Excerpt: ...sonable warning. (Health & Saf. Code § 25249.6.) The State of California has officially listed Di(2-ethylhexyl) Phthalate (“DEHP”) as a chemical known to cause cancer and reproductive toxicity. (27 CCR §27001.) Private individuals may sue to enforce Proposition 65 if they give the requisite 60-day notice of intent to sue to the public prosecutors and to the potential defendants. (Health & Saf. Code § 25249.7(d); see also Center for Self-Im...

Excerpt: ... the parties before this court previously, and judgment was entered against the Cross- Complainants on all of these issues. Judicial Notice Cross-Defendants request judicial notice of seven documents previously filed in this case. A court may take judicial notice of the existence of each document in a court file, but can only take judicial notice of the truth of facts asserted in documents such as orders, findings of fact and conclusions of law, ...

Excerpt: ...nt that occurred on January 12, 2014, at the Golden Globes Awards held at the Beverly Hilton Hotel (Hotel). Plaintiff Stephen Winick alleges he was physically removed from the event, his personal property was taken from him, he was detained then forced to leave. On January 12, 2015, Plaintiff filed this action against Defendants Noble LA Events Inc. (“Noble”), John McKillop (“McKillop”), Dick Clark Productions, Inc. (“DCP”), and Hilto...

Excerpt: ....040. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.450, subd. (b)(2).) Plaintiffs' counsel Kane Moon met and conferred with Defendants' counsel telephonically in April 2018. (Moon Decl. ¶ 10.) Attorney Moon's associate Allen Feghali also met and conferred with Defendants' counsel. (Ibid.) The parties could not informally resolve the matter. Therefore, Plaintiffs satisfies the meet and confer requirement. Legal Standard Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.450, sub...

Excerpt: ... motion must be made at the defendant's initial appearance in the action or within the time permitted to plead, unless the court extends the time for good cause shown. (CCP § 418.10(a).) As an initial matter, the Court finds that Artisan did not move to quash within the time allowed. Artisan was served by substituted service. Such service is deemed complete on the 10th day after mailing; thus, Artisan had 40 days after mailing to file a responsi...

Excerpt: ...ole, individually, (“Plaintiff Cole”) commenced this action against Defendants Montebello Care Center, LLC (“Montebello”) and Genesis Healthcare LLC (“Genesis”). The complaint alleges the following four causes of action: (1) elder abuse; (2) violation of Health & Safety Code section 1430 (against Montebello only); (3) negligent, hiring, supervision, and retention; and (4) wrongful death. The first through third causes of action are br...

Excerpt: ...ammy”). On December 29, 2017, Plaintiff in pro per filed the operative verified first amended complaint (“FAC”) against the same defendants in response to a pending demurrer by Kendrick and Mary. The FAC alleges the following four causes of action: (1) conspiracy to defraud, embezzle, and commit theft; (2) the power of attorney created by Kendrick Guidry was illegally obtained through fraud and coercion ...; and (3) abduction, abandonment, ...

Excerpt: ...ly sued as Windsor Gardens of Long Beach) (“Windsor Gardens”) and S&F Management Company, LLC (“S&F”). The complaint alleges four causes of action against Defendants for elder abuse, violation of Health & Safety Code § 1430(b), willful misconduct, and wrongful death. Ms. Bryant was 91 when she passed away on July 22, 2015 and resided at Windsor Gardens. The complaint alleges Ms. Bryant died as a result of Defendants' negligent care she r...

Excerpt: ... from the event, his personal property was taken from him, he was detained then forced to leave. On January 12, 2015 Plaintiff filed this action against Defendants Noble LA Events Inc. ('Noble"), John McKillop ("McKillop'), Dick Clark Productions, Inc. ("DCP"), and Hilton Management LLC ("Hilton')_ Plaintiff subsequently named the following Doe Defendants: Robert Dixon ("Dixon'), Thomas Applewhite C 'Applewhite"), Noble Associates Worldwide, Inc....

Excerpt: ...h a Request for Admissions, Set No. 1 (“RFAs”). As of the date of the declaration filed in support of this motion, June 28, 2018, Defendants have not served responses. Analysis When no response is made to a request for admissions, the propounding party may “move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted.” CCP § 2033.280(b). There is no meet and confer requ...

Excerpt: ...es the following facts: Redstone is 93 years old. During his life, he graduated from Harvard Law School, served in the Department of Justice, left the law to run his father's small drive-in theater company and built that company into National Amusements (a global leader in motion picture exhibition industry), and acquired Viacom, Inc., Paramount Pictures Corporation, CBS Corporation, and Infinity Broadcasting. In the waning years of his life, Red...

Excerpt: ...od product used to help correct immune deficiencies in patients. <0003004c00510056005800 0059004800550044004a>e with Defendants Health Care Services Corporation (“HCSC”) and Blue Cross of California. After confirming eligibility, Defendants authorized Plaintiff to provide monthly IVIG treatment for a total of six visits. Plaintiff alleges that in subsequent months, Defendants were unable to coordinate BM's care. Plaintiff also alleges that De...

Excerpt: ...2) breach of oral contract; (3) open book; (4) quantum meruit; and (5) foreclosure of mechanics' lien. The first through fourth causes of action are alleged against KNC, JYS, and Han. The fifth cause of action is alleged against all defendants. The complaint alleges the following facts: KNC, JYS and Han (collectively, “KNC-JYS-Han”) retained Plaintiff to provide general contracting services for the improvement of two restaurants: Holy Crab in...

Excerpt: ... took off too quickly, causing him to fall into the seat and injure himself. Analysis When no response is made to a request for admissions, the propounding party may “move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted.” CCP § 2033.280(b). There is no meet and confer requirement. Weil & Brown, Cal. Prac. Guide Civ. Pro. Before Trial (The Rutter Group 2015) ¶ 8:137...

Excerpt: ...ege ultimate facts sufficient to apprise the defendant of the factual basis for the claim against him. (Semole v. Sansoucie (1972) 28 Cal.App.3d 714, 721.) 1. Meet and Confer Before filing a demurrer or a motion to strike, the demurrer or moving party is required to meet and confer with the party who filed the pleading demurred to or the pleading that is subject to the motion to strike for purposes of determining whether an agreement can be reach...

Excerpt: ...l Code § 1793.2(a)(3); (4) violation of Civil Code §§ 1791.2(a), 1794); (5) violation of Civil Code §§ 1791.1, 1794; (6) violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act; and (7) fraud by omission. The complaint alleges the following facts: In or about July 2013, Plaintiff purchased a 2013 Chevrolet Cruz, which was manufactured and/or distributed by GM. Plaintiff purchased the vehicle from a person or entity engaged in the business of manufacturi...

Excerpt: ...ichael Tanner (“Tanner”) and his girlfriend, Christina Behle (“Behle”). The complaint alleges four causes of action for assault, battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress (“IIED”), and civil conspiracy. On December 5, 2017, Tanner answered the compliant and filed a cross-complaint against Plaintiff for assault, battery and IIED. Plaintiff filed an <0003001500130014001b00 11[ On March 28, 2018, the Court sustained Behle's d...

Excerpt: ...tion in violation of FEHA; (2) gender harassment in violation of FEHA; (3) disability discrimination in violation of FEHA; (4) retaliation in violation of FEHA; (5) retaliation for exercising right afforded an employee (Lab. Code § 98.6); (6) retaliation for whistleblowing (Lab. Code § 1106.6 et seq.); (7) defamation/slander; and (8) intentional infliction of emotional distress. The second, seventh and eighth causes of action are alleged agains...

Excerpt: ...rd The FAA governs contractual arbitration in written contracts involving interstate commerce, foreign commerce, or maritime transactions. 9 U.S.C. §§ 1, 2; AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion (2011) 563 U.S. 333, 336. Because the FAA embodies a strong federal policy favoring arbitration, conflicting state law is preempted under the Supremacy Clause. Southland Corp. v. Keating (1984) 465 U.S. 1, 12; Marmet Health Care Ctr., Inc. v. Brown (2012) 565...

Excerpt: ...(1); see Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 850 (the party moving for summary judgment bears an initial burden to demonstrate the absence of any triable issue of material fact on the elements of the claims it asserts or opposes).) “Thus, if a plaintiff who would bear the burden of proof by a preponderance of evidence at trial moves for summary judgment, he must present evidence that would require a reasonable trier of fact...

Excerpt: ...e. However, Defendant has shown good cause since the Plaintiff's deposition revealed the existence of a complete defense. There is authority for Defendant's claim that he has a statutory right to hear a summary judgment motion. Fast track rules must give way. Polibrid Coatings, Inc. v. Superior Court (2003) 112 Cal. App. 4th 920, 923. 2. Defendant's Motion for Leave to File a First Amended Answer, filed on 5/21/18, is GRANTED. Leave to amend is p...

Excerpt: ...pert disclosure cut-off dates would be based on the continued trial date of 5/22/18. On 4/24/18, the court granted Plaintiff's former counsel's motion to withdraw. The trial was also continued to 8/21/18. The court's order does not mention a continuance of all discovery cut-offs. Therefore, discovery cutoff ended on 4/23/18, (4/22/18 was a Sunday) which is 30 days before the last trial date of 5/22/18. Cal Code Civil Procedure § 2024.020(a). Ass...

Excerpt: ...money caused by the unnecessary trial of damage questions.” Trickey v. Superior Court of Sacramento County (1967) 252 Cal. App. 2d 650, 653. The facts of the case must justify it. Foreman & Clark Corp. v. Fallon (1971) 3 Cal. 3d 875, 888, fn. 8. The only basis for the motion is that the defect at issue is trivial in Defendant's opinion, and Defendant intends to move for a nonsuit. Motion, 3:11-13. This does not establish that convenience of wit...

Excerpt: ... The court disregards Defendant's objections as they are not objections to evidence but to the material facts set forth in the Separate Statement. 2. As applicable to a Plaintiff's motion for summary adjudication, the motion can be granted if there is no merit to an affirmative defense or if the motion disposes of an issue of duty. Cal Code Civil Procedure § 437c(f)(1). Plaintiff seeks adjudication of two issues: that Defendant owed Plaintiff a ...

Excerpt: ...pulate that they are not making a claim for mental and emotional distress “over and above that usually associated with the physical injuries claimed” and that an expert on mental and emotional distress will not be presented at trial. Cal Code Civil Procedure §2032.320(c). Plaintiffs apparently claim that their emotional distress is “garden variety,” but refuse to stipulate to this or that they will not present an expert on emotional dist...

Excerpt: ...Stores and 99 Cents Only Stores, LLC, alleging two causes of action for 1) premises liability, and 2) negligence. On April 19, 2018, Defendant 99 Cents Only Stores, LLC (“Defendant”) filed a demurrer and motion to strike portions of the Complaint. On May 19, 2018, Plaintiffs filed an opposition. On May 22, 2018, the Court continued the hearing on the motions to July 9, 2018 for lack of a meet and confer declaration. On May 23, 2018, the Court...

Excerpt: ...437c(p)(2). 1. Evidentiary objections. a. Plaintiff's objections to evidence. Pursuant to Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 437c(q), the Court rules only on those objections to evidence that it deems material to its disposition of the motion. Objections to evidence that are not ruled on for purposes of the motion are preserved for appellate review. Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 437c(q). Declaration of Mike Henn. #2, #3, #4. Sustained. #5. Overruled. #6. Overrule...

Excerpt: ...that they suffered any prejudice from any defect in service of the opposition. The motion hearing date was continued to 7/9/18, giving Defendants additional time to prepare a timely reply brief which has been considered. None of Plaintiff's evidence submitted in opposition has been considered as the documents have not been authenticated. Evidence Code § 1400. 2. “Spoliation” is “the destruction or significant alteration of evidence, or the...

Excerpt: ...d by the unnecessary trial of damage questions.” Trickey v. Superior Court of Sacramento County (1967) 252 Cal. App. 2d 650, 653. The facts of the case must justify it. Foreman & Clark Corp. v. Fallon (1971) 3 Cal. 3d 875, 888, fn. 8. Here, Defendants have not persuasively established that “liability is straightforward” or that Defendants are not liable for the incident because Plaintiff failed in his attempt to jump from the back of a cont...

Excerpt: ...endant was able to file a Reply brief, which has been considered. Ordinarily, if there is any prejudice resulting therefrom, the court can continue the hearing, but Defendant does not ask for a continuance. Mann v. Crachiolo (1985) 38 Cal.3d 18, 30. Substantive Discussion 2. Defendant is entitled to obtain discovery by means of a mental examination. Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 2032.020.Mental examinations and those exams other than that described und...

Excerpt: ...on to Have Requests for Admission Deemed Admitted 2 The Court has considered Plaintiffs oppositions filed on 6/20/18, two days prior to the last scheduled hearing date for these motions. While untimely filed at the time, the hearing date was continued to 7/9/18, to avoid prejudice to Defendant An order compelling responses is no longer necessary. Plaintiffs counsel declares that verified responses were personally served on 6/20/18. Defendan€s R...

Excerpt: ...ndant, Nanfang Machino Facture Co., Ltd. (“Fenghua”) within three years. 1. Plaintiff is required to serve the complaint within three years after the action is commenced against that Defendant. Cal. Code Civ. Proc. §583.210(a). Fenghua, the only Defendant remaining in this action, was named in the First Amended Complaint, filed on 7/11/13. Accordingly, the 3-year limitation for service expired on 7/11/16. 2. A Plaintiff's failure to serve wi...

Excerpt: ...otels Management Corp. (2012) 203 Cal.App.4th 403, 431. In order to impose liability on the owner for injury arising from a dangerous condition, “it must be shown that a dangerous condition existed and that the defendant knew or should have known of it. … No inference of negligence arises based simply upon proof of a fall upon the owner's floor.” Vaughn v. Montgomery Ward & Co. (1950) 95 Cal.App.2d 553, 556. Additionally, the Plaintiff ...

Excerpt: ...rder to protect the parties from unreasonable or oppressive demands including unreasonable violations of a witness's or consumer's right of privacy. Cal Code Civ Procedure § 1987.1. The right to privacy is protected by the California Constitution. Vinson v. Superior Court (1987) 43 Cal.3d 833, 839. Where privacy rights are implicated, Defendant has to show that the records are directly relevant to Plaintiff's claim and essential to the f...

Excerpt: ...le reflects that the following events took place. 11/9/17 Defendant filed a Motion for Summary Judgment 1/18/18 Plaintiff's ex parte application to continue the Motion for Summary Judgment hearing is GRANTED. The hearing is set for 2/26/18. 2/16/18 The court GRANTS Plaintiff's ex parte application for leave to file a late opposition to the Motion for Summary Judgment. The court orders that opposition be filed by 2/20/18. 2/26/18 The court GRANTED...

Excerpt: ...ve damages must be intended to cause injury or must constitute despicable conduct carried on by Defendant with a willful and conscious disregard of the rights of others. Civ Code § 3294(a). This is the definition of “malice.” “Oppression” is defined as despicable conduct that subjects a person to cruel and unjust hardship in conscious disregard of a person's rights. Cal Civ Code § 3294(c). Plaintiff alleges two claims for strict liabili...

Excerpt: ...). The motion can be supported by an affidavit of counsel based on information and belief as to the medical diagnosis and prognosis of any party. Code Civ. Proc., § 36.5 Plaintiff has shown that his health requires a preferential setting to avoid prejudicing Plaintiff's interests. Plaintiff was diagnosed in January 2018 for an un-staged lung adenocarcinoma. Motion, Ex. A. page 1. Fox v. Superior Court (2018) 21 Cal.App.5th 529, 534. He is presen...

Excerpt: ...ereafter “Bank”). Declaration of David Benavente. All objections are OVERRULED. Mr. Benavente is the Asset Manager of Defendant/Cross-Complainant Cole. He has personal knowledge of the asserted facts. His declaration supports that the parties entered into the lease agreement. He sets forth the lease provisions at issue. The Declaration is supported by the actual lease agreement at Exhibits A and B. Declaration of Samuel Nora. Cole's attorney....

Excerpt: ...cident. The court continued the hearing to 3/22/18 on the issue of sanctions only to be imposed against Plaintiff and counsel. On 3/22/18, Plaintiff did not appear at the continued hearing on imposition of sanctions, and the court granted Defendants' request for sanctions in the amount of $2,000, to be paid within 30 days. See Defendants' Notice of Ruling filed 3/26/18. The court has discretion to award attorneys' fees and costs under Cal Code Ci...

Excerpt: ...ral negligence, (2) premises liability and (3) negligent infliction of emotional distress. The premises liability cause of action includes: count one – negligence; count two - willful failure to warn pursuant to Civil Code section 846; and count three – dangerous condition of public property. The complaint alleges that on October 24, 2015, Plaintiff sat on a chair while on premises owned and controlled by Norms, and the chair broke thereby ca...

Excerpt: .... Von's (1983) 146 Cal.App.3d 29, 32. If there is any resultingprejudice, the court can continue the hearing. Mann v. Crachiolo (1985) 38 Cal.3d 18, 30. Defendant did not suffer any prejudice since Defendant was able to file a reply brief which has been considered. A party can move to compel another's deposition where the deponent fails to appear or proceed with it. Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 2025.450. Defense counsel has complied with the statutory...

Excerpt: ...he other party. Code Civ. Proc., § 473. The court has discretion to correct clerical errors in its judgment on its own motion. Defendants are in default and are therefore, “out of court” and are not entitled to notice or to file any other pleading. The effect of a default is to cut-off any of the defaulting Defendants' rights to object unless the default is set aside by the court. A & B Metal Products v. MacArthur Properties, Inc. (1970) 11 ...

Excerpt: ...Department of Transportation (2002) 27 Cal. 4th 198, 200-201; Gravelin v. Satterfield (2011) 200 Cal. App. 4th 1209, 1214 . An exception to this general rule states that the hirer remains liable if it retains control of the work and that retention of control affirmatively contributes to Plaintiff's injuries. Hooker v. DOT (2002) 27 Cal.4th 198; Tverberg v. Fillner Constr. (2012) 202 Cal. App. 4th 1439, 1446. Thus, the rule of non-liability un...

Excerpt: ...ed Complaint (“FAC”), alleging three causes of action for 1) Vehicular Negligence, 2) Negligence Per Se, and 3) Equitable Estoppel. The FAC arises from an automobile accident between Plaintiff and Johnson, an employee of LADOT. On September 6, 2016, she was rear ended by Defendants' vehicle because Johnson <0048000300290024002600 00030044004f004f0048[ges that on September 9, 2016, Plaintiff submitted a claim to the City with the claim number ...

Excerpt: ...submit an application to the public entity for leave to present a late claim. The late-claim application must be made “within a reasonable time not to exceed one year after the accrual of the cause of action and shall state the reason for the delay in presenting the claim.” Gov Code § 911.4(b). Petitioner submitted his late-claim application on 9/19/17, accompanied by a letter application dated 9/20/17. Motion Ex. B. The cause of action accr...

Excerpt: ...bility based upon competent expert testimony. Jones v. Ortho Pharm. Corp.(1985) 163 Cal. App. 3d 396, 402. The parties do not dispute the following material facts: The complaint alleges that Plaintiff presented to the emergency department of Alhambra Hospital Medical Center on 7/14/15, with heavy vaginal bleeding. UF 2. Defendant, Haiping Wang, M.D., was asked to consult. Dr. Wang suggested that patient undergo a D&C procedure. UF 3. Dr. Wang per...

Excerpt: ...n 3/2/17 does not reflect that Plaintiff served the Summons and Complaint on Defendant L.A. Care. The only document identified on the proof of service is a “Proof of Service Court.” The complaint must be served by someone other than a party to the action. Cal Code Civil Procedure § 414.10. The papers were improperly served by the Plaintiff in this action, as reflected on the proof of service filed with the court on 3/2/17. Plaintiff bears th...

Excerpt: ...er's deposition where the deponent fails to appear or proceed or produce documents for inspection without having served a valid objection. Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 2025.450. Defense counsel has complied with the statutory requirements to meet and confer. Cal. Code Civ. Proc. 2025.450(b)(2). Defendant's counsel has attempted to resolve the issues informally after each of the three noticed depositions were cancelled at Plaintiff's request, witho...

Excerpt: ... which terminating sanctions are ordered pursuant to §2023.030(d). The complaint is dismissed. Defendant's request for monetary sanctions is DENIED for improper notice. The requesting party must identify in the notice, the person, party and/or attorney against whom the sanction is sought as well as the type of sanction sought. This information is not contained in the notice, and the body of the motion does not discuss imposition of sanctions. Ca...

Excerpt: ...year after the date of injury or the date when Plaintiff discovered or should have discovered the injury, whichever occurs first and no more than three years from the date of injury. Cal Code Civ Proc § 340.5. Plaintiff's suspicion of negligence would commence the running of the statute of limitations. Knowles v. Superior Court (2004) 118 Cal. App. 4th 1290, 1300. The statute begins to run if the Plaintiff has notice or information of circumstan...