Excerpt: ...e letters or calls of the defense attorney, attempting to discussing their complaint. This is required by California Code of Civil Procedure sections 430.41(a) and section 435.5(a). Even while Plaintiffs are representing themselves, they are subject to the same restrictions and rules as all civil litigants and attorneys. [See Burnete v. La Casa Dana Apartments (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 1262, 1267; Nwosu v. Uba (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 1229, 1246–124...

Excerpt: ... to that judge's court for coordination with an action involving a common question of fact or law within the meaning of Section 404....” Under CRC 3.500, the Court must make findings related to certain factors which include whether the actions are complex, whether there are common questions of fact or law, whether those are predominating and significant to the litigation; and the disadvantages of duplicative and inconsistent rulings, orders, or...

Excerpt: ...or a protective order. Third-party information such as social security numbers, bank account information, personal contact information and the like are protected by the Constitutional right to privacy. Williams v. Superior Court (2017) 3 Cal. 5th 531, 552; SCC Acquisitions, Inc. v. Superior Court (2015) 243 Cal. App. 4th 741, 754–55. Plaintiff has properly asserted a privacy right, which the third-party entities have a reasonable expectation of...

Excerpt: ...en braking caused plaintiff to run into him. According to plaintiff, and one independent eyewitness, it appeared that defendant's actions were deliberate, designed perhaps to teach plaintiff a lesson about civility and patience. Defendant says it was just an accident. Nonetheless, the only the only question that needs to be answered at this juncture is whether pleading a “break check” incident of “road rage” is enough to support punitive ...

Excerpt: ...rior Court (1997) 16 Cal.4 th 1101, 1110; Department of Health Services v. Superior Court (1980) 104 Cal.App.3d 80, 83- 84. Absent a valid objection, service of a notice of deposition is effective to require a party or party-affiliated witness to attend and to testify. CCP §2025.280. Defendant does not want David Wertheim to be deposed. The ostensible grounds for the request are as follows: 1. Wertheim is the Vice President and General Counsel o...

Excerpt: ..., plaintiff and Hood agreed to let the listing agent Surterre Properties act in a dual agent capacity. As expressly set forth in the written dual agency agreement, Surterre owed plaintiff/Hood a “fiduciary duty of utmost care, integrity, honesty and loyalty” when dealing with the seller. On 04/18/17, plaintiff/Hood learned from agent Horton that the seller elected another buyer for the property, even though that other offer was actually less ...

Excerpt: ...seeks to disclose the Confidential Material has obtained the written consent of the person who designated the Material as Confidential to disclose the Material to such experts or consultants, provided that the person who designated the Material as Confidential shall not withhold consent without a good faith belief that serious harm would result from the Disclosure.” [Emphasis added.] According to defendant, this gives plaintiff the unilateral p...

Excerpt: ...the terms of an express warranty she alleges was made by FNB. However, from the evidence and papers submitted, there is no triable issues of material fact as to whether FNB issued an express warranty for the subject vehicle; it did not. Plaintiff has not provided any evidence to the contrary. An ““Express warranty” means: (1) A written statement arising out of a sale to the consumer of a consumer good pursuant to which the manufacturer, dis...

Excerpt: ...d motion and discovery cutoff dates. Authorities: The Discovery Act imposes two separate “cut-offs” on discovery. Unless otherwise ordered discovery proceedings must be “completed” 30 days before the date initially set for trial and discovery motions must be heard no later than 15 days before the date initially set for trial. CCP § 2024.020(a). A continuance or postponement of the trial does not operate to reopen discovery proceedings. C...

Excerpt: ...n for damages arising out of the professional negligence of a health care provider, no claim for punitive damages shall be included in a complaint or other pleading unless the court enters an order allowing an amended pleading that includes a claim for punitive damages to be filed. The court may allow the filing of an amended pleading … [if] the plaintiff has established that there is a substantial probability that the plaintiff will prevail on...

Excerpt: ...EHA, against these individual defendants or derivatively as to the union. (See FAC ¶¶ 29, 35, 38 41-42; Govt. Code § 12940(b),(a); see Mamou v. Trendwest Resorts, Inc. (2008) 165 Cal.App.4th 686, 713 (reciting elements); see also Guz v. Bechtel Nat. Inc. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 317, 355; Greene v. Pomona Unified School Dist. (1995) 32 Cal.App.4th 1216, 1222.) Although the FEHA is construed liberally, more facts are due to plead the statutory element...

Excerpt: ...on (“DMC Decision”). Anthem cites a few of federal cases that cite Rule 12(b)(6), which are not applicable to the present matter. It also cites Joslin v. HA.S. Ins. Brokerage, 184 Cal. App. 3d 369 (Ct. App. 1986), which is also inapplicable as that matter cites to judicial notice of documents already within the Court's files, which is not the case in the present matter. Anthem does not allege the Court's ability to take judicial notice of the...

Excerpt: ...strative remedies as to the timely filing of a sufficient complaint with the DFEH and obtaining a right-to-sue letter. (Holland v. Union Pac. R. Co. (2007) 154 Cal.App.4 th 940, 945; Kim v. Konad USA Distribution, Inc. (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 1336, 1342, 1345- 46; Martin v. Lockheed Missiles & Space Co. (1994) 29 Cal.App.4th 1718, 1724; Gov't Code §§ 12960(b),(d), 12965(b).) Further, on a demurrer, all material facts properly pleaded are accepte...

Excerpt: ... totally and completely without merit. CCP §128.5(b)(2). A motion is totally and completely without merit for these purposes, only if any reasonable attorney would agree that the motion is totally devoid of merit. This is an objective standard. Nunez v. Pennisi (2015) 241 Cal.App.4th 861, 879. Under CCP § 425.16(e)(4), the anti-SLAPP statute protects “any other conduct in furtherance of the exercise of the constitutional right of petition or ...

Excerpt: ...P § 583.360(b). The three statutory exceptions to the mandatory dismissal rule are as follows: (1) written stipulations or oral agreements made in open court extending the five-year time period; (2) exclusion from the computation of five years any time period during which the jurisdiction of the court was suspended or the prosecution of the action was stayed; and (3) the bringing action to trial was impossible, impractical, or futile. CCP §§ 5...

Excerpt: ... documents related to third party affiliate companies Waterworks Aquatics Beverly Hills, Inc., Waterworks Aquatics Denver, Inc., Waterworks Aquatics Siena Madre, Inc., and Waterworks Aquatics HB, Inc. which are owned entirely by defendant Jon Alpert. Requested Order: The defendants' seek a protective order limiting the scope of request number 6 in the Deposition Subpoenas for Production of Business Records served by Plaintiff on third patty affil...

Excerpt: ...without objections to sets one of the Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, Requests for Production, and Requests for Admission within 30 days of the hearing on these motions. Additionally, HB Worldwide Enterprises is to pay monetary sanctions in the amount of $1,400.00 to Plaintiff, within 10 days of the hearing. Although Defendants attempt to categorize the present matter as a “My Way of the Highway” regarding a previously discusse...

Excerpt: ...ere filed. To the extent they have not already done so, the defendants are ordered to supplement any requests which they have not already. The plaintiffs' requests for $2,500 in monetary sanctions against each defendant is GRANTED. The Defendant Dual Diagnosis is ordered to pay the plaintiffs $2,500 within 20 days of the order. The Defendant Tonmoy Sharma is ordered to pay $2,500 to the plaintiffs within 20 days of the order. The defendant served...

Excerpt: ... because of his protected status and that the harassing conduct was severe OR pervasive. (See CACI No. 2522A.) a. What is Severe or Pervasive “Severe or pervasive” means conduct that alters the conditions of employment and creates a hostile or abusive work environment. In determining whether conduct was severe or pervasive all the circumstances are considered including (a) The nature of the conduct (its severity); (b) How often, and over what...

Excerpt: ...d until the issue of his appointment is finally resolved in C8 (hearing set for 08/16/18). Both are correct. Demurrer CONTINUED to 09/10/18. Bifurcating Causes of Action to Set Aside Instruments Plaintiffs' first three causes of action all seek to set aside instruments executed by their brother Fred at a time when he was allegedly incompetent to understand/appreciate what he was doing. Many of the other causes of action also turn on Fred's compet...

Excerpt: ...CHUNG CAUSES A COPY OF THE SIGNED ORDER GRANTING THE MOTION TO BE SERVED UPON THE CLIENT PROMPTLY, AND FILES A PROOF OF SERVICE WITH THE COURT. Kring & Chung shall also give notice. Order to Show Cause Hearing --- Kring & Chung LLP Shall Give Separate Notice The Court is now scheduling an Order to Show Cause (“OSC”) hearing, regarding Dream Home Estate Inc.'s retaining counsel. The hearing is scheduled for Friday, July 27, 2018 at 9:30 am in ...

Excerpt: ...on is proper only if apparent from the complaint, or if the matter will necessarily result in a verdict below the limited civil jurisdictional amount. (Ytuarte v. Superior Court (2005) 129 Cal.App.4 th 266, 276; Walker v. Superior Court (1991) 53 Cal.3d 257, 269.) Unlikeliness is not the test: the trial court looks to the possibility of a jurisdictionally appropriate verdict. (Maldonado v. Superior Court (1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 397, 402.) Plaintiff...

Excerpt: ...rt to that judge's court for coordination with an action involving a common question of fact or law. . .” [Emphasis added.] C.C.P. § 403. An analysis of the factors laid out in C.C.P. § 404.1, weigh in favor of not transferring and consolidating the matters. As noted by Coachella, there are “entirely different plaintiffs, public works contracts, projects, locations, performance bonds, witnesses, and timeframes, and . . . potentially differe...

Excerpt: ...rmers Group, Inc. (1996) 48 Cal.App.4 th 471, 488.) Here, the Court finds that there has been inexcusable delay in seeking leave to assert the new claims at issue. Plaintiff's counsel asserts that “new facts were revealed” while she was preparing her opposition to the prior MSJ/MSAI, through certain depositions. (Mirabel Decl. ¶¶ 4, 8 & 9.) But Plaintiff's depositions concluded in late February 2018. (Robertson Decl. ¶ 3.) Yet Plaintiff fa...

Excerpt: ...8 Order ¶ 8.) A court retains limited power “when the judicial action is stayed and the case is referred to binding arbitration pursuant to the parties' agreement.” “[I]f a lawsuit is stayed pending a decision through binding arbitration, ‘the action at law sits in the twilight zone of abatement with the trial court retaining merely a vestigial jurisdiction over matters submitted to arbitration.” (Optimal Markets, Inc. v. Salant (2013)...