Excerpt: ... Partially Lift Discovery Stay Moot based on above. ...

Excerpt: ... on their MSJ/MSA – they are no more persuasive now; Strike/Tax Costs Continue to 3/14/18 to allow Judgment to be entered. ...

Excerpt: ......

Excerpt: ... American Title Guar. Corp. (1963) 59 Cal.2d 618, 620. (“In the absence of some special agreement, statutory provision, or exceptional circumstances, attorney's fees are to be paid by the party employing the attorney.”) Plaintiff argues that based on Robinson Helicopter Co., Inc. v. Dana Corp. (2004) 34 Cal.4 th 979, its fees are recoverable as a result of its fraud claims. The issue in Robinson Helicopter was whether the economic loss rule a...

Excerpt: ...rties. If the party requesting that judicial notice be taken under Section 453 fails to provide the court with ‘“sufficient information,' the judge may decline to take judicial notice.” Commission Notes, Evid. Code, § 453. The court's electronic copy of the request for judicial does not indicate that the documents have been certified by the Recorder, or establish foundation by other means. ...

Excerpt: ...to the first, second, third, and fourth causes of action based on the defense of in pari delicto is sustained. Although an exception to the in pari delicto defense exists when the parties to a fraudulent transaction occupy a fiduciary relationship and the fiduciary would personally profit from the wrongdoing (Sontag v. Denio (1937) 23 Cal.App.2d 319, 323–24; Clark v. Millsap, 197 Cal. 765, 783), Plaintiff does not allege sufficient facts to est...

Excerpt: ...o an employee's right to bring a civil action for unpaid wages and overtime show that an employee may sue the Individual Defendants under Labor Code §558.1. The Labor Commissioner's jurisdiction over wage claims is not exclusive; actions may be brought by either the Labor Commissioner or the employee. See Labor Code §1194. Section 558.1 was added to the Labor Code as part of SB 558. This bill made amendments to a number of provisions. These ame...

Excerpt: ...� 3426– 3426.10; Cacique, Inc. v. Robert Reiser & Co., Inc. (9th Cir. 1999) 169 F.3d 619, 624 (applying Calif. law); Accuimage Diagnostics Corp. v. Terarecon, Inc.(ND CA 2003) 260 F. Supp. 2d 941, 953–54 (applying Calif. law). The CUTSA, at §3426.7(b), preempts common law claims that are “based on the same nucleus of facts as the misappropriation of trade secrets claim for relief.” K.C. Multimedia, Inc. v. Bank of America Technology & Op...

Excerpt: ... separate paragraph and state whether it applies to the entire complaint or to specified causes of action. Based on the memorandum of points and authorities, the court will proceed based on the assumption that Defendant intended to specially demur for uncertainty to the 2 nd- 5th causes of action and also specially demur to the 5th cause of action on the grounds it is duplicative. Defendant's special demurrers for uncertainty to the Second – Fi...

Excerpt: ...Party Plaintiff Performance Diversified, Inc. dba Performance Wash Services. Motion 4: Demurrer to First Amended Complaint. Moving Party Zions Bancorporation and ZB, N.A. Responding Party Plaintiff Performance Diversified, Inc. dba Performance Wash Services Motion 5: Strike Punitive Damages.Moving Party ABE Corporation dba Fairview Shell. Responding Party Plaintiff Performance Diversified, Inc. dba Performance Wash Services Ruling 1: Defendant AB...

Excerpt: ...les of Professional Conduct, Rule 3- 700(c); Estate of Falco v. Decker (1987) 188 Cal.App.3d 1004, 1014. If withdrawal is by client consent, the attorney need only submit Judicial Council form MC-050: Substitution of Counsel – Civil. See CCP §284(1). If the attorney does not have the client's consent, he or she must proceed by way of noticed motion consistent with CCP §§ 284 and 1005, CRPC 3-700 and CRC, Rule 3.1362. Here, counsel informs th...

Excerpt: ...sic evidence shows the parties reached anything but the usual understanding regarding costs. At any rate, defendant did not prevail on the only contract claim. Plaintiff did, albeit with a nominal recovery. Defendant prevailed on a non- contract claim that is not subject to the costs provision (which is unilateral, anyway). (See Brown Bark III, L.P. v. Haver (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 809, 828 [Civ. Code § 1717 does “not make a unilateral provisio...

Excerpt: ...sted a dismissal. If the plaintiff is seeking a judgment as indicated in the notice, it cannot be through §998. Further, anything less than a categorical acceptance will not meet the requirements of §998. The court is presented with a factual dispute regarding acceptance of the offer, and is not authorized to adjudicate such a dispute. See Bias v. Wright, 103 Cal.App.4th 811, 822 (2002). However, there is evidence of an intent, if not the actua...

Excerpt: ... LLC (S.D. Ind. 2010) 270 F.R.D. 430, 435, stated that "the simple fact that a claimant has had social communications is not necessarily probative of the particular mental and emotional health matters at issue in the case. Rather, it must be the substance of the communication that determines relevance." The Simply Storage Court rejected a privacy argument, stating that it didn't apply even if the plaintiff locked her website (which De Angelis did...

Excerpt: ...oticed only two depositions, failed to seek relief from the Court when a dispute arose over the location, and then proposed new dates that were after the Opposition for this Motion was due. (Mirabel Decl. ¶ 10.) She also fails to explain when the document requests that she now claims to need responses for were served. (Mirabel Decl. ¶ 17.) And although she claims that Jokar refused to produce Ms. Martinez in September, without cause (Id. at ¶ ...

Excerpt: ...e claim, causes of action, or issues on which it is moving. CRC 3.1350. The court has no power to adjudicate others. Maryland Cas. Co. v. Reeder(1990) 221 Cal. App. 3d 961, 974 n. 4; Homestead Savings v. Superior Court (1986) 179 Cal. App. 3d 494, 498. According to their noticed issue no. 1, Defendants seek summary adjudication of Plaintiff's “claim for personal injury damages.” Defendant do not identify any specific cause of action by number...

Excerpt: ...ummary judgment is not whether the evidence is “overwhelming;” it is whether there is any dispute in the evidence. The evidence identified by the moving party raises a question of fact that cannot be resolved without weighing the evidence. Also, Plaintiff failed to comply with CRC, Rule 3.1350(b). Since waiver and estoppel are not generally jury questions, the court is considering severing those defenses and trying them separately, before the...

Excerpt: ...away, February 26 th. The Court does not grant the request for a terminating sanction at this time as an incremental approach is warranted. (See Lopez v. Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc. (2016) 246 Cal.App.4th 566, 572, 604; Doppes, 174 Cal.App.4 th 967, 993-4). The alternative request for evidentiary sanctions is not sufficiently supported as the papers fail to specify the particular matters that the Defendant would be prohib...

Excerpt: ...aintiffs' responses to the disputed form interrogatories were incomplete, evasive, or otherwise improper. (See, e.g., Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 783- 784.) Defendant shall give notice. Motion to Compel re Special Interrogatories Defendant Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.'s motion to compel further responses to special interrogatories is GRANTED. Plaintiffs Christopher C. Becker and Debra A. Becker shall serve complete, code- comp...

Excerpt: ...ndant must state whether, in fact, any responsive information is being withheld on the basis of the privilege. Amended responses due in 20 days. The court awards $500 sanctions. ...

Excerpt: ...ns against Defendant in the amount of $1,860.00, which is also due within 30-days. Moving Party is to give notice. 2. Motion to Compel Response to Requests for Admissions; Plaintiff Southern California Gas Company's Motion to Compel Defendant Dutra Construction Co., Inc. to Provide Further Responses to Plaintiff's First Set of Requests for Admissions, Nos. 1-6, is GRANTED. The Court compels Defendant to provide a verified further response within ...

Excerpt: ...nent is a non-party, CRC Rule 3.1346 requires that the motion to compel be personally served upon him or her. The POS attached to the motion does not show such required service (nor does it show authority to accept by another). Second, assuming Mr. Guerra is indeed the current president of cross- complainant Roof RX, Inc., service of a notice of deposition is effective to require a party or party-affiliated witness to attend and to testify. CCP �...

Excerpt: ...ke the imposition of sanctions unjust.” (See C.C.P. §2023.030(a) and C.C.P. §2031.310(h)). The Court notes Plaintiff did not attempt to meet and confer, after obtaining an extension for filing the instant Motion. (See Petersen Declaration). The communication offered by Plaintiff as Exhibit C to the Petersen Declaration indicates Defense Counsel granted an extension and communicated an intent to Supplement. Based on the same, it appears likely...

Excerpt: ...rm represented the partnership, the partnership cannot assert attorney-client privilege against Rose. (Evid. Code 962; Wortham & Van Liew v. Superior Court (1987) 188 Cal.App.3d 927; Hecht v. Superior Court (1987) 192 Cal.App.3d 560, 565.) The court DENIES both motions. Both Plaintiff's and Defendants' request for monetary sanctions are DENIED. Based on the evidence presented in connection with the motion, the Court finds as follows: 1. There is ...

Excerpt: ... Denial of leave to amend is appropriate where inexcusable delay and probable prejudice to the opposing party is shown. (Estate of Murphy v. Gulf Ins. Co. (1978) 82 Cal.App.3d 304, 311.) Here, both of these elements are lacking. The new cause of action is not being sought to cause unwarranted delay. The new cause of action simply adds another basis to impose liability on this Defendant – probably one that the lawyer discovered after the initial...