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

2574 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 2150,25
Array
(
)
2019.7.29 Motion for Summary Judgment 131
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Davis, Leland
Hearing Date: 2019.7.29
Excerpt: ...er Plaintiff to file a proper one. Instead, the Court admonishes and directs attorneys John F. Martin, Marta R. Venegas, Brittany C. Jones, and the entire law firm of Martin& Vanegas to learn and comply with all Rules of Court in this and every other case. Plaintiff also has filed, without leave of court, two sets of supplemental evidence (July 19 and 22) after Defendant had already filed its Reply papers. Plaintiff never sought leave for the del...
2019.7.29 Demurrer 765
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Davis, Leland
Hearing Date: 2019.7.29
Excerpt: ...egis Group of Northern California, LLC et. al.'s Demurrer to Plaintiff Sodini Enterprises, Inc., et. al.'s 5‐17‐19 First Amended Complaint (FAC) is OVERRULED. A demurrer challenges defects that appear on the face of the pleading, or from matters outside the pleading that are judicially noticeable. Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318. In ruling on a demurrer, the trial court is required to construe the complaint liberally with a view of ...
2019.7.29 Demurrer 249
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Davis, Leland
Hearing Date: 2019.7.29
Excerpt: .... (SAC paras. 23 ‐ 27.) The new allegations do not describe conduct that is “extreme and outrageous” for IIED. Further, the wrongful conduct “must be conduct directed at the plaintiff, or occur in the presence of a plaintiff of whom the defendant is aware.” (Wilson v. S. California Edison Co. (2015) 234 Cal. App. 4th 123, 152.) The new allegations do not state or imply that Defendants' conduct was “directed at Plaintiff.” None of th...
2019.7.29 Motion to Strike 249
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Davis, Leland
Hearing Date: 2019.7.29
Excerpt: ...nscious disregard of the rights and safety of others. Rather, the complaint alleges that the ant infestation and accumulation of dog droppings occurred, but not that Defendants caused them or that Defendants intentionally refrained from addressing the problems. As to the mold, Plaintiff alleges that he discovered the mold on June 30, 2017, and a restoration company began remediating just one week later. (SAC para. 16 & 17.) As to the shelving, Pl...
2019.7.26 Motion to Stay Proceedings 731
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Davis, Leland
Hearing Date: 2019.7.26
Excerpt: ...il Procedure Section 187, cited by Plaintiff as support for this Motion, authorizes the Court to use the means necessary to carry jurisdiction into effect, but does not specifically discuss a motion to stay the action. CCP Section 418.10(a)(2) reads “A defendant... may file a notice of motion… [t]o stay or dismiss an action on the ground of inconvenient forum.” Here, it is plaintiff moving for a stay, and the ground for the request is not r...
2019.7.26 Motion for Summary Judgment 843
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Davis, Leland
Hearing Date: 2019.7.26
Excerpt: ...ty, Defendant it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The facts of this case are not in dispute. According to Plaintiff's complaint, on the evening of October 25, 2015, [P]laintiff was on the premises of the PALO MAR STABLES, there to visit with defendant ROBIN [HOWLAND] and/or to tend to her own horse. As she walked on the premises, she walked past the vicinity of [Ms. Howland's horse,] Valentino, who was at that time not properly in his ...
2019.7.26 Demurrer 940
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Davis, Leland
Hearing Date: 2019.7.26
Excerpt: ... based on failure to allege facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. (See Code of Civ. Proc. § 430.10(e).) The Complaint indicates that Plaintiffs are bringing causes of action for General Negligence, Intentional Tort and Premises Liability. (See Complaint ¶ 10.) It also appears Plaintiffs may be attempting to allege a cause of action for Breach of Contract as well. (See Complaint, ¶ 12.) However, “each complaint must have one or mo...
2019.7.24 Demurrer 232
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Davis, Leland
Hearing Date: 2019.7.24
Excerpt: ...f Action for “fraud in the inducement” and “promissory fraud” is OVERRULED. Cross‐Defendants argue the XC fails to allege any misrepresentation(s) of fact. It alleges, however, that Cross‐Defendants falsely represented, both on their website and orally, that (a) they had accelerated 120+ Startups; (b) they had obtained $400,000,000 for those startups; (c) those startups are currently valued at $4 billion; (d) they had partners and loc...
2019.7.24 Motion for Determination of Fee Award 917
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Davis, Leland
Hearing Date: 2019.7.24
Excerpt: ... the choice of law provision contained in the parties' Agreement. Defendant Cheung contends that, notwithstanding the choice of law provision, California law applies to the dispute over attorney's fees pursuant to Rincon EV Realty LLC v. CP III Rincon Towers, Inc., 8 Cal. App. 5th 1 (Ct. App. 2017) and ABF Capital Corp. v. Grove Properties Co., 126 Cal. App. 4th 204, 220 (2005). The facts of Grove are similar to the present case: Plaintiff and re...
2019.7.24 Motion for Attorney Fees 802
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Davis, Leland
Hearing Date: 2019.7.24
Excerpt: ... Before Trial (Rutter, Jun. 2019 Update) ¶ 9:102.6.) Respondent's Request for Judicial Notice is GRANTED, BUT NOT FOR THE TRUTH OF THE MATTERS ASSERTED THEREIN, as to: (1) Request no. 1 (Petition filed on March 28, 2019); (2) Request no. 5 (Petitioner's reply papers filed May 2, 2019); and (3) Request no. 6 (Court's tentative ruling and order of May 9 and 10, 2019). Respondent's Request for Judicial Notice is DENIED as to: (1) Re...
2019.7.24 Motion to Enforce Settlement 961
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Davis, Leland
Hearing Date: 2019.7.24
Excerpt: ...ent Agreement”) entered into with Defendant in August 2018. (See Campbell Decl., Exh. A.) The court may retain jurisdiction over the parties to enforce the settlement until performance in full of the terms of the settlement, if requested by the parties. (C.C.P § 664.6.) The Settlement Agreement, which is signed by both parties, contains such a provision here. (See Settlement Agreement ¶ 23.) Plaintiff establishes that Defendant George P. Esho...
2019.7.24 Motion to Strike 232
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Davis, Leland
Hearing Date: 2019.7.24
Excerpt: ...motion seeks to strike the request for “restitution” and “damages” in ¶1 of the XC's Prayer for Relief. As an initial matter, the Opposition brief argues a request for rescission may validly exist without any accompanying claim for restitution. This is irrelevant because CrossDefendants have not moved to strike the XC's request for a rescission; they only seek to strike the request for “restitution” and “damages” in ¶1 of the Pr...
2019.7.23 Motion to Seal 870
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Davis, Leland
Hearing Date: 2019.7.23
Excerpt: ...ation overcomes the right of public access to the records and supports sealing them. Absent an order sealing this information, defendant's rights will be prejudiced as the records would be available to the public. The proposed sealing is narrowly tailored and there is no less restrictive means to protect defendant's right to privacy. If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court. Thereafter, counsel for Defendant ...
2019.7.23 Motion to Compel Completion of Deposition 862
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Davis, Leland
Hearing Date: 2019.7.23
Excerpt: ...imited Dr. Steinberg's deposition to this period. In a January 29 letter to Plaintiff's counsel, defense counsel stated: Gary Steinberg, M.D. is available on 3/7 from 2:00 p.m. – 6:00 p.m. at Stanford. Unfortunately, this is the only available weekday Dr. Steinberg has within the next couple of months. If you are not available on this date, we will have to schedule his deposition on a Saturday. Please let us know. [Dolinski Decl., Ex. E] Plaint...
2019.7.23 Motion for Protective Order 321
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Davis, Leland
Hearing Date: 2019.7.23
Excerpt: ...esent Disclosure is operative, and Plaintiff may challenge it. Defendant correctly points out that there is no such thing as “cumulative experts” based on their specialty. Rather, the prohibition is against testimony that is cumulative. Plaintiff's motion does not identify any specific testimony of any expert witness that is cumulative of any other witness. B. Motion to Exclude Dr. Ament or to Disqualify Defendant's Counsel. The motion to exc...
2019.7.23 Demurrer 574
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Davis, Leland
Hearing Date: 2019.7.23
Excerpt: ...e to pay rent or quit based on the language in the Late Payment Schedule agreement (“agreement”). (See Complaint, Exh. 1, p.2.) However, the agreement does not contain any language requiring a 30‐day notice. Rather, the agreement provides that after 30 days, “an eviction notice will be posted.” (Ibid.) “Unless the rent is brought current and late fees are paid, the Tennant [sp] shall be vacated from the unit after 60 days of nonpaymen...
2019.7.22 Demurrers 502
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Davis, Leland
Hearing Date: 2019.7.22
Excerpt: ...Same Parties. The parties must stand in the same relationship (i.e., as plaintiff or defendant) in both suits. (Plant Insulation Co. v. Fibreboard Corp. (1990) 224 Cal.App.3d 781, 789 [“absolute identity of parties” required].) In ED 1005's cross‐complaint in the Lease Action, the parties are identical to the unlawful detainer action, but only as to Vinh Nguyen. Defendant Broadway Prime Motorz is not a party to the cross‐complaint. Thus, ...
2019.7.19 Demurrer 437
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Davis, Leland
Hearing Date: 2019.7.19
Excerpt: ...DENIED as moot. All proceedings in this action are hereby STAYED pending resolution of the appeal from this court's order granting Defendant's motion to quash service of summons in Docket No. 17‐CIV‐05088, assigned Appellate Case No. A157248, or until this court orders, upon a showing of good cause, that the stay should be lifted. The court finds that the Court of Appeals' determination in Appellate Case No. A157248 may have significant beari...
2019.7.19 Demurrer 013
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Davis, Leland
Hearing Date: 2019.7.19
Excerpt: ...ealth & Safety Code § 1430(b), is OVERRULED. For purposes of the Demurrer, Defendant has not demonstrated the § 1430(b) claim(s) are time‐barred. The parties dispute whether the applicable statute of limitations is one year under Code Civ. Proc. § 340(a) (applicable to statutory “penalties”) or three years under Code Civ. Proc. § 338(a) (applicable to “all other claims for liability created by statute”). Defendant cites no case appl...
2019.7.18 Motion for Sanctions 862
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Davis, Leland
Hearing Date: 2019.7.18
Excerpt: ...(or former attorney), or both. The moving papers indicate Defendant Virginia Gualberto was represented during part of the relevant time period by attorney James Imperiale. The Notice of Motion does not provide proper notice unless it states the specific person or persons against whom sanctions are requested. Second, the 6‐10‐19 Proof of Service does not demonstrate proper service of the moving papers. It states the papers were mailed to defen...
2019.7.18 Motion to Seal 355
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Davis, Leland
Hearing Date: 2019.7.18
Excerpt: ...CTION 2000 at: i:6‐7, 16‐28; ii:1‐5; 1:2‐3, 5‐6, 15‐17, 23‐ 28; 2; 3:1‐3, 20‐28; 4:1‐23, 27‐28; 5:19‐22; 6:25, 27‐28; 7:11‐28; 8‐14; 15:1‐4, 6‐9. The portions of the DECLARATION OF DAVID ANDRIGHETTO IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO CONFIRM VALUE OF SHARES IN ANDRIGHETTO PRODUCE INCORPORATED PURSUANT TO CORPORATIONS CODE SECTION 2000 filed herewith in redacted form at: 1:13‐28 2:1‐10, 16‐18, 22‐25; 3:1‐11; Exs. A...
2019.7.18 Motion to Disqualify Counsel 571
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Davis, Leland
Hearing Date: 2019.7.18
Excerpt: ...otion Department. The Ceccatos assert that Bonis should be disqualified as counsel for the Montgomerys due to a conflict of interest based on concurrent representation and successive representation. Where the conflict of interest is alleged to be a concurrent representation, the “primary” value at issue is the attorney's duty, and the client's legitimate expectation of loyalty, rather than confidentiality. (Flatt v. Superior Court (1994) 9 Ca...
2019.7.17 Motion for Attorney's Fees 693
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Davis, Leland
Hearing Date: 2019.7.17
Excerpt: ...‐17 Order granting Plaintiffs' SLAPP motion. Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16(c); Ketchum v. Moses (2001) 24 Cal.4th 1122, 1131; Morrow v. Los Angeles Unified Sch. Dist. (2007) 149 Cal.App.4th 1424, 1446. Defendants have not challenged the charged hourly rates, which appear to be reasonable. Plaintiffs' appellate counsel is highly qualified. See 5‐17‐19 Sargent Decl. The charged rates of $650/hr. (for Mr. Russo) and $450/hr. (for Mr. Sargent, who ...
2019.7.17 Motion to Compel Vehicle Inspection 789
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Davis, Leland
Hearing Date: 2019.7.17
Excerpt: ...days after service of the demand. As a result, Plaintiff's waived any objections to the demand pursuant to CCP § 2031.260. Plaintiff contends that, pursuant to CCP § 2031.310, Defendant's motion is untimely because it was not filed within 45 days of Plaintiff's response on January 18. CCP § 2031.310 governs motions to compel further responses. Defendant, however, does not seek to compel further responses to the demand. Rather, Defendant seeks ...
2019.7.3 Motion to Compel Second Deposition 468
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Davis, Leland
Hearing Date: 2019.7.3
Excerpt: ...he repeated interruptions and interjections by defense counsel, Plaintiff cites no authority indicating that CCP § 2025.290 excludes breaks or interruptions from the permitted “seven hours of total testimony.” Third, the Court notes that when Plaintiff's counsel adjourned the deposition, he stated “This has been – this has been plenty long for me, starting at 9:00 to 4:00.” At the conclusion of the deposition, counsel did not indicate ...

2574 Results

Per page

Pages