Excerpt: ... Jones (“Jones”) and 150 Newport Center Drive LLC (“150 NCD”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), or alternatively, for summary adjudication, as to the 1 st, 2 nd, 3 rd, 4 th, 5 th, 6 th, 7 th, and 8 th causes of action alleged in the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), as well as summary adjudication on behalf of Mr. Soderling, as an individual, as to Plaintiffs' claims for punitive damages. The motion is GRANTED, in part; DENIED, in part...

Excerpt: ...Design Sciences Corp. v. Superior Court (2004) 121 Cal.App.4 th 1100, 1106.) Under Code of Civil Procedure section 483.010, attachment may be issued only if the claim sued upon is: (1) a claim for money based on a contract (express or implied); (2) the claim is for a fixed or readily ascertainable amount not less than $500, exclusive of costs, interest and attorney's fees; (3) the claim is not secured by real property (or was originally so secure...

Excerpt: ... First Amended Petition for Writ of Mandate is DENIED. In this action, Plaintiff seeks a writ of mandate to compel Respondent to disclose documents withheld in response to her California Public Records Act (CPRA) request. The CPRA must “be broadly construed if it furthers the people's right of access and narrowly construed if it limits the right of access.” (BRV, Inc. v. Superior Court (2006) 143 Cal.App.4th 742, 750-751.) “All public recor...

Excerpt: ...rd Decl. ¶¶3-4, 7.) The request does not satisfy the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 437c(h). No explanation has been provided as to how the identification of the documents is essential to opposing the motion. Further, no timeline has been given as to when the discovery is expected; nor has counsel described any specific steps or procedures he intends to use to obtain the discovery. The court also preliminarily notes that Defend...

Excerpt: ...Design Sciences Corp. v. Superior Court (2004) 121 Cal.App.4 th 1100, 1106.) Under Code of Civil Procedure section 483.010, attachment may be issued only if the claim sued upon is: (1) a claim for money based on a contract (express or implied); (2) the claim is for a fixed or readily ascertainable amount not less than $500, exclusive of costs, interest and attorney's fees; (3) the claim is not secured by real property (or was originally so secure...

Excerpt: ...omplaint on the grounds a valid agreement to arbitrate exists between them and there are no defenses to its enforcement. Whether the parties delegated the issue of arbitration to the arbitrator? Defendants contend the Court lacks jurisdiction to decide any issues concerning arbitration including the issue of arbitrability because the Employment Arbitration Policy (“Arbitration Agreement”) includes an express delegation clause. (See Arbitratio...

Excerpt: ...cted activity under the statute and Plaintiff cannot demonstrate a probability of prevailing. Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16 provides in relevant part: “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 the United States or California Constitution in connection with a public issue shall be subject to a special motion to strike, unless the Court de...

Excerpt: ... subdivision (a)(1) provides in pertinent part that: “A party may move for summary judgment in an action or proceeding if it is contended that the action has no merit or that there is no defense to the action or proceeding.” “A plaintiff or cross-complainant has met his or her burden of showing that there is no defense to a cause of action if that party has proved each element of the cause of action entitling the party to judgment on the ca...

Excerpt: ...otion is GRANTED but REDUCED. Civil Code section 1717: If neither party achieves a complete victory on all the contract claims, it is within the trial court's discretion to determine which party “prevailed” on the contract. (Scott Co. of Calif. v. Blount, Inc., (1999) 20 Cal.4th 1103, 1109; De La Cuesta v. Benham (2011) 193 Cal.App.4th 1287, 1294; Jackson v. Homeowners Ass'n Monte Vista Estates-East (2001) 93 Cal.App,4th 773, 786-789] In deci...

Excerpt: ...son for deposition on December 29, 2022. Accordingly, the Court DENIES the motion to compel an in-person deposition of Plaintiff as MOOT. The issue of sanctions remains. Defendant seeks monetary sanctions in the amount of $11,885 pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 2025.450, 2023.030, and 2023.010. Plaintiff contends Plaintiff acted with substantial justification and the amount of sanctions sought is exorbitant and excessive. “The cour...

Excerpt: ...mount of $55,169; a multiplier of 0.3 for a fee enhancement of $16,550.70, for a total amount of $71,719.70 in fees. Entitlement to Fees Civil Code section 1794, provides, in relevant part: “[i]f the buyer prevails in an action under this section, the buyer shall be allowed by the court to recover as part of the judgment a sum equal to the aggregate amount of costs and expenses, including attorney's fees based on actual time expended, determine...

Excerpt: ...failed to report to meeting”; that “male employees displayed insubordination and disrespect for Knott because she is a woman”; refused to take instructions from Plaintiff; made “vocal and aggressive communications in public forms (e.g., Slack), about Knott, her work, and her job duties”; male employees including BAINE “argued with Knott, set demands, and disregarded her opinions and instructions”; BAINE criticized Plaintiff's work a...

Excerpt: ...l, LLC's (“Engaged”) filed a Notice of Joinder in Motion to Dismiss. The forum selection clause at issue is mandatory and Plaintiff, as the party opposing the enforcement of the forum selection clause, has not met its burden of proof to show that enforcement would be unfair or unreasonable. (See Korman v. Princess Cruise Lines, Ltd. (2019) 32 Cal.App.5th 215, 216; CQL Original Prod., Inc. v. Nat'l Hockey League Players' Assn. (1995) 39 Cal.Ap...

Excerpt: ...ts to the conclusion that a “worker” is an individual person and does not extend to an entity. (See e.g., Waithaka v. Amazon.com, Inc. (1st Cir. 2020) 966 F.3d 10, 20, cert. denied (2021) 141 S.Ct. 2794, reh'g denied (2021) 141 S.Ct. 2886 [explaining the categories of “people” who are exempt under FAA]; Lenz v. Yellow Transp., Inc. (8th Cir. 2005) 431 F.3d 348, 352 [establishing a factor test to determine whether an employee is so closely...

Excerpt: ...ected activity]; Simpson Strong-Tie Co., Inc. v. Gore (2010) 49 Cal.4th 12, 21; Equilon Enterprises v. Consumer Cause, Inc. (2002) 29 Cal.4th 53, 66–67 If the defendant carries its burden, the plaintiff must then demonstrate the claims have at least “minimal merit.” (Navellier v. Sletten (2002) 29 Cal.4th 82, 89; Baral v. Schnitt (2016) 1 Cal.5th 376, 384 Further, under Baral, where the relief is sought on both protected and unprotected spe...

Excerpt: ...t cause of action or defense. [Citations.]” (Caloroso v. Hathaway (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 922, 926 (Caloroso).) “The elements of a negligence claim and a premises liability claim are the same: a legal duty of care, breach of that duty, and proximate cause resulting in injury. [Citations.]” (Kesner v. Superior Court (2016) 1 Cal.5th 1132, 1158.) “It is well established in California that although a store owner is not an insurer of the safet...

Excerpt: ...i, ¶ 4.) Though this effort does not satisfy the meet and confer requirements set forth in the Code of Civil Procedure, the Court will exercise its discretion to consider the merits of the Demurrer, as Defendant's counsel attempted to meet and confer and those attempts were ignored. Merits Defendant argues the sole cause of action for Fraudulent Transfer under the Uniform Voidable Transactions Act fails because Plaintiff does not allege Defendan...

Excerpt: ...e or order of court.” (Code Civ. Proc, § 436.) Furthermore, as with demurrers, the grounds for a motion to strike must appear on the face of the pleading under attack, or from matter which the court may judicially notice (e.g., the court's own files or records). (Code Civ. Proc, § 437.) Punitive Damages: MP seeks to strike the punitive damages allegations from the FAXC. A claim for punitive damages must be supported by specific factual allega...

Excerpt: ...tion on January 26, 2022. (ROA 93.) The Court notes Plaintiff filed a second Opposition, as well as Objections to Evidence, on November 2, 2022. Not only are Plaintiff's filings untimely, due to the November 11 holiday, but the Court did not grant Plaintiff leave to file any new opposition papers to the Motion. Thus, the Court will not consider the second Opposition or Objections to Evidence. Repeated Litigation under CCP § 391(b)(2): A litigant...

Excerpt: ...both the Demurrer and Motion to Strike. Thus, any objection by Pfizer has been effectively waived and Pfizer has not been prejudiced. Request for Judicial Notice: Pfizer requests judicial notice of the following: (1) The Inflectra label and medication guide in place since April 2016; and (2) The FDA's website regarding Tumor Necrosis Factor blockers. The Request for Judicial Notice as to Exhibit 2 (the FDA's website regarding Tumor Necrosis Facto...

Excerpt: ...and confer as required by Code of Civil Procedure section 430.41. (ROA # 258.) While the demurring parties filed a proof of service as required by the September 27, 2022 Minute Order, demurring parties failed to file a supplemental declaration regarding their further meet and confer efforts. Therefore, the demurring parties failed to follow the court's order. The court rules as follows on the Demurrer to the First Amended Complaint: • The Court...

Excerpt: ...of the California Rules of Court to refuse to consider papers served and filed beyond the deadline without a prior court order finding good cause for late submission.” (Mackey v. Board of Trustees of California State University (2019) 31 Cal.App.5th 640, 657.) Defendants both failed to timely oppose the Motion to Vacate. Their failure to oppose the motion may be treated as an abandonment of any opposition to the issues raised in the moving pape...

Excerpt: ...SA claims the parties intended to pursue a joint venture together to acquire and develop two or more gold mines located in Inyo County, California. (FAC, ¶ 19.) In exchange for BSA's expertise and labor pursuant to the joint venture, Hagestad agreed BSA would receive a percentage of ownership of the joint venture's gold mines and profits, including a 30 percent interest in both the Keystone and Radcliffe gold mines and a 15 percent carried inter...

Excerpt: ...on of public property. 4. Plaintiffs cannot establish the elements to support their negligence claim. 5. Plaintiffs cannot establish the elements to support a violation of the California Public Records Act (Government Code Section 6250, et seq.) Motion is DENIED in its entirety. Initially, the Court notes a staggering amount of documents were filed as to this motion. (3,450 pages). Each Plaintiff (Bardales and Kneeshaw) has filed their own opposi...

Excerpt: ...ble issues: (1) Whether an equitable servitude exists over Defendant Garruba's property that prohibits structures and vegetation over 17 feet high, and, if so, whether Plaintiff Buck can enforce the equitable servitude; and (2) Whether Plaintiff Buck can enforce a height restriction condition of approval imposed by the City of San Clemente on the Broadmoor project, including homes on Calle Delicada. Plaintiff cites Code of Civil Procedure section...