Excerpt: ... seeking discovery, the likelihood that permitting discovery will prevent the case from going to trial, and resulting prejudice to any other party, among other things. Cal Code Civ Procedure § 2024.050. The court's file reflects that Defendant's motion to compel Plaintiff to submit to an Independent Examination with a neuropsychologist was DENIED on 6/11/19. (Defendants' Motion to Reopen seeks to obtain both a neurological and neuropsychological...

Excerpt: ...E ERROR IN THE PROOF OF SERVICE WAS A CLERICAL MISTAKE. Plaintiff moves for an order to consolidate a contractual uninsured motorist arbitration with <0128015d016f011e011a03 5800030003> In this action, Plaintiff alleges that on June 15, 2017, she was injured in a car collision as result <019a015a011e0003015d01 01100110015d011a011e>nt, Plaintiff was in another accident that allegedly aggravated or exacerbated Plaintiff's injuries and damages. Plai...

Excerpt: ...ut having served a valid objection, or fails to produce documents for inspection. Cal Code Civ Procedure §2025.450. Defendant was obligated to “designate and produce” a person most qualified to testify. Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.230. Defendant objected on grounds the deposition was unilaterally set. The objection was timely made on 8/19/19, three calendar days before the date of the deposition on 8/22/19. Cal Code Civil Procedure § 2025.410(...

Excerpt: ...tions requiring the defendants to cease the procedure and repair the complications. Complaint Para. 12. “The complications include, but were not limited to, severe lacerations to Mr. Murillo's genital are and other nearby organs caused by the conduct of Defendants and Does 1‐ 100.” Id. (typographical errors corrected and all caps eliminated). The complaint repeatedly refers to Mr. Murillo's injury as “lacerations to Mr. Murillo's genital ...

Excerpt: ...F 1. The City of Glendale owns the property where the subject tree was located. UF 3. Plaintiff asserts one cause of action for negligence against Defendant, WCA. The City is responsible for any maintenance needed on trees in the open space, wilderness area including the subject tree. UF 6. The City would inspect, trim or prune a tree in the area, including the subject tree if there were any concerns, requests or inquiries regarding that tree. UF...

Excerpt: ...s tree branch crashed onto their car. The tree was located on a parkway between the sidewalk and the street in front of an apartment building owed by Raintree. The law imposes a duty on a person owns, possesses or controls property to use due care to prevent injuries to others. See, e.g., Alcaraz v. Vece (1997) 14 Cal. 4th 1149. Conversely, “[a] defendant cannot be held liable for the defective or dangerous condition of property which it [does]...

Excerpt: ... her left hip. UF 1-2. On 5/2/16, paramedics transferred Plaintiff to Glendale Adventist Medical Center. UF 10. Plaintiff underwent X-rays of her left hip and was informed that the X-rays showed that her bone was not broken. UF 11-13. On 6/6/16, Plaintiff went to see an orthopedic surgeon, Jai Lee, M.D, because she continued to experience pain. UF 27-28, 30. Dr. Lee obtained X-rays of Plaintiff's left hip and pelvis. UF 32. On 6/6/16, Dr. Lee tol...

Excerpt: ...he undisputed facts establish that on January 14, 2017 at about 6:30 p.m. Defendant was hanging out with a friend in the front of Smitty's Liquors when an unknown man appeared from a nearby alley yelling that someone was coming to shoot. UF 1-2. Defendant ran to his vehicle when he heard about five gunshots from the area near the front of the store. UF 3. He got into his vehicle and drove out of the parking lot. UF 5. While driving southbound on ...

Excerpt: ...t liability – design defect. On December 9, 2019, Plaintiff Abigail Bolde was driving on the freeway when a seven-foot portion of a truck's exhaust pipe broke off and fell onto the freeway and was hit by a passing vehicle. The pipe was thrown airborne and broke through Plaintiff's front windshield, striking her on the head and causing severe injuries. The truck was a 2011 International Prostar tractor manufactured by Navistar. Plaintiff contend...

Excerpt: ...aintiff contends this substitution is necessary because Dr. Giacobetti's office informed Plaintiff's counsel on June 25, 2019 (the date for which trial had previously been set) that Dr. Giacobetti did not intend to appear for trial. Counsel had understood that Dr. Giacobetti would be voluntarily appearing and thus no subpoena had been issued. When these circumstances were explained to the Court, the Court granted a continuance to November 5, 2019...

Excerpt: ... the parties' meet and confer efforts be filed along with the motion. Cal Code Civil Procedure § 435.5. The alternative request for judgment on the pleading is DENIED. Plaintiff is entitled to judgment if the complaint states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action and the answer does not state facts to constitute a defense. Cal Code Civil Procedure §438(c)(1)(A). Grounds for the motion must appear on the face of the pleading or from m...

Excerpt: ...each of these claims. I. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION FOR PREMISES LIABILITY Under the Government Claims Act, “[a] public entity is not liable for an injury, whether such injury arises out of an act or omission of the public entity or a public employee or any other person” unless specifically authorized by statute. Cal. Gov. Code 815(a); see also De Villers v. County of San Diego (2007) 156 Cal. App. 4 th 238. Government Code section 835 sets out t...

Excerpt: ...4) strict products liability. Defendants demur to the third cause of action on the ground that reckless misconduct and gross negligence do not constitute causes of action that are distinct from general negligence under California law. The Court agrees that there is no separate cause of action for gross negligence under California law. See, e.g., Eriksson v. Nunnick (2011) 191 Cal. App. 4 th 826, 856. However, the third cause of action simply sets...

Excerpt: ... alleges that Defendant Efrain Munoz (sometimes referred to as “Efrain”) was negligent in hiring and supervising Adan. Plaintiff further alleges that the Homeowners “knew or should have known that Efrain Munoz's employees were nonskilled and would not be closely supervised, thereby creating a need for adequate security measures at the site.” Based on these alleged facts, Plaintiff purports to assert four causes of action: (1) negligent su...

Excerpt: ...l Union v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters (1978) 87 Cal.App.3d 225, 228. Schumpert v. Tishman Co. (1988) 198 Cal.App.3d 598, 601; Del Junco v. Hufnagel (2007) 150 Cal.App.4th 789, 796 (discovery sanctions); Visco v. Abatti (1983) 144 Cal.App.3d 904, 908; Scarzella v. DeMers (1993) 17 Cal.App.4th 1762; City of Los Angeles v. Gleneagle Dev. Co. (1976) 62 Cal.App.3d 543. 2. Dismissals for failure to serve within three years is mandatory in n...

Excerpt: ... statute, nor does not address the court's discretion to require a party to sign a release for confidential records. As Plaintiff's authority makes clear, the court cannot create new methods of discovery that are not set forth in the Discovery Act. The court's powers are limited by the express language of the Act. In Holm v. Superior Court (1986) 187 Cal.App.3d 1241, the court refused to order a body <00890083008e0003008300 0003008b009000030096>h...

Excerpt: ...that described under Section 2032.220 require leave of court and are governed by Cal. Code Civ. Proc. §2032.310. 2. There is good cause to compel an examination based on the injuries Plaintiff has placed at issue. Plaintiff does not dispute that she suffered a traumatic brain injury (among other things) as a result of the accident. Opposition, 1:24- 25. “Good cause” is established where there are specific facts justifying discovery and the i...

Excerpt: ...r the Defendant. Brown v. Williams (2000) 78 Cal.App.4th 182, 187 fn. 4.Brown v. Williams (2000) 78 Cal.App.4th 182, 187. A void judgment can be set aside at any time, without any time limitation. Plaza Hollister Ltd. Partnership v. County of San Benito (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 1, 19. Plaintiff bears the burden of proving that service was properly accomplished. Ziller Electronics Lab Gmbh v. Superior Court (1988) 206 Cal. App. 3d 1222, 1232-1233; Di...

Excerpt: ...ght, went to Defendant's hospital for a proposed surgery to remove spinal hardware from her lumbar spine. UF 5. The surgery <008900870094009b01e100 0090009601ef00950003>employee, Nurse Gloria Deitrick, continued to chart progress notes every two hours with no change in the Plaintiff's condition. UF 17. On 2/21/16 at 17:37, Nurse Deitrick noted Plaintiff's confusion and inability to follow direction. UF 20. At 19:15 following a shift change, Nurse...

Excerpt: ...th has the burden on that issue. L. C. Rudd & Son, Inc. v. Superior Court (1997) 52 Cal.App.4th 742, 748. The settling party need only demonstrate that a settlement has been made. The burden shifts to the contesting party to demonstrate that the settlement does not meet the Tech-Bilt factors.City of Grand Terrace v. Superior Court (1987) 192 Cal. App. 3d 1251, 1261-1262. 2. The court considers a number of factors to determine whether settlement w...

Excerpt: ... conduct constituting malice, fraud or oppression. Grieves v. Superior Court (1984) 157 Cal. App. 3d 159, 166. The predicate acts to support a claim for punitive damages must be intended to cause injury or must constitute “malicious conduct,” defined as “despicable conduct” carried on by Defendant with a willful and conscious disregard of the rights of others. Civ Code § 3294(a). Oppressive conduct is defined as “despicable conduct” ...

Excerpt: ...laintiff filed an Amendment to Complaint substituting Doortech Com, Inc. dba Doortech for Doe 1 pursuant to Cal Code Civil Procedure § 474. UF 21. Generally, an amended complaint relates back to the filing of the original complaint to avoid the bar of the statute of limitations, if the amended complaint seeks recovery for the same general set of facts. Smeltzley v. Nicholson Mfg. Co. (1977) 18 Cal.3d 932, 934. The “same general set of facts”...

Excerpt: ...nts, Phillip Cabasso, M.D. and Phillip Cabasso, M.D. a Medical Corporation, as it filed one day late is OVERRULED. The statute provides that the opposition “shall be served and filed not less than 14 days prior to the hearing” which was 8/13/19. The Cabasso opposition was served and filed on 8/14/19. Cal Code Civil Procedure § 437c(b)(2). Notwithstanding, the court has broad discretion “to regulate the submission of materials in connection...

Excerpt: ... Plaintiff filed an amendment adding Action Messenger Service as Doe 1. The parties' evidentiary objections are OVERRULED. Pursuant to Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 437c(q), when the Court grants or denies a motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication, it need rule 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 fo...

Excerpt: ...n of the following claims against Defendant, Abdul Koroma (“Koroma”): Issue 3 (3rd cause of action for negligence), Issue 4 (4 th cause of action for negligence per se), and Issue 5 (5 th cause of action for premises liability). On 8/21/19, the court GRANTED Defendant Koroma's Motion for Summary Judgment with respect to the 2 nd, 3 rd, and 5 th causes of action. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion is rendered moot with respect to those causes of ...