Excerpt: ... because Outsourcing is without counsel, and a corporate entity is not able t o represent itself in general litigation. (See Gamet v. Blanchard (2001) 9 1 Cal.App.4th 1276, 1284 n.5; CLD C o n s t . , I n c . v . C i t y o f S a n R a m on (2004) 12 0 Cal.App.4th 1141, 1145-1150.) The cross-defendants, Sanders Engineering Co. and Craig Jackson, hav e objected to this, via their demurrer to the operative pleading. (See Docke t #153). Outsourcing w...

Excerpt: ...h. The Court sets a post-Arbitration Review hearing at 8:30 a.m. on 8/7/18 in this Department. A party moving to compel arbitration under Code Civil Procedure section 1281.2 must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that: (1) the parties entered into a written agreement to arbitrate; (2) one or more of the claims at issue are covered by that agreement; and (3) the responding party refused a prior demand for arbitration under the agreement of ...

Excerpt: ...A related cause of action “means a cause of action which arises out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences as the cause of action which the plaintiff alleges in his complaint.” (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 426.10(c).) Here, Epson's proposed cross- complaint is compulsory. (See Time for Living Inc. v. Guy Hatfield Homes (1991) 230 Cal.App.3d 30, 38-39 [indemnity claims arise out of the same occurrences or series...

Excerpt: ...ction for cancellation of instruments. Also, the potential loss of unique property by way of a foreclosure sale constitutes irreparable harm. See, Evidence Code § 3387. Finally, the balance of harms favors plaintiff Moez, LLC. Prevailing party to give notice. Plaintiff SGFC, LLC's Request for Judicial Notice: Defendant SGFC, LLC requested that the court take judicial notice of the following documents in support of its opposition: Exhibit 1, Bank...

Excerpt: ...ourt days hereof Plaintiff is to file and serve a proposed Preliminary Injunction, for the Court's signature. The parties are to be prepared at the hearing on this matter to discuss an appropriate bond amount. ...

Excerpt: ...dmission, Set One, as Nissa n had failed to respond thereto. Motion 1 is GRANTED IN PART. Plaintiff asserts that Form Interrogatories (Set One), Special Interrogatorie s (Set One), and Requests for Production (Set One), were propounded to Plaintif f on 7/31/17. (Babbitt Decl., ¶ 3.) Nissan concedes that it failed to timel y respond thereto. (Leonard Decl. ¶ 2.) As responses were not timely provided , all objections were waived. (SeeC.C.P. §§2...

Excerpt: ...ts' motion for summary judgment is DENIED. The motion for summary adjudication is DENIED as to Issue Nos. 1-5. Hiring Defendants' objections are OVERRULED. Issue No. 1: Plaintiff Jason Leasure's cause of action for negligence is barred by Lab. Code, § 3602 Lab. Code, § 3602(a) provides (emphasis added): “Where the conditions of compensation set forth in Section 3600 concur, the right to recover compensation is, except as specifically provided...

Excerpt: ...ion The first cause of action is for conversion. Plaintiff's claim is based on an allegation that the defendants “breached” the “50% ownership written contract.” “A person may not ordinarily recover in tort for the breach of duties that merely restate contractual obligations. Instead, ‘courts will generally enforce the breach of a contractual promise through contract law, except when the actions that constitute the breach violate a so...

Excerpt: ...djudication as to all four issues and also DENIES the motion for summary judgment. A. 1st COA: Legal Malpractice DENIED as to Issues 1 and 2. Issue 1. Reid's cause of action for Legal Malpractice against Defendants is without merit as a matter of law because Reid is unable to establish any breach by Defendants of their duty of care. Issue 2. Reid's cause of action for Legal Malpractice against Defendants is without merit as a matter of law becaus...

Excerpt: ...her motion and her supporting papers by mail was January 12, 2018. Plaintiff's proof of service states that she served her motion and supporting papers by mail on January 15, 2018; Defendant argues that Plaintiff in fact did not serve her motion and supporting papers until January 16, 2018. Either day was insufficient. As a result, the hearing on Plaintiff's motion is continued to April 5, 2018 at 1:30 p.m. in Department C13. Defendant shall file...

Excerpt: ...s ordered stricken. Defendant Costco to submit a proposed judgment of dismissal within 10 days. The Motions by Attorney Robert D. Walters and Sassan Mackay to Withdraw as Counsel of Record For Client Laurencia Gonzales are GRANTED, effective upon the filing of the proof of service of the signed orders upon the client. Defendant moving party to give notice. ...

Excerpt: ...e. (B&P 6201(a); Jafari Decl. in support of Opposition, Paras. 4 and 5 and Ex. A thereto.) However, the arbitration provision here also requires binding arbitration before Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Service, which is valid and enforceable. (Ervin, Cohen & Jessup, LLP v. Kassel (2007) 147 Cal. App. 4th 821, 826- 827.) Plaintiff has not shown any grounds to deny enforcement of binding arbitration. Plaintiff Offices of Christopher K. Jafari,...

Excerpt: ...at agreement; and (3) the responding party refused a prior demand for arbitration under the agreement of the claims at issue. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1281.2; Villacreses v. Molinari (2005) 132 Cal.App.4th 1223, 1230.) If the moving party meets this burden, the burden shifts to the resisting party to prove by a preponderance of evidence a ground for denial (e.g., fraud or unconscionability). (Villacreses v. Molinari, supra, 132 Cal.App.4th at 1230.) ...

Excerpt: ...on for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint Against Defendants Orange County Sheriffs' Department, et al. Plaintiff Jerome Stark's motion for leave to file a third amended complaint is GRANTED. See, C.C.P. § 473(a)(1) and Morgan v. Superior Court (1959) 172 Cal.App.2d 527, 530. Also, leave to amend is favored even if trial must be continued. See, Honig v. Financial Corp. of America (1992) 6 Cal.App.4 th 960, 965. Challenges to the amended compl...

Excerpt: ... through 13, 15 through 19, 21, 23, 26 through 28, 33 through 35 and 46 from Defendant Sares Regis Management Company (Sares) and Defendant Greystar, L.P. (Greystar). Plaintiff also moves for sanctions against Sares and Greystar. The court has reviewed all of the materials submitted in connection with Plaintiff's eight discovery motions, including the parties' briefs, separate statements, correspondence, and the discovery requests and responses a...

Excerpt: ...s (Set Two): No. 17.1: No. 17.1(c): Further responses are required providing more specific information, e.g., the identity of those family members and or health care providers, if any, whom Plaintiff knows have knowledge. CCP 2030.220. Special Interrogatories: Nos. 2, 9, 10- 15 and 19- 27: No. 2: The Objection was appropriate. This Special Interrogatory referred to No. 1, which requested Plaintiff to list her health care provider for the past ten...

Excerpt: ...dmission, Set One, as Nissa n had failed to respond thereto. Motion 1 is GRANTED IN PART. Plaintiff asserts that Form Interrogatories (Set One), Special Interrogatorie s (Set One), and Requests for Production (Set One), were propounded to Plaintif f on 7/31/17. (Babbitt Decl., ¶ 3.) Nissan concedes that it failed to timel y respond thereto. (Leonard Decl. ¶ 2.) As responses were not timely provided , all objections were waived. (SeeC.C.P. §§2...

Excerpt: ...attorneys' lien has priority over the liens recorded by Liberty Mutual Insurance Company and Commercial Bank of California on November 10, 2016, and January 17, 2017, as a result of the federal bankruptcy proceedings. (Waltrip v. Kimberlin (2008) 164 Cal.App.4th 517, 525 [“An attorney's contractual lien is created and takes effect when the fee agreement is executed,” and, “[w]here there are competing liens, the general rule is that, all thi...

Excerpt: ...nses, without objections, to Defendant's Form Interrogatories (Set One), Special Interrogatories (Set One), and Request for Identification and Production of Documents (Set One) within 20 days of the notice of ruling. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300.) Failing to respond to an authorized method of discovery is a misuse of the discovery process. (Code of Civ. Proc. section 2023.010(d).) So, too, is disobeying a court order to provide discovery. (Id., ...

Excerpt: ...acturer of the table saw that injured plaintiff Sotelo. Co-defendant Garfield International Company, Inc. identified “Powermatic” as the manufacturer of the power saw that injured plaintiff Sotelo. Defendant JPW Industries, Inc. has now appeared claiming it was improper named as “Powermatic Tools,” but then defendant JPW presents evidence that it was not the manufacturer of the table saw that is the basis of plaintiff Sotelo's product lia...

Excerpt: ...ssuance or nonissuance of the injunction. “The trial court's determinatio n must be guided by a mix of the potential-merit and interim-harm factors; th e greater the plaintiff's showing on one, the less must be shown on the other t o support an injunction. Of course, the scope of available preliminary relief i s necessarily limited by the scope of the relief likely to be obtained at trial on th e merits. A trial court may not grant a preliminar...

Excerpt: ...en of demonstrating that the records he seeks to redact and/or have sealed is necessary to overcome the presumption that court records are to be publicly available. See, H.B. Fuller Co. v. Doe (2007) 151 Cal.App.4 th 879, 898. Prevailing party to give notice. Future Hearings: MSC: 7/13/18 8:30 am Trial: 8/13/18 8:30 am ...

Excerpt: ... demonstrate inadvertence , mistake, surprise or excusable neglect. Here, defendant explains that he is self-represented, and unfamiliar with ho w to respond to a lawsuit. He explains that he did come to court on two prio r hearing dates, and appears to be participating as best he can. He was unawar e of the risk of default, despite already making what amounts to a genera appearance in the action. See City of Riverside v. Horspool (2014) 22 3 Cal...

Excerpt: ... to section 425.16(e)(1). Defendant also argues that Plaintiff cannot prevail in his defamation suit against Defendant because the statements made in the Victim Impact Statement are privileged. For the following reasons, Defendant's motion is granted. Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 provides that “[a] cause of action against a person arising from any act of that person in furtherance of the person's right of petition or free speech under...

Excerpt: ...pinions of Dr. Schifrin, Plaintiffs' expert, are solely grounded in Plaintiffs' medical records. (See, Declaration of Barry S. Schifrin, ¶ 2.) These medical records are not submitted in support of the motion and, more importantly, are not properly authenticated to be used as proof of independent facts to support an expert opinion solely based thereon. See, Garibay v. Superior Court (2008) 161 Cal.App.4 th 735, 742 to 743. See, also, College Hosp...