Excerpt: ... GRANTED, and unopposed. In their moving pleadings, Defendants make a prima facie showing that they are entitled to judgment against Plaintiffs as a matter of law. The Court GRANTS the Defendants' request for judicial notice. Based on the Declaration of Denise Billups‐Slone, the exhibits attached thereto, including the Declaration of Dr Justin Birnbaum, and the First Amended Complaint filed on June 13, 2019, as well as the other pleadings the C...

Excerpt: ...istress), neglect and abandonment by failing to bring plaintiff food and leaving him in the shower (causing emotional distress), and pharmaceutical abuse (causing plaintiff to fall in the shower). Before the Court this day is a defense demurrer and motion to strike, directing at most of the charging averments in the operative Fifth Amended Complaint. Pertinent Background Facts On or about 02/15/20, plaintiff was transferred from University of Cal...

Excerpt: ... agreement covering the controversy, (2) a demand for arbitration consistent therewith, and (3) a refusal by the other party to arbitrate. The burden rests with the party seeking to compel arbitration to establish these three prerequisites by a preponderance of the evidence. Sandquist v. Lebo Automotive, Inc. (2016) 1 Cal.5th 233, 244; Pinnacle Museum Tower Assn. v. Pinnacle Market Development (US), LLC (2012) 55 Cal.4th 223, 236; Martinez v. Bar...

Excerpt: ...;  on 06/24/17, during a recreational ride within the Oceano Dunes in San Luis Obispo, plaintiffs Julio and Christian sustained serious injuries when the Hisun 1000 roll cage collapsed upon them. Before the Court this day is an unopposed motion to continue trial, and a demurrer to L&K's cross‐ complaint against Hisun for express contractual indemnity and declaratory relief. As to the former, Hisun's motion to continue trial, and to trail all...

Excerpt: ...r and motion to strike directed at the First Amended Complaint, as well as the continued hearing on defendant's motion to compel further responses to special interrogatories. The discovery motion was continued to this date to clear the confusion regarding an opposition brief. In the interim, the parties have filed two more discovery motions, both set for hearing on 06/30/22. For the convenience of the parties, and since the scope of discovery mig...

Excerpt: ...e class allegations, leaving just her PAGA claim. What remains, as such, of this motion is whether the PAGA claim is subject to arbitration. First, defendant did not ask this Court to compel arbitration of the PAGA cause of action (see Notice 2:5‐6 and MPA 1:19‐24). Second, as both sides readily concede, the established law here in California is that PAGA claims are not subject to an aggrieved employee's private agreement with an employer to ...

Excerpt: ... prayer for punitive damages. The issue is whether the third cause of action, to which the prayer for punitive damages attaches, is viable in light of the economic loss rule. The economic loss rule bars most tort claims for purely economic losses covered by a contract, but does not apply to tort claims based on a theory that the defendant actually said something to the plaintiff at or about the time of contracting that was materially false. This ...

Excerpt: ...nt Nirmal Singh – for a derivative undertaking of $50,000. Regarding plaintiffs' motion for clarification, this apparently stems from the following statement contained in this Court's 09/01/21 minute order: “the only way to streamline what remains of these complex disputes post‐arbitration is to bring all of the remaining matters under one metaphorical roof in the form of a master complaint by Doan et al under the lead case 684071, with aba...

Excerpt: ...pproval. Having considered the unopposed motion for final approval and the supporting declarations and evidence, the Court finds that the settlement was entered into good faith, is fair, reasonable and adequate, and satisfies the standards for final approval under California law. (Civil Code §1781; Code Civ. Proc. §382; Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 3.769.) The class is conditionally certified for purposes of settlement and this matter is therefore d...

Excerpt: ... Motion to Strike Portions of First Amended Complaint; e) DMC Defendants' Demurrer to First Amended Complaint; f) Hospitalists of Modesto Medical Group Inc., Arun Monoharan MD, and Li Huang, MD's Demurrer to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint – After thorough review of the operative pleading in this case, the Defendants' special motions to strike, the Plaintiff's oppositions thereto, as well as the relevant statute (CCP Section 425.16) and cas...

Excerpt: ...chael C. Kronlund is appointed as referee for all purposes related to discovery in this action. Mr. Kronlund's address and telephone number are as follows: Quinn | Kronlund, LLP, 3439 Brookside Road, Suite 207, Stockton, CA 95219; (877) 943‐3955. 2. The following exceptional circumstances require this appointment: The parties' continual pursuit of numerous, time‐consuming motions related to discovery issues throughout the pendency of the matt...

Excerpt: ...n this matter and does not file any opposition to the Plaintiff's application for writ of possession. Additionally, Plaintiff caused the clerk to enter Defendant DTL Logistics Inc.'s default on 4/21/22. Based on its review of the Plaintiff's application, the declaration filed in support of the application and the operative complaint in this matter, the Court finds Plaintiff has established the probable validity of its claim to possession of the p...

Excerpt: ...nes associated with new tax liens incurred from 2018 forward. Motion to augment the judgment is DENIED without prejudice. Although the Judgment entered on 01/25/12 indicates that it “may be amended nunc pro tunc to include any and all additional [fees/fines] for the 2010/2011 and subsequent tax years” (see Para 5, emphasis added), this was a default judgment and the operative pleading does not include any claim for debts that accrued from 201...

Excerpt: ... Court this day are two plaintiff motions for order compelling further responses to Special Interrogatory Nos 14, 25, 40‐ 45, 51‐63, 65, and further responses to Document Production Nos 1‐3, 9, 13‐16, 17, 31, 37‐78, 84‐87. The motions are GRANTED in part, and DENIED in part. Regarding the Special Interrogatories, while the defendant is correct that – to some extent – these motions (like many in the lemon law field) are an exaltati...

Excerpt: ... terms of that settlement, which this Court subsequently confirmed on 12/17/21. There is a genuine concern regarding this Court's continued jurisdiction to resolve this motion in light of plaintiff's dismissal with prejudice entered 11/12/21, Victoria's failure to personally request jurisdiction reserved, and the previously pending appeals. See Mesa RHF Partners, L.P. v. City of Los Angeles (2019) 33 Cal.App.5th 913, 916‐ 919; Cunningham v. Mag...

Excerpt: ...ion for final approval of the settlement. The gross settlement amount (“GSA”) is $225,000.00, which is intended to cover 149 class members. This represents an average payout of just under $800.00. This is a non‐reversionary settlement (meaning nothing goes back to the defendant). Based on the whole of the record, this Court concludes that the gross settlement amount is fair and reasonable in light of the pertinent factors to consider. See J...

Excerpt: ... WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Although the underlying motions to compel were served upon defendant personally, notice of this Court's 12/10/21 order was only served upon defense counsel (who had just emerged from suspension). The current motion for terminating sanctions was also served only on defense counsel, despite his 11/29/21 declaration indicating that he had COVID, his secretary died from COVID, and his office was – to put it politely – in shamb...

Excerpt: ...rogatories, Set Two Propounded on Plaintiff Raven Sharp and Request for Monetary Sanctions – This is a business dispute between putative partners in a marijuana dispensary, with a sprinkling of alleged attorney self‐dealing. Before the Court this day are three defense motions seeking orders compelling further responses to special interrogatories and requests for production of documents (the motion set for 04/28/22 is included herewith). At is...

Excerpt: ...der barring defendants from selling the property before plaintiff's right to purchase can be fully vetted on the merits. Within 10 days after service of a written notice of entry of an order, an aggrieved party may make a motion to reconsider the order based upon new or different facts, circumstances, or law. CCP §1008(a). The moving party must demonstrate something new or different for the court to consider, and a satisfactory explanation for n...

Excerpt: ... Before the Court this day is the hearing on plaintiff's application for final approval of the settlement. The gross settlement amount (“GSA”) is $925,000.00, which is intended to cover 2,469 class members. This is a non‐reversionary settlement (meaning nothing goes back to the defendant). Based on the whole of the record, this Court concludes that the gross settlement amount is fair and reasonable in light of the pertinent factors to consi...

Excerpt: ...sel, class representative, third‐party administrator), preliminary approval of settlement, and approval of a PAGA portion. Since the last hearing, plaintiff has addressed the concerns raised by this Court, including payment of the $75 filing fee per § 2699.3(a)(1)(B), submission of the actual proposed settlement to the LWDA per §2699(l)(3), and provision of a conformed copy of the complaint to the LWDA within 10 days of filing per §2699(l)(1...

Excerpt: ...ice staff in failing to provide a conformed copy of the complaint to the LWDA within 10 days of filing per §2699(l)(1). This Court will forgive the error since no prejudice is shown. Plaintiff has provided the requested information supporting the request for reimbursement of litigation costs, as well as a declaration from plaintiff supporting his request for an enhancement. Since plaintiff actually attended the mediation, his request for $7,500....

Excerpt: ...y “first look” at the records and authority to redact as warranted. The motion is in essence a CCP §1008 request for reconsideration of that 06/08/21 order, and shall be viewed as such. A motion for reconsideration is only timely if presented “within 10 days after service upon the party of written notice of entry of the order,” subject to challenge. CCP §1008(a). There is no notice of entry in this Court's registry, and no evidence of a...

Excerpt: ...pposed demurrer to plaintiff's complaint, which does not effectively state any cause of action. The demurrer is SUSTAINED with 20 days leave to amend. Injunctive relief is not itself a cause of action, but rather a remedy attendant a properly‐framed substantive claim. Department of Fair Employment and Housing v. Superior Court (2020) 54 Cal.App.5th 356, 384‐ 385. The pleading here might be one for declaratory relief pursuant to CCP §1060, or...

Excerpt: ...ed. While this was previously sufficient inandof itself to seek withdrawal, the current rule requires counsel to “given the client a reasonable warning after the breach that the lawyer will withdraw unless the client fulfills the agreement or performs the obligation.” Compare CRPC 3‐700(C)(1)(f) with CRPC Rule 1.16(b)(5). There is no statement regarding client consent or proposed order with the motion. See CRC 3.1362(c) and (e). Motion DENI...