Excerpt: ...independent contractor (Lab. Code, §¿226.8); 1 (2) failure to pay all wages due (§¿1194); (3) failure to pay minimum wage (§¿1194); (4) failure to pay overtime compensation (§§¿510, 1194); (5) failure to provide meal periods (§§¿512, 226.7); (6) failure to provide rest periods (§§¿512, 226.7); (7) fai lure to provide accurate itemized wage statements (§¿226); (8) waiting time penalties (§§¿201- 203); (9) illegal deductions (§...

Excerpt: ...r of a court to decline to exercise the jurisdiction it has over a transitory cause of action when it believes that the action may be more appropriately and justly tried elsewhere.” (Stangvik v. Shiley Inc. (1991) 54 Cal.3d 744, 751.) When a court finds “in the interest of substantial justice an action should be heard in a forum outside this state,” it “shall stay or dismiss the action in whole or in part on any conditions that may be jus...

Excerpt: ... over him or her. (Code Civ. Proc., § 418.10, subd. (a)(1).) The court may dismiss without prejudice the complaint in whole, or as to that defendant, when dismissal is made pursuant to Section 418.10. (Code Civ. Proc., § 581, subd. (h).) "A court of this state may exercise jurisdiction on any basis not inconsistent with the Constitution of this state or of the United States." (Code Civ. Proc., § 410.10.) "The Due Process Clause pro...

Excerpt: ...laintiff's case, or . . . demonstrate[] that under no hypothesis is there a material issue of fact that requires the process of trial.” ( Guz v. Bechtel Nat. Inc. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 317, 334.) To show that a plaintiff cannot establish an element of a cause of action, a defendant must make the initial showing “that the plaintiff does not possess, and cannot reasonably obtain, needed evidence.” (Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal....

Excerpt: ... 1- 4, 8: The court did not rely on these exhibits. Defendant's Objection Nos. 5- 7: Overruled. Defendant argues that Plaintiff lacks clear and convincing evidence Defendant engaged in malice, oppression, or fraud sufficient to impose punitive damages. (Motion at p. 1.) When the motion targets a request for punitive damages, a higher standard of proof is at play. “Although the clear and convincing evidentiary standard is a stringent one, ‘it ...

Excerpt: ...jection No. 24 twice. Defendant's Objection Nos. 24 (Ex. 3), 25: Overruled. A defendant seeking summary judgment must “conclusively negate[] a necessary element of the plaintiff's case, or . . . demonstrate[] that under no hypothesis is there a material issue of fact that requires the process of trial.” (Guz v. Bechtel Nat. Inc. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 317, 334.) To show that a plaintiff cannot establish an element of a cause of action, a defendant...

Excerpt: ...one of the parties suffers from an illness or condition raising substantial medical doubt of survival of that party be yond six months and satisfying the court that the interests of justice will be served by granting the preference. (Id ., § 36, subd. (d).) Moreover, the court in its discretion may grant a motion for preference supported by a showing that satisfies the court that the interests of justice will be served by granting the preference...

Excerpt: .... Pursuant to the July 8, 2022 CMO, this motion is deemed made and denied. Plaintiffs did not show good cause to depart from that order. The motion is denied without prejudice to objections at trial. Plaintiffs' MIL No. 3 Plaintiffs move to exclude expert testimony about the benefits of the AMMCO brake grinder design. This motion is too vague. It does not identify the specific testimony to be excluded. It is denied without prejudice to objections...

Excerpt: ...racy causes of action and request for punitive damages. Plaintiffs stated they needed a continuance to depose Graybar, which the court granted. The parties then filed supplemental briefs A. Objections 1. Plaintiffs' Objections The Court did not rely on the Netherton Declaration. 2. Defendant's Objections Nos. 1- 3: Sustained. Nos. 4- 11: The Court did not rely on this evidence. B. Summary Judgment A defendant seeking summary judgment must “conc...

Excerpt: ...becker and Cohen) for depositions on March 18. Defendant objected to the March 18 dates. On March 5, Plaintiffs offered depositions on March 11. Defendant objected. On March 7, Plaintiffs offered the experts for depositions on March 13 and March 18. Defendant objected. On March 8, Plaintiffs offered a deposition on March 14. Defendant objected. According to Plaintiffs, the expert discovery cutoff date was Sunday, March 10, 2024. Defendant objecte...

Excerpt: ...her Plaintiff was ever charged with a crime. Defendant argues that even if Plaintiff was never convicted of a crime, any “prior conduct involving moral turpitude” is discoverable because it may be relevant for impeachment. (Motion at p. 10.) Under Evidence Code section 787, “evidence of specific instances of [a witness's] conduct relevant only as tending to prove a trait of his character is inadmissible to attach or support the credibility ...

Excerpt: ...ase, or . . . demonstrate[] that under no hypothesis is there a material issue of fact that requires the process of trial.” (Guz v. Bechtel Nat. Inc. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 317, 334.) To show that a plaintiff cannot establish an element of a cause of action, a defendant must make the initial showing “that the plaintiff does not possess, and cannot reasonably obtain, needed evidence.” (Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 854....

Excerpt: ...amples in a different case. If that means that Defendant no longer has possession of any Osmanthus talc samples, then Defendant is to serve a verified amended response so stating. If Defendant still has Osmanthus talc samples, it is to produce them. Request No. 2: Granted. This request seeks all samples of Osmanthus talc identified in an exhibit. Defendant states it have already produced all talc samples in a different case. If that means that De...

Excerpt: ...to amend an expert witness list if the court takes into account the extent to which the opposing party has relied on the list of expert witness, the opposing party is not prejudiced, a nd either the moving party would not have determined to call the expert in the exercise of reasonable diligence or the moving party failed to call the expert due to mistake, inadvertence surprise, or excusable neglect and then sought leave to amend promptly and ser...

Excerpt: ...eign bans. The evidence would have little probative value because foreign bans did not apply to workplaces in the United States and would be confusing to the jury. The motion is granted. Defendants' MIL No. 2 Defendant Honeywell seeks to preclude a 1986 EPA document entitled “Guidance for Preventing Asbestos Disease Among Auto Mechanics” as irrelevant, hearsay, unscientific, and unduly prejudicial. If Defendant contends it did not know about ...

Excerpt: ...r and corporations: The trial court determines the scope of voir dire and will give the attorneys the rules for that trial court. If any attorney asks inappropriate questions during voir dire, the other side should object at that time. A motion in limine is not the proper place to define the questions that can and cannot be asked in voir dire. The motion is denied without prejudice to objections at trial. (b) Sympathy: Plaintiffs cite no law proh...

Excerpt: ...the military. This motion is deemed made and denied pursuant to the July 8, 2022 CMO. Plaintiff did not show good cause to depart from that order. The motion is denied without prejudice to objections at trial. Defendants' MIL No. 1 Defendant Honeywell moves to exclude all references to foreign bans on the importation of chrysotile asbestos. Plaintiff did not show any defendant was aware of a foreign ban on chrysotile asbestos or the reasons why t...

Excerpt: ...d request for punitive damages. A. Objections Plaintiff's Objections: The court did not rely on this document. Defendant's Objections: Overruled B. Summary Judgment A defendant seeking summary judgment must “conclusively negate[] a necessary element of the plaintiff's case, or . . . demonstrate[] that under no hypothesis is there a material issue of fact that requires the process of trial.” ( Guz v. Bechtel Nat. Inc. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 317, 33...

Excerpt: ... of tax returns, which are privileged. Plaintiff did not waive his privacy rights in his tax return by suing for damages. Information about Plaintiff's income can be obtained from sources other than his tax returns, for example, from the financial documents Plaintiff gave Nationwide Tax Consultants. Nos. 6, 7: Denied. These requests seek all financial documents, including tax returns and other tax documents, pertaining to Plaintiff and his busine...

Excerpt: ...On October 18, 2023, the court granted the motion for preference and set a February 13, 2024 trial date. On December 13, 2023 Dr. Ing. h.c.F Porsche AG filed a motion to quash service of summons, arguing it had not been served with the complaint and summons. On January 12, 2024, the court granted that motion, finding that Plaintiffs have not served Dr. Ing. h.c.F Porsche AG, which learned about the lawsuits only months after the purported service...

Excerpt: ...for punitive damages. A. Objections 1. Plaintiffs' Objections Nos. 1- 25: The court did not rely on this material. 2. Defendant's Objections to Bendon These objections are improper because Defendant did not identify the particular evidence to which it objects and it asserts the same boilerplate objections. For example, it objects to all of Exhibit C comprised of excerpts from Carroll Frizzell's deposition testimony without quoting or specifying t...

Excerpt: ...sue of fact that requires the process of trial.” (Guz v. Bechtel Nat. Inc. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 317, 334.) To show that a plaintiff cannot establish an element of a cause of action, a defendant must make the initial showing “that the plaintiff does not possess, and cannot reasonably obtain, needed evidence.” (Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 854.) “The defendant may, but need not, present evidence that conclusively ne...

Excerpt: ...plemental brief. A defendant may move to quash service of summons on the ground of lack of jurisdiction of the court over him or her. (Code Civ. Proc., § 418.10, subd. (a)(1).) The court may dismiss without prejudice the complaint in whole, or as to that defendant, when dismissal is made pursuant to Section 418.10. (Code Civ. Proc., § 581, subd. (h).) "A court of this state may exercise jurisdiction on any basis not inconsistent with the Co...

Excerpt: ...y element of the plaintiff's case, or . . . demonstrate[] that under no hypothesis is there a material issue of fact that requires the process of trial.” ( Guz v. Bechtel Nat. Inc. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 317, 334.) To show that a plaintiff cannot establish an element of a cause of action, a defendant must make the initial showing “that the plaintiff does not possess, and cannot reasonably obtain, needed evidence.” (Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield ...

Excerpt: ... is an equitable doctrine invoking the discretionary power of a court to decline to exercise the jurisdiction it has over a transitory cause of action when it believes that the action may be more appropriately and justly tried elsewher e.” (Stangvik v. Shiley Inc. (1991) 54 Cal.3d 744, 751.) When a court finds “in the interest of substantial justice an action should be heard in a forum outside this state,” it “shall stay or dismiss the ac...