Excerpt: ...ity in permitting amendments to the pleadings “at any stage of the proceedings, up to and including trial” absent prejudice to the adverse party. (Atkinson v. Elk Corp. (2003) 109 Cal.App.4th 739, 761.) Indeed, even if the plaintiff delayed in seeking leave to amend, if the delay had not misled or prejudiced the other side, the liberal policy of allowing amendments prevails and it is an abuse of discretion to deny leave. (Higgins v. Del Faro ...

Excerpt: ...rly pled, but also of those facts that may be implied or inferred from those expressly alleged in the complaint. [Citations.]” (City of Atascadero v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. (1998) 68 Cal.App.4th 445, 459.) Code of Civil Procedure section 452, states, “In the construction of a pleading, for the purpose of determining its effect, its allegations must be liberally construed, with a view to substantial justice between the par...

Excerpt: ...uling, the court explained the deficiencies in Urquharts' (and Plaintiff's) showing of the Tech-Bilt factors and expressly noted that: · Neither Urquharts nor Plaintiff presented any evidence to show a rough approximation of Plaintiff's total recovery. There is no evidence regarding Plaintiff's current condition and/or his future prognosis, whether he is claiming any lost past or future earnings or future medical expenses. · Neither Urquharts n...

Excerpt: ...tion to Compel Response to Requests for Admissions 12. Motion to Compel Response to Requests for Admissions MOTION NOS. 1-3: Motions to Compel Further Responses to Form Interrogatories Defendant Ragini Patel's motion to compel plaintiffs Harshad Ray Patel (“Harshad), Akash Patel (“Akash”) and Akash Winery & Wineyards, LLC (“Akash Winery”) to provide supplemental, verified responses, without objections to Form Interrogatories (Set One) i...

Excerpt: ...o serve supplemental, verified responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One, number 15.1 within 20 days of this date. Gary Milo Chamness is also ordered to pay monetary sanctions of $4,500 to Plaintiffs and their counsel within 45 days of this date. Plaintiffs' Motion is MOOT as to the request for supplemental responses to Requests for Production, Set One, numbers 1, 2, 7, 8-10, 20-22, 27-28 and production of documents. Plaintiffs' Motion is DENIED...

Excerpt: ...e Section 1085, subdivision (a) provides that: “A writ of mandate may be issued by any court to any inferior tribunal, corporation, board, or person, to compel the performance of an act which the law specially enjoins, as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station, or to compel the admission of a party to the use and enjoyment of a right or office to which the party is entitled, and from which the party is unlawfully precluded by that i...

Excerpt: ...n 30 days of this date. PMH and its attorney, Burris Law are ordered to pay sanctions of $2,000 jointly and severally to WG within 30 days of this date. On receipt of responses to interrogatories, the propounding party may move for an order compelling a further response if the propounding party deems that an objection is without merit or too general or an answer is evasive or incomplete. (See Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.300, subd. (a)(1)-(3).) The...

Excerpt: ...tter generally styled D. Thomas v G. Thomas, Orange County Superior Court Case #: 15D011067. Ex. 6. Second District Court of Appeal, Division 6, State of California, Case Docket (Register of Actions) for Case #: B270906 in re Thomas v Thomas. Ex. 7. Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division 3, State of California, Case Docket (Register of Actions) for Case #: G053595 in re Thomas v Thomas. Ex. 8. April 6, 2016, Minute Order – D. Thomas v G. Tho...

Excerpt: ...e of the parties or to the prevailing party, then the party who is determined to be the party prevailing on the contract, whether he or she is the party specified in the contract or not, shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees in addition to other costs.” Plaintiff contends the motion for attorney fees is premature. The Court granted summary judgment as to Moving Defendants Moore and Quilligan, but the case proceeds as to the remaining ...

Excerpt: ...y the reasonable hourly rate prevailing in the community for similar work.” (Id. at 1320-1321.) “The Legislature, however, did not intend recovery of fees and costs as a windfall. . . .The prevailing party is entitled to a reasonable award . . . consequently, the trial court need not simply award the sum requested. . . To the contrary, ascertaining the fee amount is left to the trial court's sound discretion.” (Id. at 1321.) “Trial judges...

Excerpt: ...Civ. Proc., § 430.30, subd. (a); see also Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318.) Additionally, a defendant may demurrer on the grounds that the pleading is uncertain. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.30, subd. (f).) The purpose of a demurrer is to challenge the sufficiency of a pleading “by raising questions of law.” (Postley v. Harvey (1984) 153 Cal.App.3d 280, 286.) The court “treat[s] the demurrer as admitting all material facts properly p...

Excerpt: ...ding, the grounds for which are apparent from either the face of the complaint or a matter of which the court may take judicial notice. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.30, subd. (a); see also Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318.) Additionally, a defendant may demurrer on the grounds that the pleading is uncertain. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.30, subd. (f).) The purpose of a demurrer is to challenge the sufficiency of a pleading “by raising question...

Excerpt: ...pectively). Plaintiff also challenges two Health Directives issued on December 3, 2020 and December 6, 2020. (Complaint ¶ 3.) Plaintiffs allege causes of action for: (1) violation of Cal. Gov't Code § 8572, (2) just compensation under California Code; (3) violation of the California Constitution, and (4) violation of the Due Process Clause of the 5th and 15th Amendment of the United States Constitution. Judicial Notice Defendants' request for j...

Excerpt: ..., or upon the court's own motion after giving counsel notice and an opportunity to be heard, may make an order quashing the subpoena entirely, modifying it, or directing compliance with it upon those terms or conditions as the court shall declare, including protective orders. In addition, the court may make any other order as may be appropriate to protect the person from unreasonable or oppressive demands, including unreasonable violations of the...

Excerpt: ...this equitable remedy, Plaintiff must anticipate a future injury. (Ibid.) Here, Plaintiff alleges at paragraphs 80-83, that Defendants owe money to Plaintiff in relation to Plaintiff's subrogation cases which were handled by Defendants, and Defendants have failed to make a reserve to repay Plaintiff's funds. At paragraphs 84-87, Plaintiff requests a judicial decree holding Defendants to account for all proceeds distributable to Plaintiff in conne...

Excerpt: ...ry judgment, the specific cause of action, affirmative defense, claims for damages, or issues of duty must be stated specifically in the notice of motion and be repeated, verbatim, in the separate statement of undisputed material facts.” Code Civ. Proc. § 437c(h); see also CRC 3.1350(b). Here, the notice of motion indicates that Schindler is seeking summary adjudication and then sets four multi-sentenced grounds addressing purported deficienci...

Excerpt: ...lief and in situations other than as specified, the ‘prevailing party' shall be as determined by the court, and under those circumstances, the court, in its discretion, may allow costs or not and, if allowed, may apportion costs between the parties on the same or adverse sides pursuant to rules adopted under Section 1034.” Code Civ. Proc. § 1032, subdivision (b) states: “Except as otherwise expressly provided by statute, a prevailing party...

Excerpt: ... judge, or to a court, and refused in whole or in part, or granted, or granted conditionally, or on terms, any party affected by the order may, within 10 days after service upon the party of written notice of entry of the order and based upon new or different facts, circumstances, or law, make application to the same judge or court that made the order, to reconsider the matter and modify, amend, or revoke the prior order. The party making the app...

Excerpt: ...it requires the trial court to become involved in discovery because a dispute leads a party to move for an order compelling [compliance with a discovery mechanism].” (See Clement v. Alegre, (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 1277, 1291.) Code Civ. Proc. section 2017.010 provides in relevant part that “[u]nless otherwise limited by order of the court … any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is relevant to the subject m...

Excerpt: ...s or conditions as the court shall declare, including protective orders. In addition, the court may make any other order as may be appropriate to protect the person from unreasonable or oppressive demands, including unreasonable violations of the right of privacy of the person.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1987.1.) Similarly, “[i]f a deponent fails to answer any question or to produce any document, electronically stored information, or tangible thin...

Excerpt: ...is holding funds in a bank account that belongs to Michael D. Hooton (“Hooton”), over which Cruse and Collins claim ownership. Collins has cross-complained against Cruse for the right to the funds, which Cruse has answered. The interpleader statute permits “[a]ny person, firm, corporation, association or other entity against whom double or multiple claims are made, or may be made, by two or more persons which are such that they may give ris...

Excerpt: ...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.” (Mycogen Corp. v. Monsanto Co. (2002) 28 Cal.4th 888, 896 (Mycogen). It “acts to bar claims that were, or should have been, advanced in a previous suit involving the same parties.” (DKN Holdings LLC v. ...

Excerpt: ... are ordered to provide responses, without objections, to Shellpoint's Form Interrogatories, Set One and Special Interrogatories, Set One within 30 days of service of the court's order. Plaintiffs are ordered to pay monetary sanctions in the amount of $1,387.50 within 30 days of service of the court's order. Merits Shellpoint moves for an order compelling Plaintiffs to provide responses, without objection, to Shellpoint's Form Interrogatories, Se...

Excerpt: ...s of action within an action, one or more affirmative defenses, one or more claims for damages, or one or more issues of duty, if the party contends that the cause of action has no merit, that there is no affirmative defense to the cause of action, that there is no merit to an affirmative defense as to any cause of action, that there is no merit to a claim for damages, as specified in Section 3294 of the Civil Code, or that one or more defendants...

Excerpt: ...the Court discretion to amend a pleading “at any time before or after commencement of trial, in the furtherance of justice, and upon such terms as may be proper.” Subdivision (a) of CRC 3.1324 requires a motion for leave to amend a pleading before trial to: (1) include a copy of the proposed amendment or amended pleading, which must be serially numbered to differentiate it from previous pleadings or amendments; (2) state what allegations in t...