Excerpt: ...pose. The trial court's prior judgment was entered after Groth's motion for summary adjudication was granted on his breach of contract cause of action, followed by a bench trial on the remaining causes of action. It was then reversed on appeal last November. I. Motion for Restitution The Gilads argue that they opted to pay Groth pursuant to a judgment that should not have been entered, and accordingly they are entitled to the return of their mone...

Excerpt: ...earing that Thursday. As the Court pointed out, a reply here was due “not less than five days” before the hearing. Although Code of Civil Procedure section 12a allows an extra day to complete certain matters when the due date falls on a weekend or holiday, that section does not apply here. (Steele v. Bartlett (1941) 18 Cal.2d 573, 574 [section 12a does not apply to acts that must be “performed ‘not less' than or ‘not later' than a given...

Excerpt: ...iolation of Civil Code § 2924.17, violation of Civil Code § 2924, violation of Civil Code § 2924c, and Unfair Competition in violation of Business and Professions Code § 17200 et seq. ("UCL"). A temporary restraining order was issued on February 20, 2020 to prevent RTR from proceeding with a nonjudicial foreclosure sale of her residence, and on February 24, 2020, Plaintiff filed her motion for preliminary injunction supported by Donham's decl...

Excerpt: ...gton's California hotels since December 20, 2012. (Motion at 1:24‐26.) Remington opposes certification. The Court is inclined to grant certification in part. Parties are to appear at the hearing prepared to discuss appropriate limitations on the class definitions, as well as issues related to manageability. I. Background Remington manages eleven hotels in California. (Defendant's Response to Special Interrogatory No. 2, Ex. 5 to Boucher Decl.) ...

Excerpt: ...tion of California Unfair Competition law; (4) breach of contract; (5) negligent misrepresentation; (6) elder abuse; and (7) breach of fiduciary duty. CONTRA COSTA SUPERIOR COURT MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT: 33 HEARING DATE: 07/30/20 ‐ 17 ‐ Defendant demurs to all but Plaintiff's first cause of action pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 430.10(e). For the following reasons, the Demurrer is sustained, with leave to amend. Any amended co...

Excerpt: ...(1), arguing that defendants' motion is frivolous. That motion is scheduled to be heard on September 3, 2020. It is supported by a confusing document consisting of 48 numbered pages, with exhibits interspersed. Notwithstanding a footer that refers only to that motion, the document appears to contain the Memorandum of Points and Authorities filed in support of the CONTRA COSTA SUPERIOR COURT MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT: 33 HEARING DATE: 07/30/...

Excerpt: ...ured in two separate, otherwise unrelated auto accidents. The first occurred on May 10, 2018, in San Joaquin County. Defendant Vasquez, an employee of Advanced, was the other driver. The second accident occurred on May 7, 2019, in Contra Costa County. Defendant Antonio was the other driver. Guzman alleges that each of Vazquez and Antonio was negligent in their respective accidents. His complaint is very scanty in describing his injuries, but the ...

Excerpt: ...tion. Plaintiff may file and serve a second amended complaint by August 21. If she chooses not to do so, defendant's time to answer the surviving part of the FAC will run from then. Meet and Confer The Court stated on the prior demurrer that it was not satisfied with the attorneys' efforts to meet and confer. The Court remains unsatisfied this time around. Both sides' briefs reflect that inadequate dialog occurred about the subjects in this demur...

Excerpt: ...side from a footnote in the reply. Since Mapp did not address the promissory estoppel claim in his moving papers or offer any legal authorities in support of his position that there can be no claim for promissory estoppel against him, the motion for summary judgment is denied. Insurance Agent Liability Technically, Mapp's motion arguing that he cannot be liable as an agent of AAA was for summary judgment, not adjudication. However, both sides add...

Excerpt: ..., LLC in the amount of $422,157. The amount is the sum of unpaid rent ($35,317) and late fees ($39,229), damages for water damage to the Premises ($2,800), damage to the telecommunication system ($1,000), stolen furniture ($10,000), attorneys' fees to date ($233,811), and estimated attorneys' fees and costs through trial ($100,000). For the following reasons, the application is denied. Request for Judicial Notice Both parties' unopposed Requests ...

Excerpt: ...practices by defendant Wheels Financial Group, d/b/a Loan Mart (WFG), which were designed to deceive debtors into paying more money than they actually owed. On April 23, 2019, the Court partly granted and partly denied Wheels' motion to compel arbitration, granting it as to individual claims, denying it as to UCL claims, and staying arbitration pending resolution of the UCL claim. The parties ultimately negotiated a settlement, which included cha...

Excerpt: ...d previously and as recited by the Court of Appeal in Case No. A153576 in the First Appellate District, are that plaintiffs and defendants entered into an agreement in December 2015 for defendants to pay off a May 2012 Stipulated Judgment of $1.155 million in installment payments from December 5, 2015 to January 4, 2018, for a total CONTRA COSTA SUPERIOR COURT MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT: 33 HEARING DATE: 07/23/20 ‐ 22 ‐ reduced sum of $1...

Excerpt: ...UPERIOR COURT MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT: 33 HEARING DATE: 07/23/20 ‐ 18 ‐ The parties' unopposed requests for judicial notice are granted. The District's request for monetary sanctions is denied. The basis for this ruling is as follows. A. The Failure To Seek An Order For Publication. A‐1. Petitioner's Failure Violated The Statutory Scheme. The Court agrees with the District's argument that PG&E was required to seek an order for publi...

Excerpt: ...more than $5,000….” 2. Paragraph 15 page 4, lines 25‐27, “Defendants' [sic] conduct in breaching Section 1942.5 has been fraudulent, malicious, and oppressive….” 3. Plaintiffs' prayer for relief, page 5, line 4, “Punitive Damages pursuant to Civil Code Sections 1942.4 and 1942.5” Defendants move to strike the allegations regarding punitive damages on the ground the conclusory and vague allegations in the FAC are insufficient to su...

Excerpt: ...ndants' unopposed request for Judicial Notice of 15 USC § 1666 and 12 CFR § 202.12 is granted. Evid. Code §§ 452, 453. Factual and Procedural Background Stauffer applied to Discover Bank for a personal loan and entered into a written Loan Agreement with Plaintiff for the account number ending in 4366. UMF 1. Discover Bank disbursed the loan amount to Stauffer by check. UMF 2. Stauffer agreed to be bound by the terms and conditions of the Loan...

Excerpt: ...ailed to file an answer by the response deadline (September 23, 2019. Plaintiff filed a request for entry of his default the next day on September 24, 2019, and the clerk entered Banga's default that same date. Banga filed a motion to set aside his default on October 2, 2019. Banga's motion is supported by a declaration attesting that he contacted counsel for Plaintiff on September 12, 2019, and explained that his younger brother had passed away ...

Excerpt: ...tion brought by Richard Stritt. It appears that Plaintiffs may also be seeking to amend the complaint to clean up a few other specific allegations. However, it does not appear that these additional allegations are needed unless the Court permits the new punitive damages allegations. If Plaintiffs are seeking to make other amendments they failed to comply with all requirements set out in California Rules of Court (hereafter “CRC”), Rule 3.1324...

Excerpt: ...led late due to mistake on plaintiff's counsel's part, counsel has represented that the opposition brief was timely served. Defendants raise no objections on this basis and the Court has considered the opposition on its merits. A court assessing a demurrer accepts as true the facts pleaded in the complaint, but rejects contentions, deductions and conclusions of fact or law. (Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318; Aubry v. Tri‐City Hospital ...

Excerpt: ...of Mount Diablo, went wrong. Defendant Contra Costa Community College District, a public entity, owns, operates, maintain, and control Diablo Valley College. Prior to the incident the District organized regular events called “Club Day” at the DVC campus. Club Day is a recurring school‐sponsored event where different school clubs and other groups set up booths to give students information about the various organizations and opportunities. De...

Excerpt: ...hreaten to cause irreparable injuries, ones that cannot be adequately compensated in damages”]. See also, Tahoe Keys Property Owners' Assn. v. State Water Resources Control Bd. (1994) 23 Cal.App.4th 1459, 1471 [discussing “irreparable injury”].) If, as plaintiff contends, defendant Mehrzad Azari has caused Pine Hollow Enterprises to pay excessive attorney fees, this is an injury that can be adequately compensated by an award of monetary dam...

Excerpt: ...ttlement. The Court will consider the motions together. A. Background of the Case and Terms of Settlement This a PAGA case (not a class action), alleging violations of the Labor Code concerning a number of issues. The primary issue, at least based on the matters in the court file, concerns a “Pay Calculation Agreement,” under which salespersons paid on commission whose commission in a given pay period fell below minimum wage would be paid min...

Excerpt: ...iums associated with the adoption of alternative workweek schedules by defendants. Under IWC Wage Order 4‐2001, employees are entitled to overtime rate of pay for time worked over 8 hours in a day or over 40 hours per week. (Order 4, Par. 3(A).) This requirement does not apply, however, to “Alternative Workweek Schedules,” which permit working up to ten hours per day, up to 40 hours per workweek without payment of the overtime rate. (Id., P...

Excerpt: ...�SACC”) filed by Alamo Group, LLC (“Cross‐Complainant” or “Alamo Group”). The SACC alleges causes of action for (1) rescission; (2) negligent misrepresentation; (3) professional negligence; and (4) equitable indemnity. The Hites demurrer to the first and second causes of action pursuant to CCP § 430.10(e). For the following reasons, the Demurrer is overruled. CONTRA COSTA SUPERIOR COURT MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT: 33 HEARING DAT...

Excerpt: ...Global” or “Petitioner”). The Petition names 1827 H. Place, Inc. as a respondent as the real property in interest which filed a claim to the proceeds that was paid by Respondents. That party has not made an appearance in the action to date. For the reasons stated, the demurrer is sustained, without leave to amend. The Material Allegations of the First Amended Petition Global alleges it has a claim to excess proceeds of a tax sale of real pr...

Excerpt: ...of exposure to carcinogenic chemicals while working for BNSF and its predecessor, Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company. An action under the FELA may be filed in any state where a defendant railroad company is doing business when the action is filed. (45 U.S.C. § 56.) However, California permits a jurisdictionally proper action to be stayed or dismissed based on the doctrine of forum non conveniens if the court finds “that in the in...