Excerpt: ...l from introducing evidence regarding any bodily injuries, medical provider(s), medical treatment(s) or other damages related thereto that Plaintiff has not disclosed in discovery as of the date of this order. For the following reasons, Defendant's motion is granted in part and denied in part. The court issued an order on November 15, 2018 directing Plaintiff Susan Firooz to provide complete and responsive further responses to Form Interrogatory ...

Excerpt: ...ff incurred $165,619.00 in attorneys' fees, Muse-Fisher Supp. Decl. ¶¶ 5, 6, 7 & 8, and that the invoices reflecting the fees incurred are attached to the Muse-Fisher Supplemental Declaration as Exhibits A and B. This order addresses only the amount of fees to be awarded. All other issues raised by Plaintiff's motion were addressed in the court's April 18, 2019 order, which should be read together with this order. On August 30, 2018, the court ...

Excerpt: ...he following reasons, Defendants' demurrer is sustained with leave to amend. In ruling on a demurrer, a court must accept as true all allegations of fact contained in the complaint. 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....

Excerpt: ...ourt must accept as true all allegations of fact contained in the complaint. 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.4 th 1395, 1404-05. Questions of fact cannot be decided on demurrer. Berryman v. Merit Prop. Mgmt., I...

Excerpt: ...pt as true all allegations of fact contained in the complaint. 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.4 th 1395, 1404-05. Questions of fact cannot be decided on demurrer. Berryman v. Merit Prop. Mgmt., Inc. (2007) 152...

Excerpt: ...rty-two days before the May 20, 2019 trial date. The court granted Defendants' ex parte application to advance the hearing on this motion to enable it to be heard before trial. The court's order granting Defendants' ex parte application states that the May 20, 2019 trial date remains, as does the court's order following the parties' unsuccessful Mandatory Settlement Conference. See 04/19/19 Order & 04/26/19 Order. A motion for judgment on the ple...

Excerpt: ...iling party is usually entitled as a matter of right to recover costs in any action or proceeding. Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 1032(b); see alsoCal. Civ. Code § 1794(d). If the items on a verified memorandum of costs appear to be proper charges, the memorandum is prima facie evidence of their propriety and the burden is on the party contesting them to show that they were not reasonable or necessary. Foothill-De Anza Comm. College Dist. v. Emerich (2...

Excerpt: ...act. Little v. Pullman (2013) 219 Cal.App.4 th 558, 565. The petitioner bears the burden of proving the existence of a valid arbitration agreement by the preponderance of the evidence, and a party opposing the petition bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence any fact necessary to its defense. Id. In these summary proceedings, the trial court sits as a trier of fact, weighing all the affidavits, declarations, and other docum...

Excerpt: ...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.4 th 1395, 1404-05. Questions of fact cannot be decided on demurrer. Berryman v. Merit Prop. Mgmt., Inc. (2007) 152 Cal.App.4 th 1544, 1556. Because a demurrer tests only the sufficiency of the c...

Excerpt: ...subpoena. The letters appear to be letters sent from a medical provider to Defendant Katherine Beisel. See Queen Decl. Ex. A (attachments). Plaintiff's subpoena seeks documents protected by Defendant's right to privacy. Manela v. Superior Ct. (2009) 177 Cal.App.4 th 1139, 1150 (“There is no question that medical records are highly sensitive materials that fall within the scope of the right to privacy.”). Plaintiff has not identified counterva...

Excerpt: ...ot repeat that analysis here. As explained in detail in the September 27, 2018 order, the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act (CUTSA) displaced the first, third, fourth and sixth causes of action in Plaintiff's Complaint. Plaintiff's FAC has not changed the allegations material to the analysis in the court's September 27, 2018 order. The gravamen of Plaintiff's FAC remains trade secret misappropriation. Each of Plaintiff's causes of action alleg...

Excerpt: ...greement clause in Plaintiff's employment agreement with Defendant. Amezcua-Moll Decl. (01/16/19) ¶¶ 2-4 & Exs. A & B. Paragraph 12.11 of the agreement, entitled “Governing Law; Jurisdiction; and Venue,” states: This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, without regard to principles of conflict of law. In the event of a dispute arising out of or relating to this Agreement, the p...

Excerpt: ... Defendant's arbitration agreement with Plaintiff. The arbitration agreement states that “[t]his Agreement and the arbitration shall be governed by the Federal Arbitration Act.” Id. (¶ 5). The agreement also states: 8. Authority to Resolve Disputes Regarding This Agreement. Except as set forth in this paragraph, or by the written mutual agreement of the parties, the arbitrator, and not any court, shall have exclusive authority to resolve any...

Excerpt: ...efendant argues that the jury's $49,308.73 verdict in favor of Plaintiff Underwood on her negligence cause of action should be reduced by the amount set forth in Defendant's sealed brief to account for Plaintiffs' settlement with Defendant Spring Valley Post Acute Skilled Nursing Center. Third, Defendant argues that Plaintiffs are not entitled to prejudgment interest on attorneys' fees and costs. For the following reasons, the court sustains Defe...

Excerpt: ...d several days of work to attend doctor's appointments related to the subject accident. Opp. at 5:19-26; id. at 7:26- 8:2. Defendant correctly states that those topics are relevant to the case. Defendant's statement also, however, demonstrates that the subpoena is overbroad. The subpoena is limited as follows: All documents and other records for the period August 25, 2016 to April 30, 2018 relating to any claims by Betty Duenas (DOB 06/25/1981) o...

Excerpt: ... individuals. Defendants oppose Plaintiff's motion. The individuals have not filed oppositions. For the following reasons, Plaintiff's motion is granted. Plaintiff served subpoenas on the four individuals seeking production of a copy of each person's settlement agreement with Defendants and testimony about “[t]he claims, damages, and terms of [each] settlement.” See Liu Decl. Exs. I-L. In response, the individuals objected to the subpoenas on...

Excerpt: ...ruth 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.4 th 1395, 1404-05. Questions of fact cannot be decided on demurrer. Berryman v. Merit Prop. Mgmt., Inc. (2007) 152 Cal.App.4 th 1544, 1556. Because a demurrer tests only the sufficiency of the complaint, a court will not consider facts that have not been alleged in the complaint unless they may be reaso...

Excerpt: ...nc.'s First Amended Complaint (“FAC”). Defendant Mark Artukovich (“Artukovich”) moves for summary judgment of the same causes of action against him. Neither VAS nor Artukovich moves for summary adjudication of any issues or claims. For the following reasons, VAS's motion is denied and Artukovich's motion is denied. A defendant seeking summary judgment bears the burden of persuasion and burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence to...

Excerpt: ...sponding party permits.” “[P]arties, like witnesses, are required to state the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in answering written interrogatories.” Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 783. “A party may not deliberately misconstrue a question for the purpose of supplying an evasive answer.” Id. Special Interrogatory No. 1 asks Defendant to state how she believes the “INCIDENT” occurred. The interrogatory d...

Excerpt: ...1794(d). If the items on a verified memorandum of costs appear to be proper charges, the memorandum is prima facie evidence of their propriety and the burden is on the party contesting them to show that they were not reasonable or necessary. Foothill-De Anza Comm. College Dist. v. Emerich (2007) 158 Cal.App.4 th 11, 29; Wagner Farms, Inc. v. Modesto Irrigation Dist. (2006) 145 Cal.App.4 th765, 773- 74. The party challenging costs does not meet th...

Excerpt: ... is granted. A defendant seeking summary judgment bears the burden of persuasion and burden of proof by a preponderance 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. Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 437c(p)(2); Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 2...

Excerpt: ...utomatic stay on all state and federal proceedings against the debtor outside of the bankruptcy court, subject to certain statutory exceptions not relevant here. State courts in which action against the debtor are pending do not have the power to modify the automatic stay; only the bankruptcy court can do so. In re Gruntz (9 th Cir.2000) 202 F.3d 1074, 1082-83 (en banc). The automatic stay is self-executing and is effective upon filing the bankru...

Excerpt: ...equests for Production (Set One) propounded to each within twenty days of service of the order. Caspino Decl. Ex. E. The order states that “[d]uring the hearing, the parties acknowledged that most if not all of the responsive documents will be produced by SCSA and they agreed that [the Dewykes were] not required to produce duplicative documents.” Id. The discovery referee ordered David Dewyke and Johnnie Dewyke to produce responsive documents...

Excerpt: ...nst Defendants on January 31, 2019. For the following reasons, Defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted. A defendant seeking summary judgment bears the burden of persuasion and burden of proof by a preponderance 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 judgm...

Excerpt: ...ased is one upon which an attachment may be issued; (2) the plaintiff has established the probable validity of the claim upon which the attachment is based; (3) the attachment is not sought for a purpose other than the recovery on the claim upon which the attachment is based; and (4) the amount to be secured by the attachment is greater than zero. Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 484.090(a)(1)-(4). A court may order the issuance of a writ of attachment on...