Excerpt: ...sponded 7/26/2023. Pl aintiff filed Page 7 of 21 this Motion to Compel Further Responses to RPDS on 8/23/2023. The Court notes that in recent years, an astounding number of cases have been filed against Defendant Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. in OCSC. These cases involve a tremendous amount of time and resources for the Court, its staff, and research attorneys. For example, in this case, Plaintiff's motion includes a 195 page separate state...

Excerpt: ...ntiff's Motion to Compel further Deposition of HMA's Person Most Knowledgeable: a. Paragraph 4 – 1:19, 20 – 3:6 b. Paragraph 5 – 3:7 -8 c. Paragraph 6 – 3:9 -10 d. Exhibit P e. Exhibit Q 3. ROA# 488, Plaintiff's Amended Motion for Terminating Sanctions or Alternatively, f or Issue and/or Evidentiary Sanctions a. Page 1:15 -16, 19 -27 b. Page 2:2 -8 c. Page 2, fn. 3 d. Page 6, 13 -14, 16 -24, 26 -28 e. Page 7: 1 -2 4. ROA# 486, Amended Dec...

Excerpt: ...re, the motion is d enied, without prejudice, for the same reasons as set forth in the Court's March 7, 2024 and March 28, 2024 Minute Orders on Defendants' motion to deem the truth of the matters in Request for Admissions, Set One, admitted and motion to compel responses to Demand for Production of Documents, Set One. (See ROAs 90 and 94.) On June 21, 2023, Defendants served written discovery by mail on Plaintiff, including the instant Form Inte...

Excerpt: ...tiary objections to the De claration of Robert Dale Beaver are OVERRULED. Plaintiff's request for judicial notice of Orange County Ordinance 2183 and the Court's 04 -0722 minute order is GRANTED. (Evid. Code, § 452(b), (d).) Steven and Robert purchased the Pine Place property in 1 988 as joint tenants. Steven subsequently moved out in 1989 or 1990. Robert claims that in 1992, he and Steven agreed that Steven would grant Robert his entire interes...

Excerpt: ...ly found tha t defendant Cutler is subject to the Page 5 of 21 Court's personal jurisdiction in its November 17, 2023 Minute Order and that Defendant has not met his burden for reconsideration. A motion for reconsideration must be filed within 10 days of service of n otice of entry of the order in question. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1008(a).) However, “the trial court retains the inherent authority to change its decision at any time prior to the en...

Excerpt: ...fact the operativ e complaint is the First Amended Complaint. The court also notes that Plaintiff filed two identical oppositions to the Demurrer. In the notice of motion, Defendant argues that Plaintiff lacks standing to bring the action. Defendant also argues that the complaint is uncertain because Plaintiff failed to allege whether the actions are brought on Plaintiff's behalf or on the corporation's behalf and, to the extent that they were b...

Excerpt: ...vice of the Complai nt as the Complaint was served on the City on June 15, 2023. Plaintiff does not dispute this assertion in the points and authorities. “The special motion may be filed within 60 days of the service of the complaint or, in the court's discretion, at any la ter time upon terms it deems proper.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16(f).) “In other words, the defendant is only entitled to ‘file[]' such a motion within 60 days of ser...

Excerpt: ...r than her i nitial request. No explanation is given as to why Plaintiff now seeks a sanction amount 37 times greater than initial requested. Plaintiff contends in her moving papers, that Defendants failed to timely pay fees or costs to initiate an arbitration procee ding. Indeed, in her moving papers, Plaintiff cites to and relies exclusively on Code Civ. Proc. §1281.97(a) quoting as follows: “In an employment or consumer arbitration that req...

Excerpt: ...e meet and confer, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure S ection 435.5. The Court notes that Defendant failed to adequately meet and confer before filing this Motion. The Court will exercise its discretion to consider the merits of the Motion at this time but admonishes Def endant that the future failure to comply with all applicable statutes and rules may result in a motion being taken off calendar in the future or sanctions, where appropriate. ...

Excerpt: ...iled to fil e an opposition. In reviewing the complaint, it is unclear what causes of action are being alleged and against whom. However, the gravamen of the complaint appears to be rooted in a negligence claim. Defendant's first argument that plaintiff's complai nt fails to plead any of the elements of dangerous condition of public property under Government Code section 835 is well taken. Moreover, Defendant also appears correct in its asserti...

Excerpt: ...operly serve an amen ded Complaint by April 3, 2023, or thereafter; that at the May 4, 2023, Case Management Conference, Plaintiff had still not filed the First Amended Complaint and represented to the Court that one would be filed but that one had still not been filed and tha t Plaintiff never requested additional time to file and serve an amended complaint, and no extension was granted. Defendant asserts that the entry of default appears to...

Excerpt: ...1, 2023 be deemed admi tted and conclusively established for all purposes in this action. Defendants additionally move for an order awarding monetary sanctions against Plaintiff in the sum of $690 each for three filed motions for a total of $2,070 for all motions. Defendants contend that Plaintiff has not served responses to the discovery at issue and that Plaintiff has asserted that she has already responded to the discovery via her complaint a...

Excerpt: ... must consider the objections to the interrogatories, the interrogatories themselves, the pleadings, and the contentions of the interrogating party as to the purpose and validity of the interrogatories. (Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. v. Superior Court for Los Angeles C ounty (1968) 263 Cal.App.3d 12, 18- 19.) “If the interrogatories stray too far and seek information which cannot reasonably serve the acknowledge purposes of pretrial discov...

Excerpt: ...o effectua te personal service. Instead, Plaintiff served all Defendants by emailing the summons and complaint to Defendant Chavez. Defendants argue that Chavez did not agree to accept service of the summons and complaint by email and further did not agree to accep t service on behalf of the other Defendants. Defendants also argue that Plaintiff did not establish that she made diligent attempts to personally serve Defendants prior to serving them...

Excerpt: ...ng party has 30 days after service of a demand for inspection to ser ve a response, Page 4 of 16 unless the parties agree to extend the date for a response and the agreement is “confirmed in a writing that specifies the extended date . . . for the service of a response.” (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2031.260(a), 2031.270(a) -(b).) If a party to whom requests for production of documents were directed fails to serve a timely response, the propoundin...

Excerpt: ... if a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, a rep resentation of inability to comply is inadequate, or an objection is without merit or too general. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.310(a).) The motion must set forth specific facts showing good cause to justify the discovery sought. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.310(b).) A party may move for an order compelling further responses to interrogatories if the party deems an answer to be evasive...

Excerpt: ...e profession commonly possess and exercise; (2) a brea ch of the duty; (3) a proximate causal connection between the negligent conduct and the injury; and (4) resulting loss or damage.” (Lattimore v. Dickey (2015) 239 Cal.App.4th 959, 968.) “The standard of care against which the acts of a physician are to b e measured is a matter peculiarly within the knowledge of experts; it presents the basic issue in a malpractice action and can only be p...

Excerpt: ...��If a deponent fails to answer any question or to produce any document, electronically stored information, or tangible thing under the deponent's control that is specified in the deposition notice or a deposition subpoena, the party seeking discovery may move the court for an order compelling that answer or production.” Co de of Civil Procedure section 2025.480(b) states, in relevant part: “[t]his motion [motion to compel answers or pro...

Excerpt: ...operty. ISSUE NO. 2: Summary Adjudication is proper as to Plaintiff's Second Cause of Action for Premises Liability because Defendant had no actual or constructive notice of a dangerous condition on Defendant's property. Initially, the Court notes that the instant motion and moving papers were filed and served on February 8, 2024, which is only 42 days before the noticed hearing date of March 21, 2024. 75 -days' notice is required on a motion fo...

Excerpt: ...berts dba Image Auto Group; 2. that all parties to this acti on are hereby restrained from instituting or further prosecuting any other proceeding in any other court in the State of California, or any other jurisdiction, affecting the rights and obligations between the parties to this interpleader; 3. that Hudson b e dismissed with prejudice from the instant action, and any legal actions pending against the bond proceeds; 4. that Hudson be awarde...

Excerpt: ...award of reasonable attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to Civil Code section 1717, as they are authorized by the Promissory Note at issue in this case. Plaintiff asserts that the motion is timely; that the lodestar applies; that 172.6 hours of attorney time was expended for this action which commenced in October 2020 through August 2023 by Sean Cooney, principal of Cooney Law PC, and is reasonable as this case was aggressively defended until coun...

Excerpt: ... Fourteenth Amendment, and Third Cause of Action for Civil Harassment. D efendant contends that although the caption of Plaintiff's Complaint appears to allege violations of the 4th and 14th Amendments, the body of the Complaint states no facts regarding any such violations, and that actions were taken in accordance with the OC Municipal Code. Defendants also contend that Code of Civil Procedure section 527.6 concerns harassment, and that Plainti...

Excerpt: ...o. 7, and awarding monetary sanctions in the amount of at least $1,387.57 against Defendant. Plaintiff additionally moves for an order compelling further responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set One (“RFP”), Nos. 4 -6, 8, 9, 15, and 19, and compelling compliance with RFP, Nos. 1 -3, 7, 10, 14, 16, and 17, as well as awarding monetary sanctions in the amount of at least $3,862.57 against Defendant. Lastly, Plaintiff moves for an o...

Excerpt: ...egations of the plaintiff's complaint. (FPI Development v. Nakas hima (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 367, 381 -382 (pleadings serve as the outer measure of materiality in a summary judgment motion)). Once a defendant meets its prima facie showing, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show by reference to specific facts the exist ence of a triable issue as to that affirmative defense or cause of action. (Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4...

Excerpt: ...section 426.50. However, when a defendant seeks to file a cross-complaint against another party, not the plaintiff, the cross -complaint is not compulsory. Rather, the defendant will be permitted to file a cross - complaint if the cause of action asserted: “(1) arises out of the same transaction, occurrence, or ser ies of transactions or occurrences as the cause brought against him or (2) asserts a claim, right, or interest in the property or...