Excerpt: ...ndum of Points and Authorities in Opposition 2. Plaintiff's Separate Statement in Opposition 3. Declaration of Eric A. Forstrom in Support of Plaintiff's in Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment REPLY PAPERS: 1. Defendants' Reply to Plaintiff's Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment BACKGROUND Plaintiff Sanjuanita Rios (Plaintiff) sued 1815 E. Workman, LLC. and John T. Tsai (“Defendants”) for negligence and premises liability. Plaintif...

Excerpt: ...FAC) alleges that on September 2, 2020, a tree owned, maintained, and controlled by Defendant impacted Plaintiffs' vehicle and caused a collision. The FAC alleges causes of action for negligence and premises liability and was brought against the City of Los Angeles, County of Los Angeles, and Does 1 to 50. On May 26, 2023, Plaintiffs added Defendant to the FAC as Doe 1. Defendant now demurs arguing that the negligence and premises liability cause...

Excerpt: ...WP), City of Bishop, and County of Inyo, and Does 1 to 45, for the death of their son, decedent Dutch Benjamin Abbott, after he came into contact with a carnivorous Naegleria fowleri amoeba in a man-made water pond. On January 8, 2021, LADWP filed an answer. The complaint alleges three causes of action: (1) statutory liability/dangerous condition on public property; (2) statutory liability/ breach of mandatory duties; and (3) negligence. LADWP no...

Excerpt: ...s. OPPOSITION PAPERS 1. Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment 2. Plaintiffs' Request for Judicial Notice 3. Plaintiff's Separate Statement of Disputed Material Facts and Additional Undisputed Material Facts in Opposition 4. Evidence in Support of Plaintiff's Opposition REPLY PAPERS 1. Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Reply to Plaintiff's Opposition 2. Response to Plaintiff's Statement of Additional Facts BACKGRO...

Excerpt: ... on his claims against Respondent City of Pico Rivera. Respondent opposes the motion. LEGAL STANDARD Pursuant to the Government Claims Act, a party with a claim for damages against a public entity must first timely present the claim directly with that entity.¿ The party may file a lawsuit only if the public entity denies or rejects the claim (either expressly or by operation of law). (Gov. Code §§ 905, 945.4; City of Ontario v. Superior Court ...

Excerpt: ...her venue is proper in Los Angeles County, (2) whether any objection regarding venue has been waived, and (3) whether the Court may consider and rule on the venue issue sua sponte without a motion by Defendant. LEGAL STANDARD Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 395(a), in an action for personal injuries, the “superior court in either the county where the injury occurs or the injury causing death occurs or the county where the defendants...

Excerpt: ..., and exclusively has represented Plaintiff since then. (Id.) On May 2, 2023, the parties entered into a settlement agreement and a settlement check was made payable to Plaintiff Melissa Rosapapan, McElfish Law Firm, and Panah Law Firm. D Hess Panah and McElfish have asserted a lien for their attorney's fees. (Motion at pg. 3.) Plaintiff asserts, through her counsel McElfish Law Firm, that D. Hess Panah has refused to endorse the settlement check...

Excerpt: ... October 5, 2023 by stipulation. On August 23, 2023, the Court granted Defendant's ex parte application and continued the trial to October 23, 2023 and the final status conference to October 9, 2023. Defendant now moves to continue trial to January 5, 2024 or later, and to continue all pre-trial and trial-related dates in accordance. In their notice of non-opposition, filed on September 15, 2023, Defendant asserts that Plaintiff is agreeable to t...

Excerpt: ...ral negligence and (2) motor vehicle. The Complaint alleges that on or about October 6, 2017, “Defendant owned and/or operated his/her vehicle negligently and carelessly, proximately causing property damage and personal injury to Plaintiff.” (Complaint, p. 4 (Attachment to Complaint).) On May 11, 2020, the Court ordered this case (19STCV25342) and 19STCV34112 related within the meaning of California Rules of Court, rule 3.300(a). On June 25, ...

Excerpt: ...ctions. No opposition has been filed. LEGAL STANDARD Any party may obtain discovery, subject to restrictions, by taking the oral deposition of any person, including any party to the action. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.010.) A party desiring to take an oral deposition shall give a notice in writing which states the specification of reasonably particularly of any materials to be produced by the deponent. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.220, subd. (a)(4).) ...

Excerpt: ...t of Undisputed and Material Facts 4. Target Corporation's Index of Exhibits OPPOSITION PAPERS 1. None filed. REPLY PAPERS 1. None filed. BACKGROUND On December 14, 2021, Plaintiff Gladys Sepedjian filed a complaint against Defendant Target Corporation, Mario Rodriguez, and Does 1-100 for injuries allegedly caused by a ball that was in the aisle of Defendants' premises. Defendant Target Corporation (Target) now moves for summary judgment, or in t...

Excerpt: ...tion against Defendants Marco Antonio Luevano and J.B. Hunt Transport, Inc., based on an incident in which Defendants' vehicle struck Decedent Chen Hsueh Chang at an intersection, eventually resulting in Decedent's death. On May 19, 2023, the Court granted in part Defendants' motion for summary adjudication as to the following: - First Cause of Action – Negligence as to Plaintiffs - Second Cause of Action – Negligent Hiring, Retention or Supe...

Excerpt: ...ion for Summary Judgment 2. Declaration of David K. Dorenfeld and Exhibits 3. Plaintiff's Separate Statement of Genuine Issues of Disputed Material Facts REPLY PAPERS 1. Reply Brief 2. Evidentiary Objections to Plaintiff's Evidence 3. Reply to Opposition to Defendant's Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts and Supporting Evidence; Response to Plaintiff's Additional Facts BACKGROUND On October 12, 2021, Plaintiff Clayton Hosmann filed a ...

Excerpt: ...intiff's complaint. Defendants argue that Plaintiff has failed to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action for the following: - First Cause of Action for Battery - Third Cause of Action for Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress - Fourth Cause of Action for Fraudulent Concealment - Fifth Cause of Action for Private Nuisance - Sixth Cause of Action for Public Nuisance - Seventh Cause of Action for Breach of Contract Defendants ...

Excerpt: ...her legal representative from a judgment, dismissal, order, or other proceeding taken against him or her through his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.” In addition, a court must vacate a default or dismissal when a motion for relief under Section 473, subdivision (b) is filed timely and accompanied by an attorney's sworn affidavit attesting to the attorney's mistake, inadvertence, surprise or neglect “unless the co...

Excerpt: ...ven Jagoda Co. Tr.; Justin K. Jagoda; Steven D Co. Tr and Justin Jagoda Trust; and Does 1 to 50, claiming the assault took place on Defendants' property (“the Property”). On April 18, 2023 Plaintiff took the deposition of Justin Jagoda (Defendant) and asserts that Defendant improperly refused to answer certain questions about the owners of the property by his counsel's direction. Plaintiff now moves to Compel Answers to Questions Not Answered...

Excerpt: ...t amended complaint (FAC) was filed on February 10, 2022. The answers were filed March 17, 2022. The trial date initially set for May 2, 2023 was continued to October 24, 2023. On May 19, 2023, Defendants moved for summary judgment with a hearing date of May 20, 2024, the earliest available date. Defendants now move to continue trial so that their motion for summary judgment can be heard before trial. In the alternative, Defendants ask the Court ...

Excerpt: ...e §11580.2(f)(2) and Miranda v. 21 st Century Ins. Co. (2004) 117 Cal.App.4th 913, 921-926. Petitioner filed the petition to bring before the court a discovery dispute between parties to the pending Uninsured Motorist Arbitration (the “Arbitration”). The arbitration and this petition arise from an automobile collision that occurred on September 15, 2020. The at-fault driver, Yaris Rodriguez, was operating her vehicle without adequate insuran...

Excerpt: ...ortions of the complaint: 1) Page 2 lines 24-25: “UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF A SUBSTANCE, (despicable conduct)” 2) Page 2, line 27: “UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF A SUBSTANCE, (despicable conduct)” 3) Page 2, line 28: “be under” and page 3 lines 1: “the influence and” 4) Page 5, line 8: “6. For punitive damages” No opposition has been filed. LEGAL STANDARD California law authorizes a party's motion to strike matter from an opposing party...

Excerpt: ...laintiff argues the subpoena for his employment records is (1) an invasion of his privacy; (2) or in the alternative, overly broad in scope. LEGAL STANDARD Code of Civil Procedure § 1987.1(a) provides: If a subpoena requires the attendance of a witness or the production of books, documents, electronically stored information, or other things before a court, or at the trial of an issue therein, or at the taking of a deposition, the court, upon mot...

Excerpt: ...omplaint was filed on August 4, 2022. On March 15, 2023, LACMTA was served with the summons and complaint. On June 14, 2023, LACMTA filed an answer. On June 15, 2023, LACMTA filed a cross-complaint against the City of Los Angeles (the City). On June 28, 2023, the City filed a cross-complaint against LACMTA. On July 18, 2023, LACMTA filed an answer to the cross-complaint. On August 18, 2023, LACMTA brought this motion to continue trial. The City d...

Excerpt: ...oved to continue trial, arguing that Defendant had not been served. On June 12, 2023, Plaintiff filed proof service of the summons and complaint on Defendant. On June 27, 2023, Defendant filed their answer. Trial is set for December 15, 2023. Plaintiff moves to continue the trial to at least December 27, 2024 in order for discovery to occur. ANALYSIS Legal Standard “Continuances are granted only on an affirmative showing of good cause requiring...

Excerpt: ...aint was filed on January 29, 2021. The first amended complaint (FAC) was filed on July 14, 2021 against the City of Los Angeles (the City) and Does 1 to 100. On July 22, 2021, Defendants were substituted for Does 51 and 52. On September 3, 2021, the City filed a cross-complaint against ROES 1 to 20. On September 21, 2021, Defendants filed an answer to the FAC and a cross- complaint against the City and ROES 1 to 100. The City filed an answer to ...

Excerpt: ...pposition was filed. ANALYSIS A demurrer is a pleading used to test the legal sufficiency of other pleadings. It raises issues of law, not fact, regarding the form or content of the opposing party's pleading (complaint, answer or cross-complaint). (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 422.10, 589; see Donabedian v. Mercury Ins. Co. (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 968, 994.) It is not the function of the demurrer to challenge the truthfulness of the complaint; and for pur...

Excerpt: ... Plaintiff filed their First Amended Complaint. On August 2, 2023, Plaintiff moved to compel the deposition of Non-Party Google LLC's (Google) Person Most Knowledgeable. Plaintiff asserts that he properly served a valid deposition subpoena for personal appearance with production of records on Google LLC, who refused to appear. LEGAL STANDARD Code of Civil Procedure § 2025.450(a) provides, “If, after service of a deposition notice, a party to t...