Excerpt: ...(AR 135-136.) In a prior writ proceeding, this court found that the alleged false statements had been obtained in violation of Petitioner's POBRA rights, so that the allegations of dishonesty against him could not be sustained and could not form the basis of his termination. The court remanded the case to the City Council to reconsider the appropriate penalty, based exclusively on Petitioner's violations of departmental policy, and excluding any ...

Excerpt: ...ust be accepted as true for the purpose of ruling on the demurrer. Del E. Webb Corporation v. Structural Materials Co. (1981) 123 Cal.App.3d 593, 604. Absent court orders or other items subject to judicial notice, or items attached as exhibits to the complaint, the court may not consider the contents of pleadings or other exhibits when ruling on a demurrer. Day v. Sharp (1975) 50 Cal.3d 904, 914, and Sosinsky v. Grant (1992) 6 Cal.App.4th 1746, 1...

Excerpt: ...ded by statute. (Gov't Code § 815(a).) City further argues that the liability of a public entity for injury caused by the dangerous condition of public properly is exclusively governed by Government Code Section 835, which Plaintiff has already alleged in her first cause of action for premises liability. City correctly argues that Plaintiff's premises liability cause of action alleges liability based on the dangerous condition of public property...

Excerpt: ...by Defendant Horner On 5/9/19, Defendant Horner filed a bankruptcy petition, which triggers an automatic stay. So the question arises whether the court may rule on the two motions below. Here, Plaintiffs had already obtained a judgment for possession and writ of possession prior to Defendant's bankruptcy filing. So prior to the bankruptcy filing, it had already been established, as a matter of law, that Defendant had no legal or equitable right t...

Excerpt: ...gation pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 391.3. The motion for an order requiring the plaintiff to furnish security shall be based upon the ground, and supported by a showing, that the plaintiff is a vexatious litigant and that there is not a reasonable probability that he or she will prevail in the litigation against the moving defendant.” In addition, CCP 393.3 (a) provides: “(a) Except as provided in subdivision (b), if, after hearing...

Excerpt: ...ge County Assessment Appeals Board (“AAB”). Even though a dismissal has yet to be entered, the ruling is not interlocutory, because no further judicial action is required by the court to render a final determination between plaintiff and AAB. City of Carlsbad v. Scholtz, 1 Cal.App.5th 294, 299 (2016)(citing Dana Point Safe Harbor Collective v. Sup. Ct., 51 Cal.4th 1, 5 (2010)). Plaintiff has filed a Notice of Appeal, and thus, a stay is requi...

Excerpt: ...d by the doctrine of res judicata because they are related to the conservatorship action for which she was the conservator. Generally, res judicata describes the preclusive effect of a final judgment on the merits. Res judicata, or claim preclusion, prevents relitigation of the same cause of action in a second suit between the same parties or parties in privity with them. Planning & Conservation League v. Castaic Lake Water Agency (2009) 180 Cal....

Excerpt: ...cause of action for breach of the implied warranty of habitability is a contractual cause of action. Stoiber v. Honeychuck (1980) 101 Cal.App.3d 903, 928-929. Plaintiffs do not dispute that the breach of implied warranty of habitability cause of action is a contractual cause of action, but contend that paragraph 20 of the FAC sufficiently evidences a contractual agreement. Paragraph 20 of the FAC alleges: “On or about October of 2016 . . . new ...

Excerpt: ...ate a cause of action citing Ferraro v. Camarlinghi (2008) 161 Cal.App.4 th 509, 528 [02/07/19 Minute Order] In denying the Motion to Strike, the court indicated: “Ferraro says it all. A general demurrer should have been filed. There is no basis for granting a motion to strike.” The court did not “invite” County to file a demurrer. And, the court couldn't invite a Demurrer if it had wanted to as it was already too late to file one after t...

Excerpt: ...ing the verdict and appears to be irrelevant here. The court GRANTS the motion for the reasons set forth below. A. Surprise and Newly Discovered Evidence In his motion, Plaintiff makes a prima facie showing that he was surprised at trial because although Defendant had admitted liability during discovery, on the first day of trial she suddenly recanted and contested liability. (CCP 657 (3).) Plaintiff also argues that this constituted newly discov...

Excerpt: ...lemental expert witness list on 3/26/19, but Plaintiff does not want Yates to be limited to giving rebuttal testimony. In the alternative, Plaintiff Williams asks the court for leave to augment his expert witness list to belatedly designate Joseph Yates as an expert witness. (CCP 2034.610; 2034.620.) The court DENIES the motion for the reasons set forth below. Statement of Facts Defendant MICHAEL KEITH MAGNELL represents that he has always made i...

Excerpt: ...dant breached its duty of care to the plaintiff by failing to use reasonable care in caring for him, failing to use reasonable care in the selection and maintenance of its staff, and failing to ensure the competency of its staff, thereby causing or contributing to the incident. (Complaint, ¶ 32.) Moving hospital submits the expert declaration of Alan C. Wittgrove, M.D., who is a board-certified surgeon and attests that he reviewed all of the rel...

Excerpt: ...e not in the format required by California Rule of Court 3.1354(b). The objections are in narrative form and are not consecutively numbered. The court disregards them. Merits: In order to shift the burden on summary adjudication, the cross- defendants must show “that one or more elements of the cause[s] of action…cannot be established, or that there is a complete defense to the cause[s] of action.” See Code Civ. Proc. §437c(p)(2). The moti...

Excerpt: ... for 12/14/18. Defendants Pacific Los Alisos, LLC; Elaine Voechting; and Ben Lopez contend that Lakin and Shaver are current employees of defendant Pacific Los Alisos, LLC and therefore represented by counsel for Pacific Los Alisos, LLC. Lakin is a service technician and Shaver is the assistant community director of the subject property. Defendants further contend that upon notification from Lakin and Shaver as to the receipt of the deposition su...

Excerpt: ...sponse to these requests Defendant responded by stating that: “After a reasonable and diligent search, Defendant is unable to comply with the request as it is informed and believes that it no longer has documents responsive to this request because they were no longer in existence at the time the original discovery request was made.” Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure § 2031.230, a representation of inability to comply shall “sp...

Excerpt: ... Murphy & King, P.C. (“M&K”) are DENIED in part. The first subpoena was issued on 11/12/18 and sought a deposition on 12/11/18 on three topics: A. Design and specification information for each variation of an implant bridge made and sold by Nobel or Nobel Biocare Procera LLC from inception to December 1998 and between May 2002 and January 2013 B. Design, manufacture, and sale of the implant bridges or their predecessors pursuant to six patent...

Excerpt: ...o the individual Defendants Elia and Amirali Ibrahim in this case. But it was unclear whether the automatic stay also applied to the Ibra Family Trust, IBRA Farms Restaurants Inc., and IBRA Automation Systems. This was partly because the two debtors had declared certain assets in their bankruptcy schedules, but the Trustee had not yet had an opportunity to determine whether the stay should also apply to those entities. It was also unclear whether...

Excerpt: ...munities, Inc., and Lana Hammers motion for an order (1) staying this action until after the court issues a ruling on Defendants' Petition to Compel Arbitration; and (2) compelling plaintiff Linus Shelton, in and through his son and successor-in-interest, Lawrence Shelton, to submit his claims to binding arbitration is GRANTED. CCP § 1281.2 provides in pertinent part: “On petition of a party to an arbitration agreement alleging the existence o...

Excerpt: ...he parties outside the presence of the court or orally before the court, for settlement of the case, or part thereof, the court, upon motion, may enter judgment pursuant to the terms of the settlement. If requested by the parties, the court may retain jurisdiction over the parties to enforce the settlement until performance in full of the terms of the settlement.” “A writing signed by the parties” is interpreted to mean that the settlement ...

Excerpt: ...nds for revocation of the agreement. Here the court finds there is an agreement to arbitrate. There has been no waiver of the right to arbitrate by defendant. No authority is cited or located saying the court is authorized to rule on whether plaintiff has waived the right to assert defenses to arbitration by demanding it. If it does, it finds that defendant's evidence does not show by clear and convincing evidence that plaintiff intended to waive...

Excerpt: ...legal representative from a judgment, dismissal, order, or other proceeding taken against him or her through his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.” “Application for this relief shall be accompanied by a copy of the answer or other pleading proposed to be filed therein, otherwise the application shall not be granted, and shall be made within a reasonable time, in no case exceeding six months, after the judgment, dis...

Excerpt: ...ty. Second, the Complaint fails to plead any facts alleging that Plaintiff filed a government tort claim prior to filing the Complaint. State of California v. Superior Court (2004) 32 Cal.4th 1234, 1239 (“We conclude that failure to allege facts demonstrating or excusing compliance with the claim presentation requirement subjects a claim against a public entity to a demurrer for failure to state a cause of action.”) Lastly, Plaintiff's false ...

Excerpt: ...urrer to plaintiff V & S's first and second causes of action have been withdrawn and are therefore MOOT. Defendant SMMC's demurrer to plaintiff V & S's third cause of action for fraud is MOOT as SMMC is not a party named in this cause of action. Defendant Suheimat's demurrer to the third cause of action for fraud is sustained. The elements of a cause of action for fraud are: (1) a misrepresentation (false representation, concealment, or nondisclo...

Excerpt: ...n the moving party, Defendant Vandegrift, to show not only that (a) venue is proper in Los Angeles County, but also that (b) venue is improper in Orange County under any applicable theory. (Weil & Brown, California Practice Guide, (The Rutter Group) at ¶ 3:573; 3:575; La Mirada Community Hospital v. Superior Court (1967) 249 Cal.App.2d 39, 42; Anaheim Extrusion Co. v. Superior Court (1985) 170 Cal.App.3d 1201, 1203.) B. General Venue Rule -- CCP...

Excerpt: ... resolving the objections raised by the motion to strike. (B) That the party who filed the pleading subject to the motion to strike failed to respond to the meet and confer request of the moving party or otherwise failed to meet and confer in good faith.” Defendants have not filed a meet and confer declaration and therefore failed to comply with section 435.5. The court continues the motion filed by Defendants Prospect/Orange LLC and Williams R...