Excerpt: ... legal sufficiency of the affected pleading, not the truth of the factual allegations in the pleading or the pleader's ability to prove those allegations. (Cundiff v. GTE Cal., Inc. (2002) 101 Cal.App.4th 1395, 1404-05.) Questions of fact cannot be decided on demurrer. (Berryman v. Merit Prop. Mgmt., Inc. (2007) 152 Cal.App.4th 1544, 1556.) Because a demurrer tests only the sufficiency of the complaint, a court will not consider facts that have n...

Excerpt: ...ion, fraud, or malice.” In order to survive a motion to strike punitive damages, the Plaintiff must plead ultimate facts to show it is entitled to such relief. (Grieves v. Superior Court (1984) 157 Cal.App.3d 159, 166.) Conclusory characterization of defendant's conduct as intentional, willful, and fraudulent is a patently insufficient statement of “oppression, fraud, or malice” within the meaning of Section 3294. (Brousseau v. Jarrett (197...

Excerpt: ...urrer challenges only the legal sufficiency of the affected pleading, not the truth of the factual allegations in the pleading or the pleader's ability to prove those allegations. (Cundiff v. GTE Cal., Inc. (2002) 101 Cal.App.4th 1395, 1404-05.) Questions of fact cannot be decided on demurrer. (Berryman v. Merit Prop. Mgmt., Inc. (2007) 152 Cal.App.4th 1544, 1556.) Because a demurrer tests only the sufficiency of the complaint, a court will not c...

Excerpt: ...Defendant Brenda Hendricks asserted the following objections to this interrogatory, as it relates to Requests for Admission Nos. 1-8: The requests are vague and ambiguous and call for legal and expert conclusions. The requests also invade the province of the jury. However, subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections. Responding Party responds as follows: Deny. Requests for Admission Nos. 1-8 ask Plaintiff to admit she has never and is...

Excerpt: ..., it shall be answered to the extent possible. (c) If the responding party does not have personal knowledge sufficient to respond fully to an interrogatory, that party shall so state, but shall make a reasonable and good faith effort to obtain the information by inquiry to other natural persons or organizations, except where the information is equally available to the propounding party.” For No. 14, Defendant objected, because the service on th...

Excerpt: ...no merit because each is premised on a legally unenforceable promise of marriage; (2) Plaintiff's first, second, third, fourth, and sixth causes of action have no merit because there is insufficient evidence of a Marvin Agreement as a matter of law; and (3) Plaintiff's fifth cause of action has no merit because there is no legal basis for the Plaintiff to take back funds that were gratuitously given. For the following reasons, the court is inclin...

Excerpt: ... legal sufficiency of the affected pleading, not the truth of the factual allegations in the pleading or the pleader's ability to prove those allegations. (Cundiff v. GTE Cal., Inc. (2002) 101 Cal.App.4th 1395, 1404-05.) Questions of fact cannot be decided on demurrer. (Berryman v. Merit Prop. Mgmt., Inc. (2007) 152 Cal.App.4th 1544, 1556.) Because a demurrer tests only the sufficiency of the complaint, a court will not consider facts that have n...

Excerpt: ...n furtherance of the person's right of petition or free speech under the United States Constitution or the California Constitution in connection with a public issue shall be subject to a special motion to strike, unless the court determines that the plaintiff has established that there is a probability that the plaintiff will prevail on the claim.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16(b)(1).) Resolution of an anti-SLAPP motion involves two steps. First,...

Excerpt: ...31.240 (c) (1) required that “If an objection is based on a claim of privilege or a claim that the information sought is protected work product, the response shall provide sufficient factual information for other parties to evaluate the merits of that claim, including, if necessary, a privilege log.” Nos. 13, 14, 22 & 23: Plaintiff limited the requests only to documents sufficient to determine funding, not all documents. Plaintiff alleged tha...

Excerpt: ... supplemental responses to RFP Nos. 29, 30, 59, 78, and 94 on March 4, 2021, rendering this portion of Plaintiff's motion moot. (Gonzales Decl., ¶ 13, Ex. N.) Plaintiff does not dispute Defendant's statement. The motion to compel further responses is denied as to RFP Nos. 29, 30, 59, 78, and 94. RFP Nos. 37 and 66 seek evidence of discrimination experienced by employees other than Plaintiff, otherwise known as “me too” evidence. (Schmidt v. ...

Excerpt: ... reasonable and good faith attempt at an informal resolution of each issue presented by the motion. (CCP § 2016.040.) The meet and confer requirement is designed “to encourage the parties to work out their differences informally so as to avoid the necessity for a formal order….This, in turn, will lessen the burden on the court and reduce the unnecessary expenditure of resources by litigants through promotion of informal, extrajudicial resolu...

Excerpt: ... RFP 1-2 - Deny RFP 1 states: “Produce all written records of each payment you made for legal services at any time since June 24, 2011.” RFP 2 states: “Produce all electronic records of each payment you made for legal services at any time since June 24, 2011.” CBL objected to these requests based on attorney-client and work-product privileges, as well as relevance. Attorney-Client and Work Product Privileges CBL contends the requested pay...

Excerpt: ...son Form Interrogatory Decl., ¶ 9, Ex. A.) However, Defendant's responses to Form Interrogatories (Set One) include general objections. (See Dickson Decl., ¶ 9, Ex. A.) Due to Defendant's failure to serve timely responses to the interrogatories, Defendant has “waive[d] any right to exercise the option to produce writings under Section 2030.230, as well as any objection to the interrogatories, including one based on privilege or on the protect...

Excerpt: ...o protect any party, deponent, or other natural person or organization from unwarranted annoyance, embarrassment, or oppression, or undue burden and expense. This protective order may include, but is not limited to, one or more of the following directions: (1) That the deposition not be taken at all. . . .” Plaintiffs have noticed the deposition of Defendant's attorney. “Depositions of opposing counsel are presumptively improper, severely res...

Excerpt: ...y. The Court makes no order concerning production of documents at deposition. This issue is not properly before the Court at this time. The Court notes that Opposition to this Motion was filed by defendant/cross- complainant on March 5, 2021. Service by email was not done until March 8, 2021. The Court again reminds both parties of their statutory obligation to properly serve their papers on all party. CCP §§1005, 1010, et seq. Future failure t...

Excerpt: ...onderance of the evidence to negate the plaintiff's claim. It may do this by demonstrating the claim has no merit, that the plaintiff cannot prove an element of the claim, or that the defendant has a complete defense entitling it to judgment as a matter of law. (Civ. Proc. Code § 437c(p)(2); Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 850-51.) If a defendant does not meet this initial burden, the plaintiff need not oppose the motion...

Excerpt: ...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.” Here, Plaintiff seeks attorney's fees incurred in this action for breach of contract. (For example, see Complaint filed on 2/27/19 under ROA No. 2 which alleges Breach of Contract as the first cause of action.) Defendants (Tucker Family Restaurants, LLC and Michael Tucker) did not file an Opposition. Therefore, D...

Excerpt: ...hat Mutual Arbitration Agreement provides, in part: If you and Irvine Management Company, Irvine Holding Company, the Irvine Company, or any of affiliate or successor of the foregoing persons, or any past or present officer, director, employee, agent, benefit plan or, benefit plan sponsor, fiduciary, or administrator of any such person (collectively, the “Company”), have a legal dispute regarding any claim or matter arising out of or relating...

Excerpt: ...has had an opportunity to amend the complaint in response to the demurrer. Oakland Bulk and Oversized Terminal, LLC v. City of Oakland (2020) 54 Cal.App.5th 738, 751. Regardless of the order of the court's rulings, the court provides this tentative ruling as to the SLAPP motion. Defendant Toni Nelson moves pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 425.16 to strike portions of the First Amended Complaint of Plaintiff Brandon Day. For the followi...

Excerpt: ...nk v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318. A demurrer challenges only the legal sufficiency of the affected pleading, not the truth of the factual allegations in the pleading or the pleader's ability to prove those allegations. Cundiff v. GTE Cal., Inc. (2002) 101 Cal.App.4th 1395, 1404-05. Questions of fact cannot be decided on demurrer. Berryman v. Merit Prop. Mgmt., Inc. (2007) 152 Cal.App.4th 1544, 1556. Because a demurrer tests only the suffici...

Excerpt: ...nterference with expected inheritance, and 4) invasion of privacy. The first cause of action for conversion alleges that Defendants took without consent various guns to which Plaintiff had a right of possession. (Complaint, ¶¶ 9-12.) Similarly, the fourth cause of action for invasion of privacy alleges Defendants invaded Plaintiff's privacy beginning in 2015 by entering Defendant's residence and searching certain areas, included locked or close...

Excerpt: ...ring on the face of the pleading or from other matters properly subject to judicial notice. (See Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318.) A demurrer challenges only the legal sufficiency of the affected pleading, not the truth of the factual allegations in the pleading or the pleader's ability to prove those allegations. (Cundiff v. GTE Cal., Inc. (2002) 101 Cal.App.4th 1395, 1404-1405.) The general and special demurrers to the Third Cause of ...

Excerpt: ...arbitration. On August 24, 2020, the Court of Appeal issued an Opinion in which it remanded the case for a determination in the first instance whether the arbitration provision in the 2015 Provider Manual is unconscionable. For the following reasons, the court is inclined to find the Arbitration Provision in the 2015 Provider Manual unconscionable and, thus, deny Optum's motion to compel arbitration. Generally applicable contract defenses, such a...

Excerpt: ...001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 850.) A defendant moving for summary judgment satisfies his or her initial burden by showing that one or more elements of the cause of action cannot be established or that there is a complete defense to the cause of action. (Code Civ. Proc. § 437c(p)(2).) The scope of this burden is determined by the allegations of the plaintiff's complaint. (FPI Development, Inc. v. Nakashima (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 367, 381–82 (pleadings s...

Excerpt: ... alleged professional negligence, the time for the commencement of action shall be three years after the date of injury or one year after the plaintiff discovers, or through the use of reasonable diligence should have discovered, the injury, whichever occurs first.” “The date of injury in a wrongful death cause of action is the date of death. Kleefeld v. Superior Court (1994) 25 Cal.App.4th 1680, 1684. Decedent, Kristy Murdock died on 1/26/18...