Excerpt: ..., by and through her guardian ad litem, Carolina Quinteros (“Plaintiff”) and California Department of Health Care Services (“DHCS”) BACKGROUND Plaintiff filed a complaint against Defendants Dignity Health, sued as California Hospital Medical Center (“Dignity”), and Mary Elizabeth Claasen, Ruth Miekle, Ian Tilley, M.D. and Pediatric & Family Medical Center dba USC Eisner Family Medical Center at California Hospital (collectively, the �...

Excerpt: ...gment (the “Withdrawal Motion”) filed by Defendants Marco Naser Khorasani as Trustee of the Khorasani Family Trust (2011), Marco Khorasani (“Mr. Khorasani”), Nicole Khorasani, VIP Tours of California, Inc., and LAX Cafe & Convenience Store, Inc. (collectively, “Moving Defendants”); and (2) a motion for satisfaction of judgment liens (the “SOJ Motion”) filed by non-party Michael Luparello (“Luparello”). MOVING PARTIES: (1) Movi...

Excerpt: ... BACKGROUND This action arises out of an employment relationship. The currently operative first amended complaint (the “FAC”) alleges: (1) sexual battery; (2) sexual assault; (3) gender violence; (4) sexual harassment and harassment based on sex, gender, national origin, and race in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act; (5) constructive discharge in violation of public policy; and (6) intentional infliction of emotional distress. ...

Excerpt: ... filed. Any opposition papers were required to have been filed and served at least nine court days before the hearing under California Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) section 1005, subdivision (b). BACKGROUND Plaintiff's complaint (the “Complaint”) alleges: (1) breach of contract; and (2) common count: goods and services rendered. On May 9, 2023, Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to file a first amended complaint (the “Motion”). The ...

Excerpt: ...pposition and reply papers. BACKGROUND This action arises out of a landlord/tenant relationship. The currently operative first amended complaint (the “FAC”) alleges: (1) rescission; (2) breach of contract; (3) breach of implied warranty of habitability/tenantability; (4) breach of implied warranty of quiet enjoyment; (5) negligence; (6) fraud by concealment; (7) violation of Business and Professions Code section 17200; (8) violation of Penal ...

Excerpt: ...2) a motion to seal (the “MTS”) filed by Defendant. MOVING PARTY: (1) Plaintiff; (2) Defendant RESPONDING PARTY: (1) Defendant The Court has considered the moving, opposition and reply papers. No opposition papers were filed in connection with the MTS. Any opposition papers were required to have been filed and served at least nine court days before the hearing under California Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) section 1005, subdivision (b)....

Excerpt: ...led by Defendants Michael Theodore and Casa Theodore, Inc. (collectively, “Defendants”); and (2) a motion to compel further responses (the “MTCF”) filed by Plaintiff. MOVING PARTY: (1) Defendants; (2) Plaintiff RESPONDING PARTY: (1) Plaintiff; (2) Defendants The Court has considered the moving, opposition and reply papers. No reply papers were filed in connection with the Motion for Waiver. Any reply papers were required to have been file...

Excerpt: ...red the moving, opposition and reply papers. BACKGROUND The currently operative second amended complaint (the “SAC”), which was filed on May 3, 2023, alleges: (1) breach of contract (count 1); (2) breach of contract (count 2); (3) breach of fiduciary duty; (4) breach of guaranty; (5) conversion; (6) negligent misrepresentation; and (7) fraud and concealment; and (8) civil theft under Penal Code section 496. In relevant part, the SAC alleges t...

Excerpt: ...s of the California State University (“Moving Defendant”) RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff The Court has considered the moving, opposition and reply papers. BACKGROUND This action arises out of an employment relationship. The currently operative second amended complaint (the “SAC”) alleges: (1) discrimination; (2) harassment; (3) retaliation; (4) failure to prevent, investigate and remedy harassment and discrimination; (5) whistleblower retali...

Excerpt: ...llectively, “Plaintiffs”) RESPONDING PARTY: Defendants/Cross-Complainants Chronicpractor Caregiver, Inc. (“CCI”), Eric Loyola (“Loyola”), and Daniela Alexander (“Alexander”) (collectively, “Defendants”) The Court has considered the moving, opposition and reply papers. [1] BACKGROUND This action arises out of a business relationship involving a marijuana dispensary. The currently operative third amended complaint (the “TAC”...

Excerpt: ...), Jessica Pineda (“Pineda”), and Diana Moreno (“Moreno”) (collectively, “Moving Defendants”) RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff The Court has considered the moving, opposition and reply papers. BACKGROUND This action arises out of employment relationships. On November 3, 2022, Plaintiff filed a complaint (the “Complaint”) alleging: (1) breach of duty of loyalty; (2) aiding and abetting breach of duty of loyalty; (3) breach of contract/c...

Excerpt: ...opposition and reply papers. BACKGROUND This action arises out of a dispute over the ownership of real property. Plaintiff's complaint (the “Complaint”) alleges: (1) fraud; (2) undue influence; (3) financial abuse; (4) quiet title; (5) cancellation of instruments; (6) return of real property to elder/dependent adult; and (7) intentional infliction of emotional distress. Defendant's currently operative second amended cross-complaint (the “SA...

Excerpt: ...dered the moving, opposition and reply papers. BACKGROUND This action arises out of the purchase of an allegedly defective vehicle (the “Vehicle”) manufactured by Moving Defendant. Plaintiffs' complaint (the “Complaint”) alleges: (1) violation of the Song-Beverly Act – breach of express warranty; (2) violation of the Song- Beverly Act – breach of implied warranty (3) violation of Civil Code section 1793.2, subdivision (b); and (4) neg...

Excerpt: ...OSS-ACTION This order concerns: (1) a motion to compel the deposition of Defendant's person most qualified (“PMQ”) (the “PMQ Motion”) filed by Plaintiffs; (2) a motion for leave to file a first amended complaint (the “FAC Motion”) filed by Plaintiffs; (3) a motion to compel further responses filed by Defendant (the “MTCF”); and (4) a motion for sanctions filed by Defendant (the “Sanctions Motion”). MOVING PARTIES: (1) Plaintif...

Excerpt: ...has considered the moving, opposition and reply papers. BACKGROUND The currently operative first amended complaint (the “FAC”), filed on November 22, 2021, alleges 10 causes of action arising out of an employment relationship. On December 28, 2022, the Court granted Defendants' motion for leave to file a cross-complaint and gave Defendant five days leave to file its proposed cross-complaint (the “XC”). Defendants filed the XC on April 12,...

Excerpt: ...has considered the moving, opposition and reply papers. BACKGROUND This action arises out of a landlord/tenant relationship. The currently operative second amended complaint (the “SAC”) alleges: (1) breach of contract; (2) breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; (3) violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”); (4) violation of Civil Code section 789.3; (5) breach of quiet enjoyment; (6) intentional inflict...

Excerpt: ...apers. BACKGROUND This action arises out of an employment relationship. Plaintiff's complaint (the “Complaint”) alleges: (1) hostile work environment harassment; and (2) failure to prevent and/or remedy harassment. On March 28, 2023, Plaintiff filed a motion to compel Defendant's further responses to Plaintiff's Requests for Production (“RFPs”), Sets One and Two (the “Motion”). The RFPs at issue in the Motion concern Defendant's knowl...

Excerpt: ...sidered the moving, opposition and reply papers. BACKGROUND Plaintiff's currently operative first amended complaint (the “FAC”) alleges: (1) breach of promissory note; (2) breach of oral contract; and (3) conversion. On May 19, 2023, Moving Defendants filed a motion to continue the trial date (the “Motion”). The Motion requests that the Court continue the trial date to allow Moving Defendants to timely file a motion for summary judgment. ...

Excerpt: ...ctively, “Moving Defendants”) RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiffs Willow Creek Homes, LLC (“Willow Creek”) and Todd C. Nolette (“Nolette”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) The Court has considered the moving, opposition and reply papers. BACKGROUND This action arises out of a dispute over a loan connected to real property (the “Property”). The currently operative second amended complaint (the “SAC”) alleges: (1) money had and receive...

Excerpt: ...n and reply papers. BACKGROUND This action arises out of an employment relationship. Plaintiff's complaint (the “Complaint”) alleges: (1) disability discrimination in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”); (2) failure to accommodate in violation of FEHA; (3) failure to engage in the interactive process in violation of FEHA; (4) retaliation in violation of FEHA; (5) failure to prevent discrimination and retaliation in v...

Excerpt: ...ollectively, “Moving Defendants”) The Court has considered the moving papers. No opposition papers were filed. Any opposition papers were required to have been filed and served at least nine court days before the hearing under California Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) section 1005, subdivision (b). BACKGROUND This action arises out of a landlord/tenant relationship and alleges substandard conditions at the property (the “Property”) w...

Excerpt: ...ing Defendants”) RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff The Court has considered the moving and opposition papers. No reply papers were filed. Any reply papers were required to have been filed and served at least five court days before the hearing under California Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) section 1005, subdivision (b). BACKGROUND The currently operative first amended complaint (the “FAC”) alleges 14 causes of action arising out of an employ...

Excerpt: ...ing, opposition and reply papers. BACKGROUND This action arises out of an employment relationship. The currently operative third amended complaint (the “TAC”) alleges: (1) employment discrimination in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA”); (2) failure to accommodate in violation of FEHA; (3) failure to engage in a timely and good-faith interactive process in violation of FEHA; (4) harassment in violation of FEHA; (5) reta...

Excerpt: ... papers. BACKGROUND This action arises out of an employment relationship. Plaintiff's complaint (the “Complaint”) alleges: (1) retaliation in violation of Labor Code section 6310; (2) retaliation in violation of Labor Code section 1102.5; (3) wrongful termination in violation of public policy; and (4) remedies under the Private Attorney General Act. On May 11, 2023, Plaintiff filed a motion to compel responses to the Requests for Production (...

Excerpt: ...dants”) RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff The Court has considered the moving and opposition papers. No reply papers were filed. Any reply papers were required to have been filed and served at least five days before the hearing under California Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) section 437c, subdivision (b)(4). BACKGROUND This action arises out of a landlord/tenant relationship. The currently operative first amended complaint (the “FAC”) allege...