ford (1989) 207 Cal. App. 3d 1080, 1085.) 2. The Parties Between the Two Actions Are “Identical.” Alt...
2018.7.2 Motion for Change of Venue 696
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.2
Excerpt: ...ld be promoted by the change of venue. If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court, pursuant to Rule 3.1308(a)(1), adopted by Local Rule 3.10, effective immediately, and no formal order pursuant to Rule 3.1312 or any other notice is required as the tentative ruling affords sufficient notice to the parties. ...
2018.7.2 Motion to Dismiss 681
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.2
Excerpt: ...t INTERSTATES VANLINES, LLC. (Decl. Kutsevol, Exhibits A‐F.) They are non‐signatories to the Forum Selection Clause contained in Exhibits C and D, and thus have no standing to enforce it against Plaintiff. Moreover, the Forum Selection Clause expressly states that it applies only as between INTERSTATES VANLINES, LLC and Plaintiff, and not to any “agents, contractors, employees, and representatives”. (Decl. Kutsevol, Exhibits C and D at Se...
2018.7.2 Motion to Disqualify Counsel 575
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2018.7.2
Excerpt: ...e insufficient to support disqualification under Calif. Rule of Professional Conduct 3‐310. First, the evidence does not sufficiently demonstrate the formation of an attorney‐client relationship. The Court acknowledges that meeting with a potential client can, in some circumstances, create an attorney‐client relationship. Here, the motion is based on a 30‐minute meeting held over three years ago, in May 2015, between Plaintiff Vida's mana...

2530 Results

Per page

Pages