Excerpt: ... 17CECG01691 as the lead case. All hearing dates currently scheduled in case number 17CECG02981 are ordered vacated. An Order to Show Cause re: Service is scheduled in Department 404 on July 12, 2018 at 8:30 a.m. Explanation: Rule 3.350 of the California Rules of Court governs the procedure to be used when filing a motion to consolidate. The motion must: (a) list all named parties in each case, the names of those who have appeared, and the names ...

Excerpt: ...strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) action. (Code Civ. Proc. §425.16.) Defendants' demurrer is ordered off calendar as moot. Plaintiff's attempted “discovery motion” is ordered off calendar, since Plaintiff did not obtain a hearing date for this motion. Defendants' evidentiary objections are overruled. Explanation: Anti‐SLAPP motion The anti‐SLAPP statute provides: “A cause of action against a person arising from any...

Excerpt: ...e initial verified responses to form interrogatories, set one, special interrogatories, set one, and request for production of documents, set one, are moot. Responses have been provided. The motion that the truth of the matters specified in the requests for admission, set one, be deemed admitted as to defendant Paul Evert's RV Country, Inc. is moot. Defendant provided response to the requests for admission that are in substantial compliance with ...

Excerpt: ... payable within 30 days to defendants' counsel of record, McCormick, Barstow, Sheppard, Wayte & Carruth, LLP. Should plaintiff fail to appear at the newly noticed deposition, defendants may file a motion for terminating sanctions without first complying with Fresno County Superior Court Local Rule 2.1.17. Explanation: There was no need for defendants to comply with Local Rule 2.1.17 and request a pretrial discovery conference before filing this m...

Excerpt: ... the “Alternative Dispute Resolution Policy” (“ADR policy”), including the Spanish language versions of these documents, which shorten the timeframe to bring a claim to one year from the termination of employment, are deemed severed from those documents. To overrule all of plaintiff's evidentiary objections. Explanation: The moving party bears the burden of showing the arbitration agreement exists. (Code Civ. Proc. § 1281.2; Engalla v. P...

Excerpt: ...five‐ year trial date. Explanation: The court incorporates herein its ruling of May 9, 2017 for historical perspective. 1. CLASS CERTIFICATION a. Standards An agreement of the parties is not sufficient to establish a class for settlement purposes. There must be an independent assessment by a neutral court of evidence showing that a class action is proper. (Luckey v. Superior Court (2014) 228 Cal.App.4th 81 (rev. denied); see also Newberg, Newbe...

Excerpt: ...tlements, and (2) equitable sharing of costs among the parties at fault. (Tech‐Bilt v. Woodward‐Clyde & Assoc. (1985) 38 Cal.3d 488, 494.) The standard is whether the amount of the settlement is within the “reasonable range” or “ballpark” of the settling tortfeasor's proportionate share of comparative liability for the plaintiff's injuries. (Id. at. p. 499.) Where a motion for determination of good faith settlement is contested, the m...

Excerpt: ...gations shall be in boldface. Explanation: Demurrer for Uncertainty: Defendant first demurs to the complaint for uncertainty on the ground that the causes of action in the caption of the complaint do not match the numbers of the claims in the body of the complaint, and the causes of action do not specify against which defendant they are alleged. However, courts look with disfavor on demurrers for uncertainty and will not sustain them unless the c...

Excerpt: ... which to cut off the right to file cross‐complaints bringing in new parties without permission of court.” (Loney v. Superior Court (1984) 160 Cal.App.3d 719, 723.) Where a party files a cross‐complaint after the first trial date has been set, the cross‐complaint is subject to a motion to strike. (Code Civ. Proc. §436(b); Loney, supra, 160 Cal.App.3d at p. 724.) Leave of court is required to file a cross‐complaint, or amended cross‐c...

Excerpt: ...be entitled to a hearing on the issue of the good faith of a settlement entered into by the plaintiff or other claimant and one or more alleged tortfeasors or co‐obligors, upon giving notice in the manner provided in subdivision (b) of Section 1005.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 877.6(a)(1).) “The issue of the good faith of a settlement may be determined by the court on the basis of affidavits served with the notice of hearing, and any counter affid...

Excerpt: ...r proceeding or by any other transfer of an interest. The action or proceeding may be continued in the name of the original party, or the court may allow the person to whom the transfer is made to be substituted in the action or proceeding." Here, the moving party presented evidence that it is the assignee of the claim. No opposition was filed to the motion. The moving party may be substituted in as the plaintiff in this action. The motion is...

Excerpt: ...r. On April 28, 2016, pursuant to an “Order to Show Cause” hearing, the Court dismissed the case without prejudice. Plaintiff now moves to set aside the dismissal on the ground it is void for lack of jurisdiction and notice. As of June 8, 2018, no opposition to the motion had been filed. The general rule is that the filing of a notice of appeal divests subject matter over any matter embraced in or affected by the appeal during the pendency of...

Excerpt: ....4th 826, 850.) Only then does the burden of production shift to the party opposing summary judgment, who is then subject to its own burden of production to make a prima facie showing that a triable issue of material fact exists. (Id.) If the moving party fails to meet this burden of production, the opposing party has no evidentiary burden to even oppose the motion. “[T]here is no obligation on the opposing party . . . to establish anything by ...

Excerpt: ...the moving party establishes that there is no issue of fact to be tried.” (Buehler v. OregonWashington Plywood Corp. (1976) 17 Cal.3d 520, 526.) The affidavits of the moving party are strictly construed, while those of the opposing party are liberally construed. (Ibid.; Huynh v. Ingersoll‐Rand (1993) 16 Cal.App.4th 825, 830.) A defendant moving for summary judgment bears the initial burden of making a prima facie showing of the nonexistence o...

Excerpt: ...ng parties, seek approval of a settlement as a Private Attorney General Action (“PAGA”), pursuant to California Labor Code section 2698 et seq. Plaintiffs appear to be correct in asserting that the legislature did not provide any guidance to the courts in terms of reviewing a PAGA settlement. (See Labor Code § 2699 et seq.) While PAGA claims are procedurally distinct from class action claims, there are similarities in the two in terms of a c...

Excerpt: ...e a separate document and will be signed at the hearing. Explanation: This motion is brought under Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6 (“Section 664.6"). In pertinent part, Section 664.6 provides as follows: “If parties to pending litigation stipulate, in a writing signed by the parties outside of the presence of the court . . . for settlement of the case . . . the court, upon motion, may enter judgment pursuant to the terms of the sett...

Excerpt: ...� subject to the demurrer or motion. (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 430.41(a), 435.5(a).) Both statutes clearly require the parties to “meet and confer in person or by telephone.” (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 430.41(a), 435.5(a).) The moving party is required to file a declaration stating either of the following: (A) The means by which the [demurring or moving] party met and conferred with the party who filed the pleading . . . , and that the parties did not...

Excerpt: ...he court grants defendant twenty days within which to comply with the statutes. Defendant must meet and confer “in person or by telephone” with plaintiff regarding the issues raised by the demurrer and motion to strike, or attempt to do so and provide sufficient evidence of the attempt and plaintiff's failure to meet and confer in good faith. If the parties cannot agree on the purported deficiencies in the complaint, defendant may file a new ...