Excerpt: ...ld otherwise. That decision addressed “issues concerning the contractual duty to defend in a noninsurance context [italics in original].” (Crawford v. Weather Shield Mfg., Inc. (2008) 44 Cal.4th 541, 547.) Footnote 12 of the decision states that the issue of contractual liability for defense costs, as raised in a general contractor's cross‐complaints against subcontractors during construction litigation that has not been concluded, may be d...

Excerpt: ...e addressed at the same time in the motions and demurrers. The defendants raise several arguments in their demurrer. First, defendants argue that plaintiff lacks standing. “In general terms, in order to have standing, the plaintiff must be able to allege injury—that is, some ‘invasion of the plaintiff's legally protected interests.' (5 Witkin, Cal. Procedure (4th ed. 1997) Pleading, § 862, p. 320; see Code Civ. Proc., § 367 [‘Every ...

Excerpt: ...n it, examined the allegations of the FAC, not the allegations of the original complaint. CONTRA COSTA SUPERIOR COURT MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT: 33 HEARING DATE: 04/19/18 ‐ 9 ‐ Second Cause of Action, Intentional Misrepresentation: The demurrer to this cause of action is overruled. In challenging this cause of action, defendant cites the rule that fraud must be pleaded specifically and argues the FAC is insufficiently specific in explai...

Excerpt: ...The Crawford decision does not hold otherwise. That decision addressed “issues concerning the contractual duty to defend in a noninsurance context [italics in original].” (Crawford v. Weather Shield Mfg., Inc. (2008) 44 Cal.4th 541, 547.) Footnote 12 of the decision states that the issue of contractual liability for defense costs, as raised in a general contractor's cross‐complaints against subcontractors during construction litigation that...

Excerpt: ...ismissal was not in fact caused by the attorney's mistake, inadvertence, surprise or neglect.” In this instance, counsel fails to set forth any basis upon which, had he appeared at the hearing, a further extension of the deadline for service of a complaint filed January 9, 2017, would have been granted, given that a previous extension had been allowed. Plaintiff may appear (by telephone through Court Call) to address this issue ...

Excerpt: ...idable.” (Complaint, Par. 11.) The sole named defendant in the action is Alvernaz Partners, LLC, which purchased the property at the trustee's sale, but against whom plaintiff alleges no wrongful conduct. Plaintiff recorded a lis pendens. Alvernaz moves to expunge the lis pendens on the grounds that (1) it is invalid because plaintiff did not serve it on Alvernaz; and (2) plaintiff cannot show a probability of prevailing on the merits of the ac...

Excerpt: ... motion could have been filed at that time), it did respond (about a month late), and the parties engaged in some meet and confer efforts, which resulted in supplemental responses. While Sentinel may consider the responses to be wholly inadequate, especially given the provision in the statute that objections are waived by a failure to respond in a timely manner, the local rule exempts from the Discovery Facilitator Program only those circumstance...

Excerpt: ...ce. Given that, whether counsel for Bank of America's statement with respect to receiving the subpoena by mail is hearsay is immaterial. Second, Bank of America's contention that plaintiff has no cause of action, and specifically that whether Ms. Smith had authority to sign the documents is legally immaterial is not properly raised as an objection to discovery. The cases relied on by Bank of America concern circumstances where the court itself de...

Excerpt: ...p.4th 566, 604.) CONTRA COSTA SUPERIOR COURT MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT: 39 HEARING DATE: 04/16/18 ‐ 3 ‐ In this instance, Mr. Luria has not complied with the Court's January 9, 2018, order, either by submitting code‐complaint responses or paying the sanction award. (The Court notes that while Mr. Luria stated that he no longer has possession or control of certain documents, that statement, by itself is not sufficient. Code of Civil Pr...

Excerpt: ...s plaintiff wishes to plead have been known all along, so there is no prejudice. Prejudice requires more than the additional costs of defending against new facts and theories. (See Zellerino v. Brown (1991) 235 Cal.App.3d 1097, 1109 (Prejudice does not mean a result which is unfavorable, it means a result which is unfair); Gonzales v. Brennan (1965) 238 Cal.App.2d 69, 75 (“To be sure without the amendment he might have won his lawsuit; with it,...

Excerpt: ...ssal, separate from any formal order on the demurrer, and shall submit that proposed judgment to plaintiffs' counsel for approval as to form. The basis for the Court's ruling is as follows. A. Request for Judicial Notice. Defendant seeks judicial notice of the recorded deed of trust and assignment of deed of trust. This unopposed request is granted. (See, Scott v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (2013) 214 Cal.App.4th 743, 752‐761.) B. Individual Cau...

Excerpt: ...e BHGRE's present claim. Plaintiff Wells Fargo obtained a default judgment in this case against defendant Mason‐McDuffie in the amount of $54,420.68. Wells Fargo seeks to collect that judgment by levying on MasonMcDuffie's bank account at Union Bank. BHGRE, however, asserts in this motion that it has a superior right to the funds. It points out that nearly all the funds in the account come from an insurer's refund to Mason‐McDuffie of an over...

Excerpt: ... of several county recorder documents. This request is unopposed. The request is granted. Evid. Code §§ 452, 453. Setting Aside the Foreclosure Sale “A properly conducted nonjudicial foreclosure sale constitutes a final adjudication of the rights of the borrower and lender.” Moeller v. Lien (1994) 25 Cal.App.4th 822, 831. “As a general rule, a trustee's sale is complete upon acceptance of the final bid.” Nguyen v. Calhoun (2003) 105 Cal...

Excerpt: ...rnal failure. Defendant Sears Roebuck and Co. distributed the freezer and obtained it from defendant Midea. CSAA brings causes of action against Midea for strict liability, negligence, and breach of warranty. Midea moves for summary judgment on the basis that no evidence shows that a defect in the freezer in fact caused the fire. It also seeks to dispose of the breach of warranty claim based upon a lack of privity between it and CSAA's insured, M...

Excerpt: ...t 1:10 with Motion to Vacate filed 2/2/18 at 1:15.) Neither of these, however, is supported by any evidence or testimony under oath. A plaintiff seeking to vacate a default judgment on grounds such as these has both statutory and non‐statutory remedies. The former include remedies under Code of Civil Procedure §§ 473(b),(d) and 473.5. The nonstatutory remedy includes a suit in equity or a motion based on a claim of extrinsic fraud or mistake....

Excerpt: ... position to be able to do. Parish is no longer an employee of defendant District. Moreover, although defendant is understandably reticent concerning the circumstances as to the termination of Parish's employment, it is not difficult to infer (from the administrative leave that preceded the termination) that Parish may have left the District on less than friendly terms. Plaintiffs make no effort to explain how the District is supposed to be able ...

Excerpt: ...�employee) to engage defendant Rana as a broker to negotiate the Thekkeks' purchase of a 49% interest in Corona from the Ferrers. Having discussed the deal with the Ferrers, Rana engaged his long‐time attorney Sandbank to draft the deal documents. Then in 2014, Singh and Rana negotiated to buy the Thekkeks' interest in Corona. Again Rana arranged for Sandbank to draft the deal documents. The gist of the present lawsuit is the Thekkeks' allegati...

Excerpt: ...hich relief may be granted” is a procedural label used in federal court, not California court. The state‐court equivalents are a demurrer, or a motion for judgment on the pleadings (MJOP). (See Code of Civil Procedure §§430.10, 438.) Because defendant has filed a document captioned “Answer” (about which more shortly), the Court treats this as an MJOP. Second: The miscaptioning of defendant's motion is of little consequence to the outcom...

Excerpt: ...gh May, 2017 when her position was eliminated. She brings six claims related to her termination: 1) disability discrimination; 2) failure to accommodate a disability; 3) failure to engage in the good faith interactive process; 4) retaliation; 5) failure to pay wages due upon termination; and 6) wrongful termination. At the time of her hiring, plaintiff executed a document entitled the “Working Agreement” (Agreement). This 11‐page document i...

Excerpt: ...t, rule 3.1110, subd. (f); Local 3.42, subd. (3).) Plaintiffs' attorneys, who practice in the law firm CONTRA COSTA SUPERIOR COURT MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT: 33 HEARING DATE: 04/12/18 ‐ 13 ‐ JT Legal Group, APC, are hereby admonished that future failures to tab exhibits in this or other cases may result in an award of monetary sanctions, the disregard of non‐conforming documents, or both. 1. Irreparable Harm. In February 2018, defenda...

Excerpt: ...stee's sale, and the Ninth Cause of Action, for quiet title. These causes of action lack merit because plaintiff has failed to allege a tender of the sums due under the subject note and deed of trust, and has failed to allege facts showing a valid exception to the rule requiring CONTRA COSTA SUPERIOR COURT MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT: 33 HEARING DATE: 04/12/18 ‐ 12 ‐ tender. (See, Nguyen v. Calhoun (2003) 105 Cal.App.4th 428, 439 [the ten...

Excerpt: ...er Decl., ¶ 21 a, b, d, e, f; Pltf's Ex. 10, p. 151.) Telecare argues it is entitled to summary judgment for three reasons: (1) plaintiff's action against it is barred by the statute of limitations; (2) plaintiff cannot establish it was negligent; and (3) plaintiff cannot establish that any negligence by Telecare caused her injuries. CONTRA COSTA SUPERIOR COURT MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT: 33 HEARING DATE: 04/12/18 ‐ 4 ‐ 1. Statute of li...

Excerpt: ... may “deny leave when the proposed amendment or amended pleading is insufficient to state a cause of action or defense.” (Congleton v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. (1987) 189 Cal.App.3d 51, 62.) The Court notes a trial date of July 16, 2018, continued upon stipulation of the parties from November 22, 2017. While this motion for leave to amend is not brought on the “eve” of trial, discovery has been closed. The City also has a pending mot...

Excerpt: ...est the granting of Plaintiffs' motion then that party should follow the normal rules for contesting a tentative ruling. Although not raised by the parties, the Court notes that the moving party on this motion failed to comply with all the requirements in California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1324. The parties should comply with this rule, as well as all Rules of Court, at all times. There is “a policy of great liberality in permitting amendments t...

Excerpt: ...e of action subject to the requirements of this article, whether through oversight, inadvertence, mistake, neglect, or other cause, may apply to the court for leave to amend his pleading, or to file a crosscomplaint, to assert such cause at any time during the course of the action. The court, after notice to the adverse party, shall grant, upon such terms as may be just to the parties, leave to amend the pleading, or to file the cross‐complaint...