Excerpt: ...e 6th Cause of Action (Breach of Written Contract‐‐ Authorizations), the 7th Cause of Action (Breach of Implied Contract), the 8th Cause of Action (Breach of the Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing), the 9th Cause of Action (Indebitatus Assumpsit), and the 10th Cause of Action (Quantum Meruit). Defendants' Request for Judicial Notice of Exhibits A‐N is denied. Defendants' Request for Judicial Notice of Exhibits O and P is grante...

Excerpt: ...sum. Given that Intertek's liability is likely zero to negligible, the proposed settlement is within the range of the moving party's proportionate share of comparative lliability under a Tech‐Bilt analysis. The settlement is in good faith. ...

Excerpt: ...lated event. ‐‐Rushton was not traveling to any worker's compensation appointments. ‐‐Rushton was traveling to the Hyperion Treatment Plant, where he worked. ‐‐Rushton performed his work at the plant. ‐‐On the day of the accident, Rushton was scheduled to do routine instrumental analysis at the lab of the plant. ‐‐Rushton was never told by the City that he was required to bring his personal vehicle to work. ‐‐Rushton w...

Excerpt: ...reach of Contract and Implied Covenant claims are sufficiently alleged. Plaintiff alleges that it properly and timely exercised the Extension Option and that it paid the increased rent to the landlord for 3 years based on the Fair Market Rent which was calculated for the Option Term under the terms set forth in the Second Amendment to Lease. See Paragraphs 31‐35 of the Fourth Amended Complaint. Further, the Fourth Amended Complaint alleges that...

Excerpt: ...ing as damages? The objections are not well taken. The Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum or to Limit the Scope of the Subpoena served on Farmers Insurance filed by Defendant Sundial is granted in part. Request for Production Nos. 4‐8 are quashed. These requests exceed the scope of permissible discovery under CCP Section 2017.020. As to Request for Production Nos. 1‐3, these requests are modified and limited to those documents relating to d...

Excerpt: ...mber 26, 2015 email qualifies as extortion. Defendant does not concede that the email was extortion. The email does not demand anything in return from Plaintiff and informs Plaintiff of the investigation and intent to pursue legal remedies should the investigation reveal theft. Therefore, the exception found in the case of Flatley v. Mauro (2006) 39 Cal.4th 299, 320 does not apply here. Plaintiff fails to show the probability of prevailing on the...

Excerpt: ...mber 26, 2015 email qualifies as extortion. Defendant does not concede that the email was extortion. The email does not demand anything in return from Plaintiff and informs Plaintiff of the investigation and intent to pursue legal remedies should the investigation reveal theft. Therefore, the exception found in the case of Flatley v. Mauro (2006) 39 Cal.4th 299, 320 does not apply here. Plaintiff fails to show the probability of prevailing on the...

Excerpt: ...to Strike with leave to amend as to the treble damages, injunctive relief and punitive damages only. Defendant's Request for Judicial Notice is granted as to Exhibits 1‐7 and denied as to Exhibits 8‐11. The Declaration of Jacqueline Marcott is irrelevant. This is not an evidentiary hearing. ...

Excerpt: ...n Paragraph 8 of the First Amended Complaint, an essential element of the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Causes of Action cannot be established as a matter of law and therefore fail. ‐‐There is no competent evidence that Escandari & Michon was Plaintiff's fictitious business name or that Plaintiff ever registered it per Business and Professions Code Section 17918. Further, even if Escandari & Michon was a proper fictitious business name, Plaintiff deni...

Excerpt: ...ndent contractors under Labor Code Sectin 2750.5. ‐‐Defendant's license was revoked at the outset of the Cadet project under Business and Professions Code Section 7125.2. ‐‐Defendant fails to show substantial compliance under Business and Professions Code Section 7031(e). ...

Excerpt: ...hicle during the warranty period." See Second Amended Complaint Paragraphs 26‐27. It is not clear who made the misrepresentations, to whom, what was specifically misrepresented, by what means, etc. As to the negligence claim, there is no indication how Plaintiff suffered emotional injuries. This claim is barred by the economic loss doctrine. Further, there is no separate tort of neligent infliction of emotional distress. The tort is neglieg...

Excerpt: ...oods, . . . the measure of damages shall include the cost of repairs necessary to make the goods confirm." The evidence was clear at trial that Plaintiff kept the Mercedes and stored it at her husband's warehouse. The evidence was clear at trial that the cost to replace the transmission was @$9,000.00. The amount of damages is therefore within the limited civil case jurisdiction. ...

Excerpt: ...the deadline? Further, the Motion was filed on February 9, 2018 and the Separate Statement was untimely filed on March 5, 2018. At an Informal Discovery Conference, the parties agreed and the court ordered Defendants to appear for deposition on January 23, 2018. Defendants appeared. Previously, Defendants did not appear for deposition due to illness. Under these circumstances, there is no legal authority to support the award of sanctions. ...

Excerpt: ...Design to perform repairs at the property. See Defendant's Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts No. 1 and the Supplemental Declaration of Jay Griffith, Paragraph 1. Even if Jay Griffith was not the owner, the evidence shows that he had management and control of the property. The Privette case does not absolve the moving party from liability under the 1st Cause of Action (Premises Liability) or the 3rd Cause of Action (Negligence). ...

Excerpt: ......

Excerpt: ...ails to establish that no subcontract was formed between Tower Glass and McCormick. See Nos. 1‐10 which support a finding of a subcontract. Also, there is an allegation in the Complaint that a subcontract was formed. See Paragraph 25 of the First Amended Complaint. If the existence of a subcontract between McCormick and Tower Glass was a condition precedent for a subcontract between Tesla/Asis and Tower Glass, there is a triable issue. There is...

Excerpt: ...rt to inspect the mail program for emails relevant to Plaintiffs and his web browser." Defendants stated they would not allow Plaintiffs' expert to copy the hard drives. Plaintiff's requests are outside of the response to the Request for Production. As to Plaintiff's Evidentiary Objections to the Declaration of John Hostetler: Sustain As to Plaintiff's Evidentiary Objections to the Declaration of Steven Morris: Sustain all ...

Excerpt: ... qualify as a default, default judgment or dismissal. In the last hearing, the court found that the 1st prong of the analysis had been met and the burden shifted to Plaintiff to establish the probable validity of her claims against Defendant. Plaintiff failed to carry her burden. Mandatory relief is denied. However, discretionary relief is available for any "judgment, dismissal order or other proceeding," so long as the judgment, etc. was...

Excerpt: ...r v. Copley Press, Inc. (2006) 141 Cal.App.4th 1550, 1559‐1560. Messenger Fees and Service of Process Fees are recoverable. See CCP Section 1033.5(c)(4), "reasonably necessary to the conduct of the litigation rather than merely convenient or beneficial to its preparation." Nelson v. Anderson (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 111, 132 and Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007) 149 Cal.App.4th 836, 858. ...

Excerpt: ...d due to a glitch in the software. All company records were affected by the same glitch, not just records concerning the Plaintiff. It would be an abuse of discretion to impose a termination sanction in light of the fact that an evidentiary sanction is available. Even if the deletion of the records was inadvertent, it impairs Plaintiff's ability to prove his case. Therefore, Defendant may not submit any evidence challenging Plaintiff's va...

Excerpt: ... Defendants establish that Rojeski signed a form acknowledging that the treating doctors were independent contractors and not employees of Valley Surgical Center. Therefore, Rojeski knew that Dr. Gee and Dr. Chau were not employees of Valley Surgical Center. The burden shifts to Plaintiff to show that acknowledgment is not authentic. Plaintiff fails to submit evidence to dispute Defendants' Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts No. ...

Excerpt: ... (2008) 162 Cal.App.4th 670, 684. Plaintiff's injuries were sustained in Florida and he was treated in Florida. He resides and works in Florida. Therefore, percipient witnesses to the accident, to his treatment and his loss of income are located in Florida. It would be difficult for Defendant to depose such witnesses if the case remains in California. ...

Excerpt: ...raph of the Declaration of Sheila Chesanow. 22 CCR Section 71225 requires that there by "a sufficient number of therapists to carry out the scope of services offered" and "a sufficient number of appropriate personnel shall be provided for the safety of the patients." See 22 CCR Section 71225(b) and (c). There is a triable issue of fact whether Defendant committed neglect under the Elder Abuse Act. ...

Excerpt: ...n May 17, 2013. ‐‐This action was filed on October 7, 2013. T There is a triable issues: ‐By what legal authority does the assignment of the Note and TD automatically transfer the Recognition Agremeent? ‐Was Ocean Towers excused from giving notice under Section 3 of the Recognition Agreement? ‐Did Ocean Towers reasonably comply with Section 3 of the Recognition Agreement? ‐Who was entitled to notice: First Capital Mortgage, Thornburg ...

Excerpt: ...s no cause of action in California for unjust enrichment. See Melchior v. New Line (2003) 106 Cal.App.4th 779, 793. ...

Excerpt: ...Cal.4th 503, 511. What tort did Doefendant conspire to committ? ...

Excerpt: ...ry due to the undercurrents? ‐‐What was the mechanism of Plaintiff's injury? ‐‐Were the lifeguards the agents or employees of Defendant? ‐‐Did the conduct of the lifeguard contribute to Plaintiff's injury? ...

Excerpt: ...e 3rd Cause of Action (RICO). A cause of action for civil conspiracy cannot be stated if the alleged conspirator was not personally bound by the duty that was violated by the wrongful act and that he/she was acting only as the agent or employee of the party who did have the duty. See Doctors' v. Superior Court (1989) 49 Cal.3d 39, 44. The agent immunity rule extends to allegations that the agent aided and abetted the principal. See Janken v. ...

Excerpt: ... not have an express preemption clause. However, there is implied preemption because it is clear that Congress intended to cover aviation claims. See Gilstrap v. United Air Lines (9th Circuit 2013) 709 F.3d 995, 1004. The language of the statute is to relieve lessors, owners, and those with a security interest in an aircraft from lliability for personal injury, death and property damage when they are not in actual possession or control of the air...

Excerpt: ...aragraph 47 of the First Amended Complaint. The Violation of Business and Professions Code Seciton 7031 is properly alleged. Defendant raises factual disputes which are not appropriate to resolve on Demurrer. The fraud claim lacks specificity. How, when, where, to whom and by what means were the alleged misrepresentations made? ...

Excerpt: ...sufficient to make the maintenance of the action inoffensive to traditional concepts of fair play and substantial justice." See Vitual Magic Asia, Inc. v. Fil‐ Cartoons, Inc. (2002) 99 Cal.App.4th 228, 238. Defendant has availed himself of the benefits of property ownership in California in a manner that is related to this case. The real property which is the subject of this litigation is located in Los Angeles County, California. It is fai...

Excerpt: ...establish causation and (2) cannot establish damages. As to the first ground for summary judgment, they argue that it is undisputed that Tina took the funds; that the Defendants did not take any funds; and that Tina caused the alleged damages and Defendants' alleged conduct is irrelevant. They also argue that Plaintiff cannot establish that had the funds not been taken by Tina, they would have been awarded to him in a settlement or following a tr...

Excerpt: ...ner actively participates in how the job is done, and that participation affirmatively contributes to the employee's injury, the hirer may be liable in tort to the employee." A hirer may also be liable if the hirer "knows or reasonably should know of a concealed, preexisting hazardous condition on the premises; the contractor does not know and could not reasonably ascertain the conditions; and the landowner fails to warn the contracto...

Excerpt: ...efendant is ordered to produce electronically stored information in the manner in which it is ordinarily kept or in a word‐searchable format. See CCP Section 2031.030(a)(2) and CCP Section 2031.280(d)(2). No sanctions. ...

Excerpt: ...s in the document which makes Cross‐Defendant a guarantor. There is no evidence that Dr. Ghodadra was acting as the agent of Reetu Dua and therefore bound her as a guarantor of the Precise Agreement. Further, agency is not implied from the marital relationship. See Lovetro v. Steers (1965) 234 Cal.App.2d 461, 475. Where a defendant's spouse has no personal liability, there is no legitimate basis to name him or her as a defendant in the acti...

Excerpt: ...nspection which showed that the loss was due to the roof being "worn and drying out due to normal age" and a clogged drain. "Wear and tear" is an exclusion under the policy. Plaintiff fails to show that the claim was denied due to the absence of building coverage; this was the grounds contended by Plaintiff to support a Professional Negligence claim. Plaintiff's evidentiary objections to the Declaration of Keith Sklerov are ov...

Excerpt: ...the punitive damages is denied. The Demurrer is timely. As to the Defamation claim, more facts are needed in order to determine that the alleged insults were statements of fact. As to the Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress claim, more facts are needed to show that Cross‐ Complainant suffered severe emotional distress as a results of the alleged insults. What is the outrageous conduct? As to the Stalking claim, the Cross‐Complaint su...

Excerpt: ..., LLC. In addition, there is no right for the moving party to compel arbitration of the claims of 1501, LLC against DK Brown. However, the moving party is entitled to enforce the arbitration provision of the Prime Contradct (WSA and 1501, LLC) as against 1501, LLC because 1501, LLC has asserted in its arbitration that James Schram is dividually subject to the arbitration provision of the contract. 1501, LLC is now estopped from asserting that Jam...

Excerpt: ...torney do? The standard is that in order to grant relief from default based on extrinsic mistake, there must be a showing of "neglect of an extreme degree amounting to positive misconduct by counsel, rather tha mere inexcusable neglect, sufficient to obliterate the attorney‐client relationship and thereby preclude any imputation of counsel's neglect to the client. Positive misconduct is found where there is a total failure on the part o...

Excerpt: ...tion (Breach of Contract), the 4th Cause of Action (Unjust Enrichment), the 6th Cause of Action (Declaratory Relief/Breach of the Corporations Code 17704.10), the 8th Cause of Action (Negligent Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage), the 9th Cause of Action (Intentional Interference with Contractual Relations), the 10th Cause of Action (Intentional Interference with Economic Advantage) and the 11th Cause of Action (Breach of Fiduciary ...

Excerpt: ...here are other factors at issue here. Plaintiff admits in his Complaint that he had personal issues and Defendant submits evidence that Plaintiff was not generating sales and was failing to supervise the sales team. How do these factors impact the sale of the stock and the value of the stock? If the value of the stock was fair and reasonable, then the transfer of the shares could be made without the consent of the spouse. See Family Code Section ...

Excerpt: ...nt debtor or who may become obligated to make payments to the judgment debtor depending upon future developments." Without a named obligor in the order, who is bound by the order? As to the request for permission to propound discovery every 30 days with a shortened response period of 15 days, what is the authority for this request? See CCP Section 708.020 and 708.030 which restrict discovery requests (interrogatories and document inspection) ...

Excerpt: ...tion (Breach of Contract), the 4th Cause of Action (Unjust Enrichment), the 6th Cause of Action (Declaratory Relief/Breach of the Corporations Code 17704.10), the 8th Cause of Action (Negligent Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage), the 9th Cause of Action (Intentional Interference with Contractual Relations), the 10th Cause of Action (Intentional Interference with Economic Advantage) and the 11th Cause of Action (Breach of Fiduciary ...

Excerpt: ...ith Defendants against the 2nd and 3rd Causes of Action for Products Liability and Negligence. ‐‐Judgment on the Griffith Defendants' Cross‐Complaint based on their failure to provide West LA indemnification and defense from the Plaintiff's action. The moving party fails to provide a properly authenticated copy of the Rental Agreement containing the indemnification provision. Further, the moving party fails to establish as a matter ...

Excerpt: ...ly designed or did not include sufficient instructions or warnings of potential safety hazards. The undisputed facts show that Dockmasters did not sell, market or distribute the product to the Plaintiff. Further, Dockmasters was not involved in the chain of commerce that resulted in the sale of the product to the Plaintiff. See Dockmasters Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts Nos. 26‐ 32. This product was sold by Harmar to Love Handl...

Excerpt: ...any of the monthly fees required under the contract. See Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts No. 31. Then in the Motion, MSG asserts that Precise paid only $14,000.00 for March and April 2015. Lastly, in its Cross‐Complaint, MSG alleges that Precise paid $42,000.00 for six months of rent. See Paragraph 24 of the Cross‐ Complaint. ‐‐What is the nature of the obligation of Precise to pay $7,000.00 per month to MSG under the writ...

Excerpt: ......

Excerpt: ...se in a way that violates CC 2784.5. To avoid the express indemnification provision, Boswell must present evidence that its own actions did not in any way contribute to Plaintiffs' injury. Boswell fails to present such evidence: ‐‐Boswell had no discussions with the City or with Over & Over Ready Mix regarding the size of the trucks. ‐‐Boswell had no discussions with the City or with Over & Over Ready Mix regardring the routes to be u...

Excerpt: ...7 ‐‐Paragraph 2 of the prayer of the First Amended Complaint Plaintiff is granted 10 days leave to amend to support the claim for punitive damages. See Paragraph 37 of the FIrst Amended Complaint. Defendants' Request for Judicial Notice is granted. As to the 2nd Cause of Action, Plaintiff now alleges sufficiient facts to state a claim. See Paragraphs 3, 33 and 34 of the First Amended Complaint. Even though the allegations of the 1st Cause...

Excerpt: ...use), there are sufficiient allegations to show a claim of "taking." See Paragraph 54 of the First Amended Complaint. As to the 3rd Cause of Action (Breach of Fiduciary Duty) and the 4th Cause of Action (Accounting), Plaintiff alleges that Lyles was her fiduciary, that he was also an agent of other Defendants and that he made misrepresentations. The allegations support a fiduciary relationship. See Paragraphs 26, 27, 29 and 66 of the Firs...