Excerpt: ...erson Most Knowledgeable; 4. Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Deposition of Defendant Brenda Stanfield; and 5. Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Further Responses to Plaintiff's Requests for Production of Documents, Set Two. The Court DENIES Defendant, Piecemakers' Motion for Protective Order. The Court GRANTS Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Further Responses to Plaintiff's Requests for Production of Documents, Set Two. The Court GRANTS, in part, and DENIES,...

Excerpt: ... records. (Sosinsky v. Grant (1992) 6 Cal.App.4th 1548, 1564.) The Court issued its ruling on the preliminary injunction by minute order dated 12-17-19 and Notice of Ruling on same was served on 12-20-19 by mail. This Motion, however, was not filed until 2-3-2020—far beyond the 10-day limitation set forth in section 1000(b). Even a motion filed one-day beyond the 10-day limitation is grounds for denial. (See Wiz Tech., Inc. v. Coopers & Lybrand...

Excerpt: ...declaratory relief claim.” (Canova v. Trustees of Imperial Irr. Dist. Employee Pension Plan (2007) 150 Cal. App. 4th 1487, 1497.) “To qualify for declaratory relief under section 1060, plaintiffs were required to show their action (as refined on appeal) presented two essential elements: ‘(1) a proper subject of declaratory relief, and (2) an actual controversy involving justiciable questions relating to the rights or obligations of a party....

Excerpt: ...rt a cause of action for elder abuse against Defendant Carehouse Health Center (“Carehouse”). (See FAC, ¶¶ 11-13.) Specifically, the FAC fails to allege specific facts demonstrating ratification or authorization by Carehouse. As a statutory “cause of action,” elder abuse must be pleaded “with particularity.” (See Covenant Care, Inc. v. Superior Court (2004) 32 Cal.4th 771, 790.) Second COA (Professional Negligence) and Fourth COA (W...

Excerpt: ... Defendant also contends plaintiff has not shown Defendant was properly served with the Initial Statement of Damages such that the default is void. Defendant further contends plaintiff's death necessarily changed the nature of the Complaint which requires that Dr. Hajj be allowed to respond, and that the court cannot allow a plaintiff to prove different claims or different damages at a default hearing than those pled in the Complaint. Under Code ...

Excerpt: ..., Case Number 30-2018-01014579. (Evid. Code, § 452(d).) Demurrer based on Standing: The FAC alleges Plaintiff and Defendants entered into an oral agreement according to the terms of which Defendants agreed to, in exchange for valuable consideration, design, manufacture and install bridges and veneers for Plaintiff's daughter, Ms. Bond. (FAC, Attachment BC-1.) The FAC adequately alleges facts demonstrating that Plaintiff, as a contracting party, ...

Excerpt: ...he Declaration of Jerry Noon is SUSTAINED. Plaintiff's evidentiary objections to the Declaration of David Stroud are SUSTAINED. Plaintiff's evidentiary objection to the Declaration of Jeffrey Bloom is SUSTAINED. Motion for Summary Judgment/Adjudication: Plaintiff Ascentium Capital LLC (“Ascentium” or “Plaintiff”) moves for an order granting summary judgment in favor of Ascentium and against Defendants Jeffrey H. Bloom, D.O. and Jeffrey Bl...

Excerpt: ...fendant cites Mendoza v. City of Los Angeles (1998) 66 Cal.App.4 th 1333 for this proposition. However, that case was not a demurrer case, and actually went to a jury. Mendoza involved an off-duty police officer who fatally shot his fiancé. The Court of Appeal stated, “Mendoza was both off duty and in Hawthorne, outside the jurisdiction of the Department, when he shot Clementina during a domestic dispute. The act was unrelated to his official ...

Excerpt: ...tium moves for summary adjudication of the first cause of action (breach of contract) and second cause of action (breach of guaranty). Plaintiff fails to meet its initial burden, i.e., Plaintiff fails to establish its damages. Specifically, Plaintiff represents that as of December 10, 2019, the amount of $209,860.10 is due and owing from Defendants to Ascentium under the CSA. (See PSS ¶ 9.) This statement is supported by the Declaration of Jerry...

Excerpt: ...dent. Defendant cites Mendoza v. City of Los Angeles (1998) 66 Cal.App.4 th 1333 for this proposition. However, that case was not a demurrer case, and actually went to a jury. That case involved an off-duty police officer who fatally shot his fiancé. The Court of Appeal stated, “Mendoza was both off duty and in Hawthorne, outside the jurisdiction of the Department, when he shot Clementina during a domestic dispute. The act was unrelated to his...

Excerpt: ... the 3 rd, 4 th, and 7 th COAs is that is that they are superseded by the CUTSA. However, UTSA does not displace noncontract claims that, although related to a trade secret misappropriation, are independent and based on facts distinct from the facts that support the misappropriation claim (Angelica Textile Services, Inc. v. Park (2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 495, 506, as modified (Oct. 29, 2013), as modified on denial of reh'g (Nov. 7, 2013).) Here, in ...

Excerpt: ...position to the Demurrer is 21-pages. The Court will disregard any pages past the 15-page limit. Request for Judicial Notice: Defendants' Requests for Judicial Notice of Exhibits A-K are GRANTED, pursuant to Evidence Code section 452(d), however, the Court takes notice of the existence of the documents, only, and not Defendants' characterization of the same, within the Requests. Demurrer: As to whether the Court lacks jurisdiction based on the Ba...

Excerpt: ... that the first cause of action for Violations of ICRAA, Cal. Civ. Code § 1786, et seq. fails to state facts sufficient to state a cause of action as it does not state that defendant's failure to comply did not result in a more favorable investigative consumer report. Defendant does not establish this is an element that must be pled by plaintiff. Rather, this is an affirmative defense for defendant to assert as it presumes a failure by defendant...

Excerpt: ...(“Related” or “defendant”) contends the first COA, for Violations of the Investigative Consumer Reporting Agencies Act (“ICRAA”), Cal. Civ. Code § 1786, et seq. fails to state facts sufficient to state a cause of action as it does not state that defendant's failure to comply did not result in a more favorable investigative consumer report. Defendant does not establish this is an element that must be pled by plaintiff. Rather, this is...

Excerpt: ...neous exchange” of a list of expert witnesses the parties “expect” to call as expert witnesses at trial. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2034.210(a), 2034.260(b).) Section 2034.300 provides that a party who has timely and completely engaged in the initial expert exchange may object and seek to exclude the expert opinion of any witness offered by any other party who has failed to: (a) list that witness as an expert under section 2034.260; (b) submit ...

Excerpt: ...jects that the documents sought are protected by Plaintiff's right to privacy. The court agrees, and grants the motion to quash the FS SDT. Where the right to privacy is asserted as a protection against discovery, the person raising the objection must establish a legally protected privacy interest, an objectively reasonable expectation of privacy in the given circumstances, and a threatened intrusion that is serious. (Williams v. Superior Court (...

Excerpt: ...tal Corp.'s Motion to Consolidate is GRANTED as follows: Westover v. Simon, D.D.S., et al., Case No. 30-2019-01093125-CU-BC-CJC (“Westover Action”) is consolidated with this action, Bond v. Simon, et al., Case No. 30-2018-01014579 (“Bond Action”), for all purposes. The Bond Action is to be the lead case. The two cases Defendants are seeking to consolidate involve common questions of law and fact, i.e., they arise from the dental services ...

Excerpt: ...Code § 3294(a); College Hospital Inc. v. Superior Court (1994) 8 Cal. 4th 704, 721; Turman v. Turning Point of Central Calif., Inc. (2010) 191 Cal.App.4th 53, 63; Cyrus v. Haveson (1976) 65 Cal.App.3d 306, 316-317.) “Notwithstanding relaxed pleading criteria, certain tortious injuries demand firm allegations. Vague, conclusory allegations of fraud or falsity may not be rescued by the rule of liberal construction. [Citation.] When the plaintiff...

Excerpt: ...FA Nos. 11, 13, 15, and 18 these requests are compound. The Requests should be propounded as separate requests. As to RFA Nos. 5, 6, 7, 10, 16, 17, 19, and 10, the Motion is GRANTED. Despite Defendant's objection, these requests are not compound, and the defined term of “PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE” is not vague, ambiguous or compound. Defendant is required to provide to provide a complete and straightforward response as the information reasonabl...

Excerpt: ... no e-mails responsive to any of the requests at issue, defendant is to provide a supplemental response concerning the inability to comply which complies with Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.230. Good Cause and Relevance: Defendant's supplemental responses contain statements of compliance with the demand that are incomplete. Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.220 provides, in relevant part, that “[a] statement that the party to whom a de...

Excerpt: ...y served an Amended Statement of Damages on him by mail, as opposed to personal service, rendering the default void. Defendant relies on Plotitsa v. Superior Court (1983) 140 Cal.App.3d 755, and Schwab v. Southern California Gas Co. (2004) 114 Cal.App.4th 1308 (“Schwab”), but these cases do not appear to apply here if plaintiff properly served the Initial Statement of Damages, and plaintiff is seeking less than what was originally sought in t...

Excerpt: ...dant Piecemakers' Person Most Knowledgeable; 4. Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Deposition of Defendant Brenda Stanfield; and 5. Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Further Responses to Plaintiff's Requests for Production of Documents, Set Two. The Court CONTINUES the five motions to 4-2-2020, Dept. C11, at 2 pm, as set forth below. (1) Defendant Piecemakers' Motion for Protective Order: Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.060(a) provides that when a requ...

Excerpt: ...bdivision (b) provides that “[t]he court may permit withdrawal or amendment of an admission only if it determines that the admission was the result of mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect, and that the party who obtained the admission will not be substantially prejudiced in maintaining that party's action or defense on the merits.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.300(b).) Any doubts in applying section 2033.300 must be resolved in favor of th...

Excerpt: ...ndants prevailed on their special motion to strike and are thus entitled to their reasonable attorney fees and costs pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16(c). Defendants seek an hourly rate of $425 for their counsel. The Motion is supported by the Declaration of Blut who states his normal and customary hourly rate is $425.00. (See Blut Decl., ¶ 2.) The declaration, however, fails to set forth counsel's level of experience and fails ...

Excerpt: ...to maintain a cause of action. Defendants' Request for Judicial Notice as to the court records contained in Exhibits A and B is GRANTED pursuant to Evidence Code section 452(d). The First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) alleges defendants own and reside in a single-family home located at 203 Calle Delicada, San Clemente, California, situated in a common interest development governed by a set of covenants, conditions, and restrictions (“CC&Rs”),...