Excerpt: ...fendant objects on the grounds that the interrogatory is vague and ambiguous, seeks premature disclosure of expert opinions, and seeks privileged information. The objections are overruled. The interrogatory simply requests disclosure of facts upon which Defendant may argue that Plaintiff was entirely or contributorily negligent. An interrogatory is not objectionable merely because an answer involves an opinion or contention that relates to facts ...

Excerpt: ...ff's complaint, a claim for premises liability. The demurrer is overruled. LEGAL STANDARD “It is black letter law that a demurrer tests the legal sufficiency of the allegations in a complaint.” (Lewis v. Safeway, Inc.(2015) 235 Cal.App.4th 385, 388.) In ruling on a demurrer, the court must “liberally construe[]” the allegations of the complaint. (Code Civ. Proc., § 452.) “This rule of liberal construction means that the reviewing court...

Excerpt: ...to take place in Charlotte, North Carolina. Defendants Daryoush David Saadat, M.D., Beverly Hills Aesthetic Surgical Institute, Inc., and Roxbury Surgical Center, LLC (“Defendants”) oppose the motion. The motion is denied. DISCUSSION The deposition of an expert witness that a party has designated “shall be taken at a place that is within 75 miles of the courthouse where the action is pending.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2034.420.) However, “[...

Excerpt: ...ndants Hadley Towing Company, Inc., and FMG, Inc., dba Hadley Tow in the complaint. Plaintiffs have not yet served any Defendants. On May 25, 2018, Plaintiffs filed a request for dismissal without prejudice of Plaintiff Mark Cutting's claim. Plaintiffs now move to vacate the order of dismissal, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 473(b). In his declaration, Plaintiff's counsel states that his clients had two different civil actions, and h...

Excerpt: ...ndants Hadley Towing Company, Inc., and FMG, Inc., dba Hadley Tow in the complaint. Plaintiffs have not yet served any Defendants. On May 25, 2018, Plaintiffs filed a request for dismissal without prejudice of Plaintiff Mark Cutting's claim. Plaintiffs now move to vacate the order of dismissal, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 473(b). In his declaration, Plaintiff's counsel states that his clients had two different civil actions, and h...

Excerpt: ...osas (“Defendant”). Plaintiffs filed a complaint on June 19, 2018, asserting causes of action for motor vehicle and general negligence. Plaintiffs also seek punitive damages. Defendant filed an answer to the complaint but moves to strike the claim for punitive damages. The proof of service that Defendant submits with the motion appears to be from <00030033004f0044004c00 00030033004f0044004c[ntiffs filed no opposition to the motion, suggesting...

Excerpt: ...dent, Defendant Mary Byrne (“Defendant Byrne”) had rented a car from Budget Rent a Car System, Inc. (“Defendant Budget”). Defendant Harris was driving that car on the date of accident even though he was not a party to the rental agreement between Defendant Byrne and Defendant Budget. The rental agreement expressly stated that “use of the car by an authorized driver” would terminate the rental and void all liability protection. (Separa...

Excerpt: ...gainst three physicians, as well as Cedars-Sinai Medical Center and Assisted Home Health Care, Inc., alleging a single cause of action for medical malpractice. Specifically, Plaintiff alleges that Dr. Elizabeth Kim (“Defendant”), a plastic surgeon who operated on Plaintiff twice to address an infection from a cesarean section. Defendant moves for summary judgment, and Plaintiff filed no opposition. The motion for summary judgment is granted. ...

Excerpt: ...roup, Inc. (“Defendants”) owned or controlled. Plaintiff seeks leave to file a second amended complaint to add punitive damages allegations. The motion is denied without prejudice. DISCUSSION Under California Rules of Court, rule 3.124, a motion to amend a pleading must include a copy of the proposed amendment and state the allegations that the moving party proposes to add or delete. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1324, subd. (a).) California R...

Excerpt: ...Jie Tan. Plaintiffs filed this action asserting causes of action for motor vehicle and general negligence, alleging that the vehicle at issue was registered to Hao Jie Tan, Zexing Huang, and EAN Holdings, LLC (collectively, “Defendants”). Among other things, Plaintiffs allege that Defendants “negligently, carelessly, recklessly, wantonly, and unlawfully” entrusted the vehicle to Defendant Hao Jie Tan, which “directly and proximately” ...