Excerpt: ... to the Estate of Timothy Swihart, Deceased (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) NOTICE: OK RELIEF REQUESTED: Moving Defendants demur to the second, third, and fourth causes of action in Plaintiffs' complaint. Moving Defendants also seeks an order striking Plaintiffs' references to punitive damages and attorney fees from the complaint. TENTATIVE RULING: The demurrer is sustained as to Plaintiffs' second and fourth causes of action and overruled as to...

Excerpt: ...”), Set Two, Nos. 11–15 (as to Defendant David M. Robinson) and Nos. 34–49 (as to Defendant Jay William Smith), within 10 calendar days. Plaintiff further requests monetary sanctions to be imposed against each Defendant and their counsel in the amount of $2,310.00. TENTATIVE RULING: The motions are granted. Defendants to provide further code-compliant responses to Plaintiff's second set of RFPs, Request Nos. 11–15 (as to Defendant David M...

Excerpt: ...der compelling Plaintiff to provide further responses to Moving Defendant's Form Interrogatories, Set One, No. 12.2. Moving Defendant further requests that the Court order monetary sanctions against Plaintiff and her counsel in the amount of $3,472.35. TENTATIVE RULING: The motion is granted. Plaintiff is ordered to serve further responses to Moving Defendant's Form Interrogatories, Set One, No. 12.2, within 20 days. The Court imposes sanctions a...

Excerpt: ...LING: The demurrer is overruled. Defendants to file their answer to Plaintiff's complaint within 30 days. BACKGROUND This is a nuisance action brought by Plaintiff, the County of Los Angeles, on behalf of itself and the public, against Defendants, who own and operate certain real property located at 13025 Sierra Highway, Santa Clarita, CA 91390 and 13036 Chrisco Street, Santa Clarita, CA 91390. Plaintiff alleges that it has received numerous neig...

Excerpt: ...cuments (“RFPs”), Set One. Plaintiffs further request monetary sanctions to be imposed against Defendant and its counsel in the amount of $3,541.75. TENTATIVE RULING: The motion is denied. The Court imposes sanctions against Plaintiffs' counsel in the amount of $300.00. Plaintiffs are reminded to review the 5/3/19 First Amended General Order Re Mandatory Electronic Filing for Civil. When e-filing documents, parties must comply with the “TEC...

Excerpt: ...��70 within 10 calendar days. Plaintiff further requests monetary sanctions to be imposed against Defendant and its attorneys in the amount of $3,180.50. TENTATIVE RULING: The motion is granted. Defendant to provide further code-compliant responses to Plaintiff's first set of RFPs, Request Nos. 1–70 within 30 days. The Court imposes sanctions against Defendant in the amount of $790.00. The parties are reminded to review the 5/3/19 First Amended...

Excerpt: ...DICIAL NOTICE: Defendant/Cross-ComplainanYs request for judicial ANALYSIS legal Standard notice is granted. The court may, upon a motion, or at any time in its discretion, and upon terms it deems proper, strike any irrelevant, false, or improper matter inserted in any pleading. (Code Civ. Proc., S 436, subd. The court may also strike all or any part of any pleading not drawn or filed in conformity with the laws of this state, a court rule, or an ...

Excerpt: ...: Defendant General Motors, LLC (“Defendant”) NOTICE: ok¿¿ RELIEF REQUESTED: Orders compelling Defendant to provide further responses to the following discovery requests within ten calendar days: · Plaintiff's Form Interrogatories, Set One, Nos. 15.1 and 17.1; · Plaintiff's Requests for Production of Documents, Set One, Nos. 1, 2, and 4–17; · Plaintiff's Requests for Admission, Set One, Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 8, and 12; and · Plaintiff's Sp...

Excerpt: ...ING: The unopposed motion is granted. Defendant to separately file its FAXC within 20 days of this hearing. Defendant is reminded to review the 5/3/19 First Amended General Order Re Mandatory Electronic Filing for Civil. When e-filing documents, parties must comply with the “TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS” which are set forth at page 4, line 4 through page 5, line 12 of the Court's 5/3/19 First Amended General Order Re Mandatory Electronic Filing for...

Excerpt: ...ing Defendants also move to strike various provisions contained therein. TENTATIVE RULING: The demurrer is overruled, and the motion to strike is denied. Moving Defendants shall file and serve an answer to Plaintiff's complaint within 30 days. BACKGROUND This is a contractual fraud action in which Plaintiff alleges that he and nonmoving defendant Sam Churukian were the sole shareholders of nonmoving defendant American Cigar Smoke, LLC (the “Com...

Excerpt: ...entitled to a judgment against Defendant in the amount of $52,597.45. Plaintiff is reminded to review the 5/3/19 First Amended General Order Re Mandatory Electronic Filing for Civil. When e-filing documents, parties must comply with the “TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS” which are set forth at page 4, line 4 through page 5, line 12 of the Court's 5/3/19 First Amended General Order Re Mandatory Electronic Filing for Civil (particularly bookmarking decla...

Excerpt: ...verruled. Moving Defendant to file and serve its answer to Plaintiffs' FAC within 30 days. REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE: Moving Defendant's request for judicial notice is denied. Moving Defendant is reminded to review the 5/3/19 First Amended General Order Re Mandatory Electronic Filing for Civil. When e-filing documents, parties must comply with the “TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS” which are set forth at page 4, line 4 through page 5, line 12 of the ...

Excerpt: ...sustained with 20 days leave to amend. BACKGROUND On 9/12/23, Moving Defendant filed the instant demurrer to Plaintiff's FAC. On 10/25/23, Plaintiff filed their opposition. On 10/31/23, Moving Defendant filed its reply. ANALYSIS Moving Defendant again¿demurs to Plaintiff's third cause of action on the bases that Plaintiff fails¿to allege facts sufficient to¿state¿a cause of action for negligent repair, and the claim is barred by the economic ...

Excerpt: ...amount of $23,846.23. TENTATIVE RULING: The motion is granted in part. Plaintiff is awarded $15,666.23 in attorney fees and costs. The request for a “judgment” is denied. The parties or party may file a separate request for a judgment, or the parties may file a stipulated judgment consistent with the Court's ruling. EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS: Defendants' evidentiary objections are overruled. Plaintiff is reminded to review the 5/3/19 First Amend...

Excerpt: ... (2) monetary sanctions against Yamin and M&Y in the amount of $1160.56. TENTATIVE RULING: The motion is granted in part. Nonparty deponent M&Y Personal Injury Lawyers is ordered to produce any additional documents and/or communications in connection with Plaintiff's claims in the instant action, by delivering a true, legible, and durable copy of the business records described in the 7/10/23 Deposition Subpoena for Production of Business Records,...

Excerpt: ... RELIEF REQUESTED: Moving Defendant demurs to the third and fourth causes of action in Plaintiff's complaint. ¿ TENTATIVE RULING: The demurrer is overruled. Moving Defendant to file and serve its answer to Plaintiff's complaint within 30 days. BACKGROUND¿ This is a childhood sexual assault action in which Plaintiff alleges that in 1994, when he was 15 years old, he was sexually assaulted by nonmoving defendant Doe 4, who was Plaintiff's youth g...

Excerpt: ...quests for Admission (“RFAs”), Set One, propounded on Defendant, be admitted. Plaintiff further requests that the Court order monetary sanctions against Defendant in the amount of $360.00. TENTATIVE RULING: The unopposed motion is granted. The Court deems each of Plaintiff's RFAs, Set One as admitted. The Court imposes sanctions against Defendant in the amount of $360.00. Defendant is reminded to review the 5/3/19 First Amended General Order ...

Excerpt: ...TIVE RULING: The demurrer is sustained with 30 days leave to amend. BACKGROUND On 3/29/23, Plaintiff filed its first amended complaint (“FAC”), alleging the same causes of action against Defendant. On 4/28/23, Defendants filed their answer and cross-complaint, alleging (1) Malicious Prosecution; and (2) Breach of the Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing. On 7/21/23, Plaintiff filed the instant demurrer against Defendants' cross-com...

Excerpt: ...nsome and oppressive insofar as they are repetitive, duplicative, cumulative, and expensive, and that Plaintiff is excused from responding to them. TENTATIVE RULING: The motion is denied. Plaintiff is ordered to serve her responses to all outstanding discovery requests propounded by Defendant within 30 days. The Court imposes monetary sanctions against Plaintiff in the amount of $100.00, payable within 60 days. Defendant is reminded to review the...

Excerpt: ...at he was injured by the content of the film "Avatar. The Way of Water ("Avatar 2"), which he viewed on 12/16/22. On 12/19/22, Plaintiff filed his complamt against Defendant in a related case, LASC Case No. 22CHCV01431 ("Cho I"). On 6/23/23, the Court sustained Defendant's demurrer against Plaintiffs first amended complaint mthout leave to amend. On 6/26/23, Plaintiff filed the instant complaint against Defendant On 7/31/23, Defendant filed the i...

Excerpt: ...of Documents (“RFPs”), Set One, Nos. 1–3, 7–9, 12, 18, 20, 24, 26, 32, 37, 40, 43, 46, 50, 52, 58, 63, 66, 69, 70, 73, 81, 88, 93, 95, 96, 105, 113–119, and 123 within 10 calendar days. TENTATIVE RULING: The motion is granted. Defendant to provide further code-compliant responses to Plaintiffs' first set of RFPs, Request Nos. 1–3, 7–9, 12, 18, 20, 24, 26, 32, 37, 40, 43, 46, 50, 52, 58, 63, 66, 69, 70, 73, 81, 88, 93, 95, 96, 105, 1...

Excerpt: ...nt within 30 days. Defendant is reminded to review the 5/3/19 First Amended General Order Re Mandatory Electronic Filing for Civil. When e-filing documents, parties must comply with the “TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS” which are set forth at page 4, line 4 through page 5, line 12 of the Court's 5/3/19 First Amended General Order Re Mandatory Electronic Filing for Civil (particularly bookmarking declarations and exhibits). (CRC 3.1110(f)(4).) Failure ...

Excerpt: ...a. Overruled as to Defendant's second cause of action; b. Sustained as to Defendant's fifth, seventh, and eighth causes of action without leave to amend; and c. Sustained as to Defendant's first, third, fourth, and sixth causes of action with 30 days leave to amend. Plaintiffs are reminded to review the 5/3/19 First Amended General Order Re Mandatory Electronic Filing for Civil. When e-filing documents, parties must comply with the “TECHNICAL R...

Excerpt: ...TATIVE RULING: The demurrer is sustained without leave to amend. BACKGROUND This action arises out of the alleged breach of two contracts entered into between Plaintiff and Defendants, wherein Plaintiff was to provide computer networking services to Moving Defendant, with the assistance of non-moving defendant Cabling Solutions Group, LLC (“CSG”) as its subcontractor. (SAC ¶ 8.) Plaintiff alleges that Defendants thereafter directly contracte...

Excerpt: ...��Defendants”) RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiffs Lorena Arredondo and Martin Arredondo (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) NOTICE: OK¿ ¿ RELIEF REQUESTED: An order granting summary judgment in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiffs. TENTATIVE RULING: The motion is granted. REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE: Defendants' request for judicial notice is granted as to Exhibit Nos. 1–4, 6–8, and 11–15, and denied as to Exhibit Nos. 5, 9–10, and 16–...