Excerpt: ...ay. Instead, counsel has made what appear to be empty promises to comply. All of the motions on calendar this day are unopposed. Motion #1: This motion is actually several motions in one, but under the circumstances this Court will forgive the failure to tender proper motion fees. (See Govt. Code §70617.) This is a refiling of the motion previously filed with a defective notice. Although plaintiffs filed opposition to that motion, they did not o...

Excerpt: ...roperty”). Before the Court is the continued hearing on plaintiff's unopposed motion to consolidate this civil action with 21CV45366. As previously noted, both lawsuits involve claims of adverse possession to the same property by the same putative owners against many of the same defendants. At the prior hearing, this Court made the following salient observations: First, there was a due process concern regarding plaintiff's failure to serve Char...

Excerpt: ...that the pleading plaintiff wants judgment on is its complaint filed 05/12/21, though the motion makes repeated reference to defendant's answer filed 06/30/21. The request for judicial notice is granted pursuant to Evidence Code §§ 452 and 453. A statutory motion for judgment on the pleadings is similar to a demurrer, except that the motion (1) can be made at any time 30 days prior to the initial trial date, but (2) only after defendant has ans...

Excerpt: ...es was representing itself in the action. Attorney Jeffrey was not representing Pollock & James and had no obvious authority to file anything on behalf of Pollock & James, especially something as material as a dismissal of their claim. (See CRPC 1.2(a) and Maddox v. City of Costa Mesa (2011) 193 Cal.App.4th 1098, 1105.) Even though an attorney in the law firm of Pollock & James signed the Request for Dismissal, there is no indication that Attorne...

Excerpt: ...nly within the “four corners” of the pleading (which includes exhibits attached and incorporated therein) or at matters outside the pleading which are judicially noticeable under Evidence Code §§ 451 or 452. In general, a pleading is adequate if it contains a reasonably precise statement of the ultimate facts, in ordinary and concise language, and with sufficient detail to acquaint a defendant with the nature, source and extent of the claim...

Excerpt: ...me (see Minute Order dated 07/02/21), and at that time found “a reasonably possibility that Petitioner can state a good cause of action.” However, since that time, a curious wrinkle has come to light necessitating further briefing. On 05/07/19, 82% of the qualified electorate approved the Appaloosa Road Community Services District Measure B, which increased the annual parcel tax in the Appaloosa Zone from $75 to $175. The ballot itself identi...

Excerpt: ...ivate nuisance. Pursuant to CCP §§ 435 and 436, a party may move for an order striking from a pleading “any irrelevant, false or improper matter” or “any part of any pleading not drawn in conformity” with laws, rules or orders. A motion to strike is to be used sparingly, and only as is warranted to excision averments that have no basis in the action or which are not recoverable as a matter of law. See Ferraro v. Camarlinghi (2008) 161 C...

Excerpt: ... date for compliance on 08/30/21. Defendant did not timely (or ever) serve responses. (See Freshman Decl Para 3.) Pursuant to CCP §2033.280(b), the party propounding RFAs may “move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted, as well as for a monetary sanction.” The trial court “shall” grant the motion unless it finds that the party to whom the requests for ...

Excerpt: ...ure to include this language in the notice may be a basis for the Court to deny the motion.” Although defendant is representing himself, he is still required to adhere to all the procedural requirements for law and motion, including all local rules. Based on defendant's failure to include the required language, the motion is DENIED, without prejudice to refile, to the extent it otherwise is timely and appropriate pursuant to relevant statutes. ...

Excerpt: ...er “P&J”). According to the allegations of the operative pleading, both Callison and P&J had vested interests in the referenced real property transaction. On 10/06/21, new counsel for Callison filed a Request for Dismissal on behalf of P&J, despite there being no documentation in the court file that P&J ever retained Attorney Jeffrey in this action or that said counsel had in fact substituted as that party's representative. The dismissal was ...

Excerpt: ...ng party in a civil action may recover, as a matter of right, attorney's fees when authorized by contract or statute. The “prevailing party” is the party with a net monetary recovery or for whom judgment is entered. (CCP §1032(a)(4).) There is no question here that defendant is the prevailing party, having secured both a judgment in its favor (see 06/18/18 Judgment), as well as in the instant matter an unqualified affirmance before the Third...

Excerpt: ...s a desire to specify additional building standards. To amend a pleading already at issue, the sponsoring party is required first to seek leave of court by way of noticed motion. (CCP §473(a)(1).) Motions for leave are to follow the regular notice requirements contained in CCP §1005(b). Pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1324, the moving party must: a) Specify in the moving papers by page, paragraph, and line number the allegations p...

Excerpt: ..., plaintiffs commenced the within action, naming “Sherry Crum” as a codefendant. On 09/09/20, plaintiffs effectuated substituted service upon “Sherry Crum” by leaving a copy of the summons and complaint with “Thomas Crum (an occupant)”. On 10/27/20, plaintiffs filed and served a Request for Entry of Judgment against “Sherry Jeffcrum” to the same address used for substituted service; Default was entered. On 07/01/21, this Court –...

Excerpt: ... defective because there is no indication in the moving papers that petitioner served a copy of the motion and waited the required 21 days “safe harbor” before filing this motion. (See CCP §128.7(c)(1); Primo Hospitality Group, Inc. v. Haney (2019) 37 Cal.App.5th 165, 173‐174; Martorana v. Marlin & Saltzman (2009) 175 Cal.App.4th 685, 698.) The safe harbor period is mandatory, and the full 21 days must be provided absent a court order shor...

Excerpt: ...l be scheduled. According to plaintiffs' counsel, the parties also agreed that if the survey showed encroachments, “they would be removed.” On 05/21/19, defendant Carol Gordon passed away. The oral settlement was never reduced to writing. On 04/10/20, plaintiffs filed a “Creditor's Claim” in a related Heggstad petition for the ostensible purpose of protecting the oral settlement. (See 19PR8204.) On 05/04/20, the estate tendered to plainti...

Excerpt: ... provide defendant (homeowner) with landscape services for a fixed amount of $9,480.00. According to plaintiff, this was a heavily discounted estimate, offered on defendant's promise that she had more future projects. Apparently, those “other” projects never came to fruition, and the former working relationship degenerated. On 09/05/20, defendant filed a small claims action (apparently in Contra Costa or Alameda County) against plaintiff and ...

Excerpt: ...cial Notice is granted pursuant to Evidence Code Sections 452 and 453 as to all eight offered exhibits; see 18CV43734 and 19CV44032). (This is a renewed motion, the prior having been denied without prejudice for failing to comply with Local Rule 3.3.7.) Pursuant to CCP §405.30, anyone with an interest in real property may move a court for an order expunging a lis pendens. A court “shall” grant a motion to expunge if either of the following c...

Excerpt: ...erved upon defendant Requests for Admission, Set One, by regular US Mail at defendant's service address. Pursuant to CCP §§ 1013 and 2033.250, defendant had 35 days from the mailing to provide a verified written response. Defendant did not timely (or ever) serve responses. (See Kenosian Declaration, Paragraph 5.) Pursuant to CCP §2033.280(b), the party propounding RFAs may “move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the trut...

Excerpt: ...g Claim, (hereinafter referred to as “subject property”). Before the Court is an unopposed motion to consolidate this civil action with a nearlyidentical civil action filed by plaintiffs (21CV45366). Both lawsuits involve claims of adverse possession to the same property by the same putative owners against many of the same defendants. Both complaints were verified (though only the 2021 lawsuit was verified by both Gilbert and David). The case...

Excerpt: ...ere they are sued. Venue is not jurisdictional in the fundamental sense, though certain actions can “only” be brought in specific counties. The test largely begins with whether the main relief sought in the original operative pleading relates to rights in realty (local) or personalty (transitory). Venue is to be determined at the outset of the action based on the averments set forth in the operative pleading when the motion to transfer is fir...

Excerpt: ...s, and duplication. As an initial matter, through his support memorandum, Vorhees “requests that Special Master Sarah Burke manage both the Valley Springs and Voorhees matters.” (Support Memo at 6:16‐17.) Voorhees did not, however, include this relief, or the grounds therefore, in the notice of motion. As such, the matter is not properly before the Court through the present motion. (See CCP §1010: “the notice of a motion, other than for ...

Excerpt: ...ct discovery. Moving party has failed to comply with Local Rule 3.3.7, enacted January 1, 2018, in that the Notice of Motion does not include the mandatory language regarding the Court's tentative ruling system. Pursuant to said local rule, lack of compliance provides a specific ground to deny any such procedurally‐deficient motion. Based solely upon moving party's failure to comply with Local Rule 3.3.7, the motion is DENIED without prejudice ...

Excerpt: ...ion. A Plaintiff may only move for Judgment on the Pleadings pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 438, on grounds “that the complaint states facts sufficient to constitute a cause or causes of action against the defendant and the answer does not state facts sufficient to constitute a defense to the complaint.” (Cal Code Civ. Proc., § 438, subd. (c)(1)(A).) “The grounds for motion provided for in this section shall appear on the face...

Excerpt: ...ted, the Court finds that KDI is a suspended corporation. KDI appears to concede the point by failing to file an opposition to the motion. A suspended corporation may not prosecute or defend an action in a California court. (See Ransome‐Crummey Co. v. Super. Ct. (1922) 188 Cal. 393, 396‐97.) Based on the foregoing, the motion is GRANTED. The clerk shall provide notice of this ruling to the parties forthwith. PMZ is to prepare a formal Order p...

Excerpt: ...esponses are incomplete and evasive. Defendant further requests the Court impose monetary sanctions pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 2030.300 (d) and 2031.310 (h), against Plaintiff and his counsel in the amount of $500. Plaintiff's request for judicial notice is GRANTED. The Court takes judicial notice of the Complaint filed in this action. A. INTERROGATORIES A party propounding interrogatories has the burden of filing a motion to co...