Excerpt: ...in the Notice of Motion, Defendant asks this court to strike out language which he contends is false based on reference to documents attached to complaint and to the Request for Judicial Notice. The document attached to the complaint does not go to the foundation of any cause of action and is instead attached to illustrate the claim that the document was not valid. The documents attached to the Request for Judicial Notice are not relevant as the ...

Excerpt: ...dant has sufficient “minimum contacts” with the forum state so that the exercise of jurisdiction does not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice. Ibid. In other words, the defendant's contacts with the forum state must be such that the defendant had “fair warning” that its activities might subject it to personal jurisdiction in the state. Id. at pp. 1166-1167. Each defendant's contacts with the forum State must be...

Excerpt: ...al effects of the records, but not as to the truth of any disputed facts asserted therein. (Ev. Code §452(d); Fontenot v. Wells Fargo Bank, NA (2011) 198 Cal.App.4th 256, 264; Arce v. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. (2010) 181 Cal.App.4th 471, 482.) As a preliminary matter, the Court notes that Defendant failed to file proof of service of the motion and the reply. (CRC 3.1300(c)). Plaintiff opposed the motion on the merits and thus waived th...

Excerpt: ...ired Notice of Right to Arbitrate (“Notice”) regarding a fee dispute in the underlying matter of Merrell v. Ford Motor Company, Orange County Superior Court Case No. 30-2020-01147752-CU-BC-NJC (“Underlying Case” or “UC”). Plaintiff's opposition provided no evidence showing a Notice had ever been served on Defendants as required under Bus. & Prof. Code § 6201(a). Bus. & Prof. Code § 6201 and the Mandatory Fee Arbitration Act (“MFAA...

Excerpt: ...sible for the day to day operations of Doe 2, (3) that between 1997 and 2008 Doe 1 worked at temples owned by Doe 2, (4) that between 1997 and 2008 Doe 1 was in contact with minor children at temples owned by Doe 2, (5) that between 1997 and 2008 Doe 1 sexually molested or otherwise inappropriately touched minor children in or around the temples owned by Doe 2 and (6) that between 1997 and 2008 he worked at temples owned by Doe 2. (ROA #93) On 7/...

Excerpt: ...sam” individually) and Danielle Darwish (“Plaintiffs” together with Hassam). The court finds a preliminary injunction (“PI”) should not be issued in this instance. The Temporary Restraining Order (“TRO”) that was granted on 08/15/22 is also ordered to be terminated. The court notes Plaintiffs have put forth almost no, or at most excessively minimal, legal basis, arguments, and evidence in support of their request for a PI. Instead, ...

Excerpt: ...iled by plaintiff against the two defendants, and both defendants filed a single opposition to all six, which prompted plaintiff to file a single reply. Defendants contend that the vast majority of discovery requests at issue are moot because they served a supplemental response to the discovery, i.e., a “second amended and supplemented omnibus objections and responses of defendants Dyllon and Chase Whitaker to form interrogatories, requests for...

Excerpt: ... itself must determine whether the agreement exists and, if any defense to its enforcement is raised, whether it is enforceable.” (Mitri v. Arnel Management Co. (2007) 157 Cal.App.4th 1164, 1169) (emphasis in original.) Here, Plaintiff does not dispute that she signed the “Self-Service Storage Rental Agreement” (“the Agreement”) which contains the arbitration provision at issue. Rather, she contends that because the Agreement was signed...

Excerpt: ...fendants' evidentiary objections are all overruled. Summary Adjudication Plaintiffs move for summary adjudication in their favor and against Doe 1 on the first four causes of action pled in their complaint which are respectively for: (1) sexual assault, (2) sexual battery, (3) Gender Violence and (4) sexual harassment. Plaintiffs move for summary adjudication against Doe 2 on the fourth cause of action only. Standards A plaintiff moving for summa...

Excerpt: ...er of RFAS (an additional 132 RFAS bringing the total to 257) was warranted under CCP §2033.040 to establish liability and damages and that the number of SROGS was warranted (an additional 102 SROGS bringing the total number to 371) “because of the complexity of the existing and potential issues of the particular case”. No party may propound more than thirty-five (35) RFAs that do not relate to genuineness of documents. (CCP §2033.030(a).) ...

Excerpt: ...2030.290(a).) Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings A motion for judgment on the pleadings has the same function as a general demurrer but is made after the time for demurrer has expired. Except as provided by CCP § 438, the rules governing demurrers apply. (Cloud v. Northrop Grumman Corp. (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 995, 999 (citing text); Southern Calif. Edison Co. v. City of Victorville (2013) 217 Cal.App.4th 218, 227; Templo v. State of Calif. (201...

Excerpt: ...face European Master Distributor Agreement” as the written contract at issue, and attaches it as Exhibit D. It identifies the parties to the agreement, reflects signatures, and states the agreement terms. Performance is also alleged, as is breach, in failing to promote and market RPs' product and in failing to order at least 100 “big brake kits,” and damages for costs incurred for manufacturing the brakes (see ¶¶ 57- 59, 62-66, 73.) Wheth...

Excerpt: ...vides that all papers relating to the same motion may be combined, “[i]t should not be read to authorize combining papers relating to separate motions.” (See Weil & Brown (The Rutter Group 2021) Cal. Prac. Guide Civ. Pro. Before Trial, Law and Motion §9:24.3) Procedural Deficiency The motions are denied based on plaintiff's failure to file separate statements for all of the motions or submit a concise outline of the discovery requests and ea...

Excerpt: ...tice of the truth of the hearsay matters stated therein or a particular interpretation of the laws cited therein. (Herrera v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. (2011) 196 Cal.App.4th 1366, 1374-1375) A. Plaintiff's Objection to the Declaration of Mokhtar Ramadan is OVERRULED. (See ROA #138) A. Defendant's Objections to documents Nos. 1-3 below are OVERRULED. 1. Declaration of Laurent Fabre and Exhibits A through E thereto 1. Declaration of Sacha E...

Excerpt: ...duty; (3) a proximate causal connection between the negligent conduct and the resulting injury; and (4) actual loss or damage resulting from the professional's negligence. Paul v. Patton (2015) 235 Cal.App.4th 1088, 1095. Here, the FAC pleads that Nabavian, as an insurance professional, owed a duty to Plaintiff to fulfill promises made and services contracted for by Plaintiff; that Nabavian breached its duty by failing to obtain fire insurance as...

Excerpt: ...9 and served on January 24, 2019 3. Substitution of Attorney filed on July 5, 2019 in the matter of Kamell v. Del Taco, LLC, Court of Appeal for the Fourth District, Case No. G057498 Demurrer Standards While a demurrer admits all material facts properly pleaded (Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318), the complaint may be read as containing judicially noticeable facts even when the pleading contains express contrary allegations. (Jocer Enterp...

Excerpt: ...0, the time to bring the case to trial would have run, but for any applicable exceptions, by 6/14/21. (See C.C.P. § 12a and 583.310.) However, under Emergency Rule 10 (“ER 10”), that was extended by six months. (See DRJN Ex. 3.) The 5-year deadline for both cases was thus extended to 12/14/21. It is undisputed that Plaintiffs John Duffy and Laura Duffy (“Plaintiffs”) did not bring the cases to trial by that time. Dismissal is thus warran...

Excerpt: ...nt. (CCP § 437c(p)(1); see Hunter v. Pacific Mechanical Corp. (1995) 37 Cal.App.4th 1282, 1287 (citing text) (disapproved on other grounds in Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826); S.B.C.C., Inc. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. (2010) 186 Cal.App.4th 383, 388.) COA 1: Breach of Equipment Financing Agreement The first cause of action asserts a breach of contract claim against MS Physicians. The elements of a breach of contra...

Excerpt: ...rned upon Defendants' demand. (Ernby Decl. ¶ 5, Ex. C at p. 4, instruction No. 10.) Significantly, the Devices were returned after this lawsuit was filed. Nonetheless, Defendants admit to discarding the Devices without any prior notice to Plaintiff. Plaintiff seeks a court order for purpose of restoring data from the Devices it retained from the seizure in which Defendants will bear the costs of the restoration and the cost of a referee to revie...

Excerpt: ...ntiffs and judgment creditors that sought to unwind the assignment, all of which were denied by the Court. Moving party contends that the agreement with the plaintiffs afford them a basis for attorneys' fees, as does Code of Civil Procedure section 128.5. The agreement with the plaintiffs (Exhibit B to moving papers) contains the following provision in paragraph 10: Attorneys' Fees and Costs. In any legal proceeding between the Parties arising ou...

Excerpt: ...ust consider two factors: (1) the likelihood the moving party ultimately will prevail on the merits, and (2) the balance of the interim harm that the moving party is likely to sustain if the injunction is denied and the harm to the opposing party is likely to suffer if the injunction is granted. White, supra, at 554; Teamster Local 856 v. Priceless, LLC, (2003) 112 Cal. App.4th 1500, 1509. “The granting or denial of a preliminary injunction doe...

Excerpt: ...real property. . .” (Civ. Proc. Code § 405.4.) “The statute provides no further definition of “affect ... title to, or the right to possession of,” specific real property, nor has case law provided any abstract definition. [Citations.] Case law has determined that certain types of actions clearly do, or clearly do not, affect title or possession. [Citations.] At one extreme, “[a] buyer's action for specific performance of a real proper...

Excerpt: ...compel compliance. This motion is made pursuant to CCP §2031.320(a). Here, Andersson responded that she would comply with the RFPS at issue. That response was adequate for Razzo. There is no dispute over his right to inspect the responsive documents. The 45-day time limit for motions to compel further discovery responses does not apply to a motion brought pursuant this section. (Standon Co. v. Superior Court (1990) 225 Cal.App.3d 898, 903). Ande...

Excerpt: ... Because April does not seek judgment on all causes of action stated in her complaint, this motion is one for summary adjudication. (CCP §437c(f)(1)) April bears the burden of persuasion that there is no triable issue of material fact and that she is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” (Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 850) Preliminary Matter – April's RJN April's request for judicial notice, pursuant to Evid. C...

Excerpt: ...lied warranty of merchantability by the manufacturer of consumer goods and, where applicable, an implied warranty of fitness for a particular purpose or need by the manufacturer, distributor, or retailer. (Civ. Code, §§ 1792, 1792.1, 1792.2.) As used in the Act, the term “buyer” is defined as “any individual who buys consumer goods from a person engaged in the business of manufacturing, distributing, or selling consumer goods at retail.�...