Excerpt: ... The requests are overbroad as framed, however, and are narrowed as follows: 37. Documents reflecting all complaints by owners of 2012 BMW 328i vehicles regarding the coolant light repeatedly illuminating, for the period July 1, 2011 through June 30, 2016. The documents are to be redacted to exclude personal identifying information of the buyer(s)/owner(s). 39. Documents reflecting all repurchases or replacements by YOU of 2012 BMW 328i vehicles,...

Excerpt: ...very request and all the responses to it that are at issue. The separate statement must be full and complete so that no person is required to review any other document in order to determine the full request and the full response.” Next, the mutual requests for sanctions are denied given the legitimate dispute over whether the documents being withheld are privileged or not. See, C.C.P. § 2031.310(h). Prevailing party to give notice. Future Hear...

Excerpt: ... service filed on January 19, 2018, show the notice of hearing was served via substitute service, deemed effective as of January 18, 2018. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 415.20 [substitute service deemed complete on the 10th day after mailing].) The last day to timely notice the hearing was January 9, 2018. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1005, subd. (b).) Plaintiffs to give notice. Future Hearings: CMC: 4/10/18 8:30 am ...

Excerpt: ...Act) and breach of contract. In doing so, Plaintiff alleges unlawful acts that can serve as a basis for violations of section 17200. See Lueras v. BAC Home Loans Servicing(2013) 221 Cal.App.4th 49, 81. Indeed, Plaintiff specifically alleges that “[b]y violating the Act, Neff has engaged in unlawful activities, thereby satisfying the ‘unlawful prong' of the UCL [section 17200 et seq.].” FAC ¶ 38. Relying on Prudential Home Mortgage Co. v. S...

Excerpt: ...ently in her position. (Guz v. Bechtel National, Inc. (2000) 24 Cal.4 th 317, 355.) The complaint also fails to allege facts showing a discriminatory motive. (Id.) Rather, this is alleged as a conclusion only. (Complaint at Para. 10.) Statutory claims must be alleged with specificity. (Covenant Care, Inc. v. Superior Court (2004) 32 Cal.4th 771, 790; Fisher v. San Pedro Peninsula Hospital (1989) 214 Cal.App.3d 590, 604.) The second cause of actio...

Excerpt: ...C does allege facts to support its claim as to her “creditor” status. (FAC ¶¶ 9 & 10.) Nor is the TILA claim clearly time-barred. Buyers argue that even if she is a creditor, there is a 3-year limitation on the right to rescind. But a demurrer on statute of limitations grounds will not lie where the action is not necessarily barred – the defect must appear clearly and affirmatively upon the face of the complaint. (Lee v. Hanley(2015) 61 C...

Excerpt: ...eveal that an actual controversy exists between the parties.'” D. Cummins Corp. v. United States Fid. & Guar. Co. (2016) 246 Cal. App. 4th 1484, 1489. “[A] home loan borrower has standing to claim a nonjudicial foreclosure was wrongful because an assignment by which the foreclosing party purportedly took a beneficial interest in the deed of trust was not merely voidable but void, depriving the foreclosing party of any legitimate authority to ...

Excerpt: ...ged. The Demurrer to the Sixth Cause of Action For Rescission is SUSTAINED without leave to amend, on the basis that rescission is a remedy not a free-standing cause of action. This is without prejudice to the pleading of the remedy of rescission in connection with an appropriate supporting cause of action. The Demurrers to the Eighth and Ninth Causes of Action For Concealment and Fraud are SUSTAINED with leave to amend, on the basis that the fac...

Excerpt: ...ued hearing. The court also ordered plaintiff to give notice. Nothing in the court file indicates that plaintiff gave notice, or met and conferred as ordered. Plaintiff's counsel is ordered to engage in the meet and confer required by Code of Civ. Proc. § 430.41 as to the issues raised by this demurrer, and to file and serve a declaration evidencing such efforts not less than nine court days before the continued hearing. Plaintiff to give notice...

Excerpt: ...Defendants' demurrer is overruled. Plaintiff law firm alleges that a third party minor's father signed a contingency fee agreement with Plaintiff in February 2017. Plaintiff alleges that approximately two months later, Plaintiff was informed the third party had decided to retain another attorney to pursue her personal injury claims. Whether the third party's initial fee agreement with Plaintiff is valid is immaterial to Defendants' demurrer. In c...

Excerpt: ...ose employing broker is Lee Humphrey Durst. As a matter of law in CA, only a licensed real estate broker may receive the commissions in connection with real estate transactions; any other procedure is a violation of B&P 10138, and subjects Bianca Espinoza to discipline, including suspension and/or revocation of her license. (Miller & Starr, 2 CA Real Estate, Section 5:56.) Thus, all real estate commissions paid for her services as a real estate a...

Excerpt: ...the prevailing party, and award costs of suit and statutory attorney fees, at the conclusion of a litigation, after all the claims are resolved. [See CCP §1033.5(a)(10), (c)(5)); Cal.R.Ct. 3.1702(a),(b), 8.104(a); Civ. Trials & Evid. §§ 17:151-52, 17:166 (Rutter Group 2017); P R Burke Corp. v. Victor Valley Wastewater Reclamation Authority (2002) 98 Cal.App.4th 1047, 1052.] Here, the case is not over, and Plaintiff still has one undisposed-of ...

Excerpt: ...sn. v. Touchstone Ins. Servs.(1994) 27 Cal. App. 4th 1085, 1091. No party has filed Opposition to this motion. Regardless, the settlement by Cross-Defendant Lonerock, Inc. appears does not appear to be “so far 'out of the ballpark' in relation to these factors as to be inconsistent with the equitable objectives of the statute.'” Id. Liability of Lonerock, the general manager of the construction site, appears questionable. And the law concerni...

Excerpt: ...f action for Malicious Prosecution and new allegations regarding the express written release currently pled in the Cross Complaint. The court finds no prejudice to Cross Defendants resulting from Cross Complainant's delay from July to January in seeking this leave. If delay in seeking the amendment has not misled or prejudiced the other side, the liberal policy of allowing amendments prevails. Indeed, it is an abuse of discretion to deny leave in...

Excerpt: ...potential prejudice to Defendants, trial is continued from 4/30/18 to 10/1/18 and the MSC is continued to 8/31/18. All other pretrial dates are continued consistent with the new trial date. Plaintiff to give notice. Motion to Compel Compliance with Business Records Subpoena The Motion by Defendant Fotona, LLC's (“Fotona”) to Compel Institute for Advanced Laser Dentistry's (“IALD”) compliance with business records subpoena is GRANTED in pa...

Excerpt: ...1) 91 Cal. App. 4th 875, 882. Defendants' Request for Judicial Notice: Granted as to taking judicial notice of the language of Judicial Council Form Interrogatory No. 4.1. See, Evidence Code § 452(h). Plaintiff's Objection to and Motion to Strike Motion for JNOV and Associated Documents: Plaintiff objected and moves to strike the following pleadings for failure to comply with the rules of court: (1) the declaration of Jenos-Heidari filed in supp...

Excerpt: ... Moving Parties claim summary adjudication is appropriate as to both cross-defendants, Antonio Medina and GNA on the first and fourth causes of action. Moving Parties argue the indemnity provisions of the contracts between Pelican and Responding Parties include RPs' duty to defend Pelican in this action. MPs imply they are entitled to collect the cost of their defense in this suit. It could very well be that Medina and GNA did owe MPs a duty to d...

Excerpt: ...following reasons, Defendant's motion is granted. A. Vicarious Liability California law generally imposes liability on the owner of a vehicle, albeit there is a limitation on the amount of damages that may be collected for any resulting death or injury. See Cal. Veh. Code §§ 17150, 17151. The Graves Amendment, however, precludes liability based on the law of any state against an owner that is in the business of renting vehicles, if the harm occ...

Excerpt: ...tate Automobile Assn. (2010) 189 Cal.App.4th 947, 975.) Plaintiff Luke Slovenec's (plaintiff) request for judicial notice is DENIED as to items 1 and 2, and GRANTED as to item 3. Items 1 and 2 require a copy of the docket from the underlying dissolution proceedings. Plaintiff has failed to provide the court with a copy of that docket and nothing indicates plaintiff has made arrangements with the clerk to have the docket available at the time of t...

Excerpt: ...200.00 per hour x 4 hours) + $150.00 for no-show fee + $60.00 for filing fee + $9.95 for e-filing fee] within fifteen (15) days of the date of notice of this order. Defendants to give notice. ...

Excerpt: ...orizon facility for an event sponsored by Defendant. Defendant initially objected to this interrogatory and responded “hotel venue vendor;” in its supplemental response, Defendant objected again and responded that it “is not ‘affiliated' with Horizon Resort & Casino” and that Defendant “has used Horizon as a hotel venue vendor on two occasions.” Plaintiff's motion to compel is granted. Interrogatory No. 1 seeks relevant information....

Excerpt: ......

Excerpt: ...ook steps reasonably calculated to apprise Pltfs of the existence of the program at the time of warranty disputes; Deny. ...

Excerpt: ......

Excerpt: ...nds of uncertainty; Pltf failed to allege facts showing that Deft published a defamatory statement of fact; Sustain with 10 days leave to amend; Strike Portions of Complaint Grant as to Item 1 [page 1, line 25 to page 2, line 2]; Grant as to Item 2 [page 2, lines 2-5] specifically the word ‘similarly'; Deny balance of Item 2; Deny as to Item 3 [page 3, lines 25-26]; Moot as to Item 4 [page 16, line 1]; Deny as to Item 5 [page 16, lines 3-4]; Gr...