Excerpt: ...Sixth Cause of Action for Wrongful Death is OVERRULED. Defendant California Department of State Hospitals (“CDSH”) moves for an order sustaining its demurrer to two of the causes of action alleged in the Complaint filed on November 15, 2022 by Plaintiff Rosela Lee (“Plaintiff”), an individual and as Successor-in- Interest to Victoria Jarvis, an individual, deceased (“Decedent”). CDSH demurs to the Fifth Cause of Action for Intentional...

Excerpt: ...unless otherwise noted. 2 Section 631, subdivision (b) provides that “[a]t least one party demanding a jury on each side of a civil case shall pay a nonrefundable fee of one hundred fifty dollars ($150), unless the fee has been paid by another party on the same side of the case.” “A party waives trial by jury...[b]y failing to timely pay the fee described in subdivision (b)....” (Id. at subd. (f).) With exceptions not relevant here, “[t...

Excerpt: ...andum filed February 6, 2023. Defendants are also granted leave to file additional declarations in support of their opposition. However, the Declaration of Adam K. Tanouye filed 5 February 6, 2023, will remain before the Court and the matters declared therein need not be reasserted. If Defendants file an amended opposition memorandum, then Plaintiffs may serve and file, no later than March 3, 2023, an amended reply memorandum of points and author...

Excerpt: ...tion brief, and any other evidence supporting the motion that has been previously served on Plaintiff. FMC is further ordered to comply with Local Rule 3.3. Defendant Ford Motor Company (FMC) moves for an order compelling the parties to arbitrate their claims and defenses in this action pursuant to the “Arbitration Provision included in the Sales Contract agreed to and signed by Plaintiff James Flat....” (Amended Notice of Motion at 1:4-17.) ...

Excerpt: ...iffs are ordered to pay to Defendants, care of their attorney of record, within 10 calendar days of notice of entry of this order, sanctions in the amount of $430. Defendants Suresh C. Malhotra and Lamya Malhotra (collectively, “Defendants”) move, pursuant to “the Civil Discovery Act,” for an order to compel Plaintiffs Raghu Sawkar and Sudha Sawkar (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) to (1) deem admitted the truth of facts to Defendants' Req...

Excerpt: ...55 Pickett Road, Calistoga, California (“Property”) that is the subject of the dispute between the parties (“subject hillside”). Hundred Acre is ordered to maintain and preserve existing vegetation on the subject hillside; if not already accomplished, to, within no more than 15 days of the date of this Order, install (a) fiber rolls at the top and toe of the subject hillside and across the face of the subject hillside at intervals no grea...

Excerpt: ...ting it leave to file a Complaint in Intervention. Galleron's proposed complaint asserts both direct claims by Galleron against Defendant Todd R. Code dba Strata Landscape Architecture (“Strata”) and claims as assignee of Plaintiff Ledcor Builders Inc. (“Ledcor”). The direct claims against Strata are for negligence and breach of contract. (Declaration of Matthew A. Richards (“Richards Decl.”) ¶ 11, Exh. 1 (¶ 42-55).) The moving part...

Excerpt: ...IONS TENTATIVE RULING: The motion is GRANTED IN PART. Defendant and attorney Kurt Harris are ordered to jointly pay additional monetary sanctions in the amount of $3,410, to Plaintiff, no later than 10 calendar days after notice of entry of the present order. As noted in the Court's January 4, 2022 Order Granting, in Part, Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Further Responses to Special Interrogatories and to Compel Answers to Deposition Questions and f...

Excerpt: ...Minute Order.) On February 6, 2023, at 1:08 p.m., Defendants filed a declaration stating that the Court set an abbreviated briefing schedule for the motion on January 27, 2023, that Defendant had not received Plaintiff's moving papers which were due by February 2, 2023, and, therefore, the motion should be denied. On February 6, 2023, at 4:47 p.m., Plaintiff filed additional briefing. The Court notes that the grounds for Plaintiff's motion, and e...

Excerpt: ...”), and Calistoga Ranch Club (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) move for judgment on the pleadings with respect to Defendants and Cross-Complainants AIG Specialty Insurance Company (“AIG”), Arch Specialty Insurance Company (“Arch”), Landmark American Insurance Company (“Landmark”), Homeland Insurance Company of New York (“Homeland”), and Interstate Fire & Casualty Company's (“Interstate”) (collectively, “Insurers”) two cau...

Excerpt: ...low further briefing as discussed herein. Plaintiffs Auberge Resorts LLC (“Auberge”), Calistoga Ranch Owner LLC, Calistoga Ranch Investors LLC, and Calistoga Ranch Club (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) move, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.310, for an order compelling further responses to Plaintiffs' Requests for Production of Documents and Tangible Things, Set One, to Defendants AIG Specialty Insurance Company (“AIG”), A...

Excerpt: ...s RLM Construction Services, Inc. (“RLM”) and Michael Reyes (“Reyes”) (collectively, “Defendants”). Third Street's Request for Judicial Notice of the court records (Exhibits 1-7) is GRANTED. Defendants' Request for Judicial Notice of corporate documents (Exhibits A-F) is DENIED on the grounds that none of the subject documents are relevant to the Court's resolution of the issues raised by the present motion. B. Parties' Contentions Th...

Excerpt: ...thout reasonable cause and without a good faith belief that there was a justifiable controversy against the City on the grounds that the City is entitled to its defense fees and costs because Plaintiff pursued a frivolous action against it.” (Notice at 1.) Plaintiff Savannah Ritter (“Plaintiff”) filed an opposition on December 15, 2022. The Proof of Service indicates it was timely served on the City on December 14, 2022; however, the City i...

Excerpt: ... Local Rule 2.9. The moving party is therefore directed to immediately provide, by telephone call AND email, the missing notice to opposing party/ies forthwith. The requirements for requesting oral argument under Local Rule 2.9 remain in effect. However, the Court may grant belated requests for oral argument or continuance of hearing, made by any party who represents it did not timely receive the required notice, regardless of whether or not movi...

Excerpt: ... of record are ordered to pay to Plaintiff, care of her counsel of record, no later than February 13, 2023, monetary sanctions in the amount of $2,660. The Court takes Plaintiff's request for issue sanctions under submission and CONTINUES this narrow aspect of the matter to March 3, 2023, at 8:30 a.m. in Dept. B. Plaintiff is granted leave file and serve, no later than February 21, 2023, a supplemental memorandum in support of the motion, of no m...

Excerpt: ...oves for an order requiring Plaintiff the People of the State of California (the People) to produce the person most qualified for deposition pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure, section 2025.010, and 2025.230.1 EVIG also requests that the Court impose monetary sanctions on Plaintiff for their refusal to produce such person. Plaintiff first argues that the motion is time barred pursuant to section 2025.480, and the line of caselaw interpreting tha...

Excerpt: ...rder and Defendants thereafter deny or delay coverage. A. Procedural Matters Defendants Hallmark Specialty Insurance Company (“Hallmark”), Western World Insurance Company (“Western World”), and AXIS Surplus Insurance Company (“AXIS”) (collectively, “Moving Defendants”) demur, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 430.10, subdivision (e), to the Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) filed by Plaintiff Spring Mountain Vineyards...

Excerpt: ...t to constitute a defense as required by [Code of Civil Procedure section] 430, subdivision (a), misstates facts or asserts an inapplicable defense.” (Notice at 1‐2.) As an initial matter, the Court notes that Code of Civil Procedure section 430 was repealed in 1972. That said, Plaintiff provides the applicable statutory grounds for her demurrer in her support memorandum. (See Support Memo at 1:19‐21, citing Code Civ. Proc., § 430.20.) The...

Excerpt: ... present ruling, to amend the Complaint to: 1) state a claim entitling them to the requested judicial decree, and 2) strike the word “may” from paragraph 21. 23 I. PROCEDURAL MATTERS Defendants Sheila Loewenstern and Norman Loewenstern demur to the first, second, and third causes of action asserted by Plaintiff through the verified complaint (Complaint) on a variety of grounds. Defendants' Request for Judicial Notice is DENIED in its entirety...

Excerpt: ...h the Complaint are based on acts by Defendants in furtherance of their free speech rights and are therefore subject to a special motion to strike. In making the following ruling, the Court did not rely on any of the portions of the Declaration of John S. Rueppel that are the subject of Defendants' evidentiary objections and on that basis, the objections are MOOT. “The special motion to strike established in section 425.16 may be used to attack...

Excerpt: ...ex parte application seeking an order to, among other relief, continue the deadline by which Plaintiffs were required to file the FAC. The matter came on ex parte on August 23, 2022, with Micheal A. Thompson appearing on behalf of Plaintiffs and Nathaniel Bigger appearing on behalf of Defendants. (See August 23, 2022 Minute Order (8/23 M.O.). The 8/23 M.O. states, “Counsel advised the Court that they had entered into a Stipulation as follows:.....

Excerpt: ...tiffs failed to allege facts sufficient to establish that either Jamcan or AC I enjoy standing to 6 maintain their claims and on the further grounds that the allegations of the first cause of action are fatally uncertain. While the moving party includes an abstract reference to the Court's tentative ruling system, he failed to include, in the notice of this motion, the Tentative Ruling notice explicitly required by Local Rule 2.9. The moving part...

Excerpt: ...2033.290, for an order compelling Cross‐Defendant Albert Czap to serve further verified responses, without objections, to Form Interrogatory Nos. 2.11, 12.4, 13.1, and 17.1 and Request for Admissions Nos. 1‐3, 9‐10, 13‐16, and 21‐26 on the grounds that Czap “has failed, without justification, to serve proper responses to these Discovery Requests.”1 (Notice of Motion at 2:4‐8, 11‐13.) Wang also moves, pursuant to sections 2023.01...

Excerpt: ...lfth, Thirteenth, Sixteenth, and Seventeenth Causes of Action in the Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) filed by Plaintiff Genevieve Walsh (“Plaintiff”). The moving party failed to include in the notice of this motion proper notice of the Court's tentative ruling system as required by Local Rule 2.9. Moving party is directed to immediately provide, by telephone call AND email, the missing notice to opposing party/ies forthwith. The requirem...

Excerpt: ...oes not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action because it is untimely under Probate Code section 9100. The moving party failed to include in the notice of this motion proper notice of the Court's tentative ruling system as required by Local Rule 2.9. Moving party is directed to immediately provide, by telephone call AND email, the missing notice to opposing party/ies forthwith. The requirements for requesting oral argument under L...