Excerpt: ...stantially comply with Code of Civil Procedure § 2033.220. Pursuant to section 2033.280(c), “[i]t is mandatory that the court impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010) on the party or attorney, or both, whose failure to serve a timely response to requests for admission necessitated” the motion. Accordingly, because Plaintiff's failure to serve timely and complete responses to Defendant's Requests for Admis...

Excerpt: ...roduce documents responsive to Plaintiff's Request for Production of Documents (Set One) Nos. 2 and 7. For the following reasons, Plaintiff's motion is granted. Request No. 2 seeks documents constituting, memorializing or referring to any communications Royal Pacific had with Defendant Christopher A. Calderon since January 1, 2016 concerning Royal Pacific's hiring of Calderon. Request No. 7 seeks documents reflecting or referring to compensation ...

Excerpt: ...alleges that Defendant misrepresented to him that he required root canals on healthy teeth that did not require root canals, Complaint ¶ 25, and that Defendant knew the representations were false when made or made them recklessly and without regard for their truth. Id. ¶ 26. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant intended to deceive Plaintiff, id. ¶ 27, and that Plaintiff relied to his detriment and was damaged. Id. ¶¶ 28, 33. Plaintiff meets the ...

Excerpt: ...Cal.3d 311, 318. A demurrer challenges only the legal sufficiency of the affected pleading, not the truth of the factual allegations in the pleading or the pleader's ability to prove those allegations. Cundiff v. GTE Cal., Inc. (2002) 101 Cal.App.4 th 1395, 1404-05. Questions of fact cannot be decided on demurrer. Berryman v. Merit Prop. Mgmt., Inc. (2007) 152 Cal.App.4 th 1544, 1556. Because a demurrer tests only the sufficiency of the complaint...

Excerpt: ...le an opposition. For the following reasons, Plaintiffs' demurrer is sustained in part and overruled in part. “Generally speaking, the determination whether an answer states a defense is governed by the same principles which are applicable in determining if a complaint states a cause of action.” South Shore Land Co. v. Petersen (1964) 226 Cal.App.2d 725, 732. Accordingly, a demurrer reaches only to the contents of the pleading and such matter...

Excerpt: ...tion is granted. Compliance with the statutory procedures for service of process is essential to establish personal jurisdiction. Ellard v. Conway (2001) 94 Cal.App.4 th 540, 544. Thus, a default judgment entered against a defendant who was not served with a summons in the manner prescribed by statute is void. Id.; see also OC Interior Servs., LLC v. Nationstar Mortg. (2017) 7 Cal.App.5 th 1318, 1330-31. Under section 473(d), the court may set as...

Excerpt: ...Plaintiffs move for entry of judgment based on the settlement agreement, which Plaintiffs allege Defendants have breached. Defendants did not file an opposition to Plaintiffs' motion. For the following reasons, Plaintiffs' motion is granted. In a September 6, 2016 order, the court (Judge Andrew P. Banks) granted issue sanctions against Defendants, establishing liability against Defendant Ocampo on Plaintiffs' first cause of action for financial e...

Excerpt: ...lege that Defendant McMahon, Plaintiff S.P.'s “zero period” instructor at GFHS, “had a policy” of not marking students absent from zero period as long as the students attended on Fridays. TAC ¶¶ 15-16. Plaintiffs allege Defendant Landsiedel, the school principal, knew about McMahon's alleged policy. Id. ¶ 16. Plaintiffs allege that numerous times during the second semester of 2016, after Plaintiff M.D.A. dropped S.P. off at school, S.P...

Excerpt: ...ued Terrazas, its former employee, and others on August 22, 2016, alleging that Terrazas and others embezzled from Avenal and otherwise misused Avenal funds. Cross-Defendants Yuan Hong Taiwan Enterprises (Yuan Hong) and Neoteric Entertainment, Inc. (Neoteric) also sued Terrazas the same day based on similar allegations. Yuan Hong alleges in its complaint that Cross-Defendant Reggie King is Yuan Hong's principal. Cross-Defendants contend Terrazas'...

Excerpt: ...ss and overbreadth. For the following reasons, Plaintiff's motion is granted in part and denied in part. Defendant hired attorney Michael Robbins and his firm EXTTI, Inc. “to provide limited legal services in the form of a workplace investigation” related to Plaintiff's allegations. Robbins Decl. ¶¶ 2, 5-8 & Ex. A. Defendant contends that the attorney-client privilege shields all of the information and documents sought by Requests for Produ...

Excerpt: ...move to augment their expert witness list to add Dr. Laura Audell as a retained defense expert pain management specialist. The court has read and considered the briefs, declarations and other evidence submitted in support of and in opposition to Defendants' motions. Defendants submitted with their reply various exhibits that had not yet existed at the time Defendants filed their motions (e.g., transcripts of depositions not taken until after Defe...

Excerpt: ...on must demonstrate that it is entitled to summary judgment on both of Plaintiffs' causes of action. Flatiron has not done so. A defendant seeking summary judgment bears the burden of persuasion and burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence to negate the plaintiff's claim. It may do this by demonstrating the claim has no merit, that the plaintiff cannot prove an element of the claim, or that the defendant has a complete defense entitling...

Excerpt: ...6, alleging that the Controller had, in 2007, improperly paid Johannes-Surmenian one-half of the value of five properties for which Benavides had submitted a claim to the Controller. Plaintiff alleges that Johannes- Surmenian's claim to the Controller and subsequent refusal to return the proceeds she received from the State to Plaintiff resulted in more than $160,000 in damages to Plaintiff. Johannes-Surmenian subsequently filed a cross-complaint...

Excerpt: ...g on December 29, 2017; the court (Judge Robert Moss) requested supplemental briefing and continued the motion hearing to January 26, 2018. On January 26, 2018, the court issued a tentative ruling on Trustee Doan's motion and held argument; following argument, the court requested further supplemental briefing and continued the motion hearing to March 2, 2018. The case, including Trustee Doan's motion, was thereafter transferred to this court and ...

Excerpt: ...writ proceeding. Pursuant to section 1094.5(b), the inquiry extends to the questions whether the respondent has proceeded without, or in excess of, jurisdiction; whether there was a fair trial; and whether there was any prejudicial abuse of discretion. Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1094.5(b). Abuse of discretion is established if the respondent has not proceeded in the manner required by law, the order or decision is not supported by the findings, or t...

Excerpt: ...e following reasons, Defendants' motions are granted. Plaintiff failed to appear for a defense medical examination noticed for January 4, 2018. Plaintiff did not serve objections to the noticed date or otherwise communicate to Defendants that he would not appear. Defendants have rescheduled the medical examination for April 26, 2018. Plaintiff is ordered to appear on April 26, 2018 at 9:00 a.m. at the offices of Steven Nagelberg, M.D., 10800 Para...

Excerpt: ... identified in response to Form Interrogatory Nos. 12.1(d), 12.2(d), 15.1(b) and 17.1(c). Defendant has agreed to produce each of the individuals who is still employed by Defendant and to accept deposition subpoenas on their behalf. Additionally, Defendant has provided Plaintiff's counsel with the last known contact information for the three individuals Plaintiff seeks to depose who are no longer employed by Defendant. Plaintiff did not address t...

Excerpt: ...e deemed to constitute “new litigation” subject to that order. In the alternative, Defendant requests an order that it need not respond to future motions filed in this case until the court initially determines whether the court has jurisdiction to consider the motions. For the following reasons, Defendant's motion is denied. California Civil Procedure Code § 391.7 states that “the court may, on its own motion or the motion of any party, en...

Excerpt: ...dication is denied. The court (Judge David T. McEachen) previously denied Defendant's motion for summary judgment on statute of limitations grounds, finding that “there is a disputed fact as to when Fantastic Path knew or should have known that the Second Deposit was released.” 07/28/17 Order. Plaintiff, in seeking summary judgment and summary adjudication in its favor on its first and second causes of action, implicitly (if not explicitly) a...

Excerpt: ...nt of Undisputed Facts, Nos. 2, 4, 7, 11-12, 15, 16, 19, 28-30 & 33-34. Defendants showed a triable issue of material fact with respect to each of these causes of action – the amount owed. SeeDefendants' Opposing Separate Statement of Disputed Facts, Nos. 12, 13, 19, 20, 34 & 35. Plaintiff's motion is therefore denied as to Plaintiff's first, second and fifth causes of action. Plaintiff met its burden of demonstrating it is entitled to summary ...

Excerpt: ... Special Interrogatory Nos. 36 through 148. See Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2030.040(b); Plaintiff's Opposition at 6:10-9:20. Several of these interrogatories seek facts, witnesses and documents supporting Defendant's thirty-one affirmative defenses (Nos. 59 through 148) and the other interrogatories cover appropriate areas of discovery (e.g., Nos. 44 through 46, seeking information supporting Defendant's contention that the alleged public disseminat...

Excerpt: ...anted Mercury's summary judgment motion because Plaintiff filed her lawsuit after the one-year limitations period set forth in Plaintiff's policy with Mercury had expired. As discussed below, there is substantial evidence to support the decision. Plaintiff's policy with Mercury contains a one-year limitations period: "Suit Against Us. No action shall be brought unless there has been compliance with the policy provisions and the action is started ...

Excerpt: ...on against an attorney for a wrongful act or omission, other than for actual fraud, arising in the performance of professional services shall be commenced with one year after the plaintiff discovers, or through the use of reasonable diligence should have discovered, the facts constituting the wrongful act or omission, or four years from the date of the wrongful act or omission, whichever occurs first. Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 340.6(a). Under secti...

Excerpt: ...y of the specific allegations in each cause of action refer only to a single “Defendant.” Plaintiff's explanation in her opposition that any given allegation “ultimately applies to one or both of the Defendants” illustrates the ambiguity. Defendants cannot be certain which causes of action are alleged against which Defendant, which prevents Defendants from reasonably responding to the Complaint. Plaintiff must file and serve an amended co...

Excerpt: ...is sustained in part and overruled in part. Plaintiff alleges four causes of action in the SAC: (i) breach of Governing Documents; (ii) declaratory relief; (iii) abatement of nuisance and nuisance per se; and (iv) intentional interference with contractual relations. Plaintiff alleges Defendants have harassed one of Plaintiff's employees and have violated Plaintiff's rules by constructing an unauthorized patio cover in violation of Covenants, Cond...