Excerpt: ......

Excerpt: ...ate under Code of Civil Procedure section 415.20. Accordingly, Mr. Abdo's suggestion that he is not linked to that address lacks credibility. RP to give notice. It appears Mr. Abdo must explain why, if the address the entity in which he was an officer was listed as 2213 Ringwood Ave, he claims he has no connection with that address. Because the Court cannot consider evidence with any reply documents, the Court will DENY WITHOUT PREJUDICE. ...

Excerpt: ...In addition, this motion is not timely pursuant to CRC 3.110(b) because it was filed after 60 days of the filing of the Complaint. The court schedules a Case Management Conference for 5-15-18, Dept. C11, at 8:45 am. Prevailing Party is to give notice. (2) Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File a Second Amended Complaint is GRANTED. There does not appear to be any undue prejudice to Defendants in granting Plaintiff leave to file a Second Amended Com...

Excerpt: ...capacity of the person who is signing the Verification on behalf of the responding party and fails to state where the Verification was executed and on what date. (See Exh. C to Saghera Decl.) An unverified response is the equivalent of no response at all. (Appleton v. Superior Court (Cook)(1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 632, 636.) To the extent Cross-Defendant PRELUDE has not already produced responsive documents, the Court ORDERS Cross-Defendant PRELUDE t...

Excerpt: ...on.) This appears to be a result of Plaintiffs' assertion Defendant failed to serve verifications to the discovery and“[u]nsworn responses are tantamount to no responses at all.” (Appleton v. Superior Court (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 632, 636.) Significantly, however, "there is no need to verify that portion of the response containing the objections." (See Food 4 Less Supermarkets, Inc. v. Superior Court (1995) 40 Cal.App.4th 651, 657.) Taking the...

Excerpt: ...AMS where the underlying controversy must be arbitrated.” (Motion pg. 7:5-8.) Plaintiffs' “Introduction” to its Opposition states, “because (i) this motion involves, inter alia, the question of whether Defendants waived any right to arbitrate by suing plaintiff Michael Baker in Tennessee without mentioning arbitration, and (ii) that very issue is already pending in Defendants' fully-briefed motion to compel arbitration before the Tennesse...

Excerpt: ......

Excerpt: ...m in her bankruptcy petition, and therefore the claims are part of the debtor's bankruptcy estate and have not been discharged. (11 U.S.C. §541(a)(1); Hamilton v. Greenwich Investors XXVI, LLC (2011) 195 Cal.App.4 th 1602, 1609.) Second, the express terms of the written Deed of Trust submitted by Defendant in support of the Demurrer reflects different terms than those expressed in the FAC. The court treats the facts asserted in the FAC as mere s...

Excerpt: ... Cal. 1977) 441 F.Supp.792, 796.) Here, there has been no showing of prejudice to Californian creditors and, thus, Defendants' first basis for Demurrer fails. Additionally, pursuant to the Order appointing Plaintiff as Receiver: “Receiver, as an officer of this Court, shall immediately have and take possession and custody and control of all ‘Collateral' securing the obligations of Proove to Leavitt under the Note and Security Agreement, as bo...

Excerpt: ...t for Production “shall set forth specific facts showing good cause justifying the discovery sought by the demand.” "Good cause” for production of documents may be established where it is shown the request is made in good faith and the documents sought are relevant to the subject matter and material to the issues in the litigation. (Associated Brewers Distributing Co. v. Superior Court (1967) 65 Cal.2d 583, 588.) Request No. 21 seeks: “Al...

Excerpt: ...tion. (DSS ¶¶ 1-8.) Plaintiffs did not oppose the motion. Thus, the motion for summary judgment is granted. Defendant to give notice. (1) Defendant State of California's motion for summary judgment, or in the alternative, for summary adjudication, is CONTINUED to 5-15-18, Dept. C11, at 2 pm. Counsel for Plaintiffs, attests that: (1) immediately upon being served with this motion, Plaintiffs set a number of depositions in this matter, among them...

Excerpt: ...tained without substitution of a personal representative after a party has died.” Sacks v. FSR Brokerage, Inc. (1992) 7 Cal. App. 4th 950, 957. Since a ruling on attorney's fees will be part of a judgment, the court is hesitant to move forward with the hearing as presently constituted. ...

Excerpt: ...r Defendants attempted to meet and confer in good faith seeking an extension of time to respond to the subject discovery before filing the instant motion. Specifically, it appears counsel attempted to come to an agreement as to the extension in time and Defendant's deposition, but counsel for Plaintiffs did not respond within the proposed time, and Defendants had to file the motion by 12-11- 17 [or risk waiving their objections to the discovery]....

Excerpt: ...ffs have not demonstrated any tangible prejudice from the granting of this motion. The Court VACATES the default entered against Moving Party on 11-17-17. Moving Party is to separately file the Motion to Quash, attached as Exhibit 4 to the declaration of Mr. McAndrew, within the next 5-calendar days. The Court SUSTAINS Plaintiffs' objection to Exhibit 1 only. Moving Party is to give notice. ...

Excerpt: ... t a l l . (Appleton v. Superior Court (Cook) (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 632, 636.) The Court ORDERS Cross-Defendant PRELUDE to produce documents responsive to Request Nos. 7, 1, 13, 17, 23 and 25 in compliance with its Response within the next 21-calendar days. The Court ORDERS Cross-Defendant PRELUDE to provide further responses to Request Nos. 8-10, 12, 14-16, 20-22, and 24 within the next 21-calendar days. The Court OVERRULES the objection that th...

Excerpt: ...sel represents there is a breach of an agreement or obligation to pay attorney as to expenses or fees, and that the client has engaged in a conduct such that it is unreasonably difficult for counsel to carry out employment effectively. The motion is unopposed. It also appears that the client will not be prejudiced if the motion is granted since the trial date is not until June 5, 2018. The order will take effect on filing of proof of service upon...

Excerpt: ...duty, breach of duty, causation, and damages apply…Whether a defendant owes a duty of care is a question of law. Its existence depends upon the foreseeability of the risk and a weighing of policy considerations for and against imposition of liability. [Citation.]” (Burgess v. Superior Court (1992) 2 Cal.4 th1064, 1072.) Proof of negligence requires a showing of duty, breach of duty and causation of injury. (McIntyre v. The Colonies-Pacific, L...

Excerpt: ...of the recorded documents and their legal consequence. (Fontenot v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (2011) 198 Cal. App. 4th 256, 264.) The court may not take judicial notice of the truth of matters stated in the recorded documents. (Poseidon Development, Inc. v. Woodland Lane Estates, LLC (2007) 152 Cal. App. 4th 1106, 1117-18.) Further, these documents are not reasonably subject to dispute and are capable of immediate and accurate determination by resor...

Excerpt: ..., many of the Park's Rules, each of which constitutes a breach of the Agreement. MP's first argument is that Cross-Complainants fail to allege the specific terms that existed and were breached. However, the actual Lease Agreement is attached to the XC as Exhibit A. One of the terms is that “Homeowner agrees to abide and conform with all applicable laws and ordinances, all terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Rules and Regulations, all ru...

Excerpt: ...tions of the Complaint into this cause of action (via Para. 11) and it alleges that Defendant GUINEY breached the implied covenant in the written agreements which include, inter alia, “trying to oust and squeeze PLAINTIFF out of his investments in GnG and the WEE CHIPPY GLOBAL” and thwarting the building of the Costa Mesa franchise location. (See Complaint, Para. 13.) The WEE CHIPPY GLOBAL Operating Agreement states that the “purpose” of ...

Excerpt: ...indicate what, if any, information is currently in Defendant's possession. (See Code Civ. Proc., §2030.300(a)(1).) Additionally, Defendant failed to support any of the objections asserted within the responses and it is unclear whether information has been withheld, on the basis of these objections. Notably, “if a timely motion to compel has been filed, the burden is on responding party to justify any objection.” (See Fairmont Ins. Co. v. Sup...

Excerpt: ...the Court rules as follows: SUSTAIN objection to ¶¶ 17, 20, 20.a, 20.b, 20.c, 20.d, 21, 25, 26, 27, 28, and 37; OVERRULE as to the remaining objections. (1) The balancing of harm lies in Defendant's favor. Code of Civil Procedure section 526(a) provides in pertinent part: “(a) An injunction may be granted in the following cases: … (2) When it appears by the complaint or affidavits that the commission or continuance of some act during the li...

Excerpt: ...tion 405.32, the burden of proof is on the party opposing the motion to show, by a preponderance of the evidence, that Complainant's claims have probable validity. (Code Civ. Proc., §405.30; See Also Howard S. Wright Construction Co. v. Superior Court (2003) 106 Cal.App.4 th 314, 319.) To meet his burden under these provisions, Plaintiff relies on two pieces of evidence: First, Plaintiff cites Exhibit B to the verified First Amended Complaint, w...

Excerpt: ... to Compel Responses to RFAs (11) Motion to Compel Responses to RFAs (12) Motion to Compel Responses to RFAs Tentative Ruling: (1-12) Plaintiff Balboa Capital Corporation's twelve discovery motions are DEEMED MOOT. Defendants represent, and Plaintiff concedes, that further responses were served after the motions were filed. Reasonable monetary sanctions of $3,880.00 are imposed against Defendants, payable within 30 days. The court “shall” imp...

Excerpt: ...r: The Complaint alleges that harm claimed by Plaintiff concerning the purchase of stocks occurred between February 2013 and November 2014. (Complaint, ¶¶ 17, 25.) Plaintiff commenced this action on May 28, 2015. Defendant Flower was named as Doe 5 on August 15, 2017. Thus, unless the relation back effect is given to the amendment naming Defendant Flower as Doe 5, it appears Plaintiff's claims, other than for breach of fiduciary duty and fraud,...