Excerpt: ...ot limited to, the following:” 1. The necessity and the reasons for the discovery; 2. The diligence or lack of diligence of the party seeking the discovery or the hearing of a discovery motion, and the reasons that the discovery was not completed or that the discovery motion was not heard earlier; 3. Any likelihood that permitting the discovery will prevent the case from going to trial on the date set, or otherwise interfere with the trial cale...

Excerpt: ...tiff's job duties in May had been hired in March of 2016. In March of 2016 and May of 2016 people had been hired and they took over most of Plaintiff's job duties in May and then the remainder of her job duties in October 2016 when she demanded that she receive a raise in pay or that her job duties be reduced. Carlsen Decl. Ex. B (at 13:23-14:2). Plaintiff's Special Interrogatory No. 9 seeks the names of the individuals referred to in Defendant's...

Excerpt: ... court addresses section 128.7 motion); id. § 1005(b) (“all moving and supporting papers shall be served and filed at least 16 court days before the hearing”) (emphasis added); Cal. R. Ct. 3.1300(c) (“Proof of service of the moving papers must be filed no later than five court days before the time appointed for the hearing.”). Defendant also did not comply with section 128.7(c)(1) (“Notice of motion shall be served as provided in Secti...

Excerpt: ...nges 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 complaint, a court will not consider facts ...

Excerpt: ...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 complaint, a court will not consider facts that have not been a...

Excerpt: ...rm and special interrogatories on Plaintiff on February 20, 2018. Alvanos Form Interrogatory Decl. Ex. 1; Alvanos Special Interrogatory Decl. Ex. 1. Pursuant to various extensions, Plaintiff's responses were due on April 12, 2018. Alvanos Form Interrogatory Decl. ¶ 5 & Ex. 3; Alvanos Special Interrogatory Decl. ¶ 5 & Ex. 3. Plaintiff has not served any responses. Alvanos Form Interrogatory Decl. ¶¶ 10- 11; Alvanos Special Interrogatory Decl. ...

Excerpt: ...ng, 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 complaint, a court will not consider facts that have not been alleged in the complaint unless the...

Excerpt: ...lowing reasons, Cross-Defendants' demurrer is sustained with leave to amend. The elements of intentional interference with prospective economic relations are: (i) an economic relationship between Cross-Complainant and a third party that probably would have resulted in an economic benefit to Cross-Complainant; (ii) Cross-Defendants' knowledge of the relationship; (iii) wrongful conduct by Cross-Defendants; (iv) by engaging in the wrongful conduct,...

Excerpt: ...he 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) 25 Cal.4th 826, 850-51. If a defendant does not meet this initial burden, the plaintiff need not oppose the motion and the motion must be denied. Binder v. Aetna Life Ins. Co. (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 832, ...

Excerpt: ...he requests. The court has reviewed Plaintiff's supplemental responses and finds that they moot Defendant's motion as to those forty-seven requests. California courts have recognized that requests for admission differ in purpose from other commonly used discovery devices, such as interrogatories, document demands, or depositions. City of Glendale v. Marcus Cable Assocs., LLC (2015) 235 Cal.App.4 th 344, 352. Although requests for admission are in...

Excerpt: ...t entirely of objections. SeeCal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2030.250(a) (“The party to whom the interrogatories are directed shall sign the response under oath unless the response contains only objections.”). If the responses contain an objection(s), the party's attorney must sign the response. See id. § 2030.250(c) (“The attorney for the responding party shall sign any responses that contain an objection.”). “The objections themselves do not...

Excerpt: ...45 Cal.App.4 th 170, 186. Plaintiff alleges, inter alia, that Defendant misrepresented to her that she required root canals on six healthy teeth that did not require root canals, FAC ¶ 30, and that Defendant knew the representations were false when made or made them recklessly and without regard for their truth. Id. ¶ 31. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant intended that Plaintiff would rely on the representations and undergo unnecessary treatment...

Excerpt: ...ed to possession of the property claimed; (2) show that the property is wrongfully detained by the defendant, the manner in which the defendant came into possession of the property, and the belief of the plaintiff of the reason for that detention; (3) describe the property and state its value; (4) provide the location of the property and whether the property or some part of it is within a private place that may have to be entered to take possessi...

Excerpt: ...Suite, Inc. and JS CJ3 LLC for alleged lack of personal jurisdiction. Defendant Cessna Finance Corporation moves in the alternative to dismiss or stay this case based on a forum selection clause in agreements between Cessna Finance and Plaintiff JS CJ3, LLC. For the following reasons, Defendant Beverlin's motion to quash is denied, Defendant Textron's motion to quash is denied, and Defendant Cessna Finance's motion to quash is granted. In light o...

Excerpt: ... that the vicarious liability allegations in the first through fifth and eighth causes of action are duplicative of the tenth cause of action. “For the doctrine of respondeat superior to apply, the plaintiff must prove that the employee's tortious conduct was committed within the scope of employment.” Mary M. v. City of Los Angeles (1991) 54 Cal.3d 202, 209. A risk arises out of the employment when in the context of the particular enterprise ...

Excerpt: ...and overruled in part. “Generally speaking, the determination whether an answer states a defense is governed by the same principles which are applicable in determining if a complaint states a cause of action.” South Shore Land Co. v. Petersen (1964) 226 Cal.App.2d 725, 732. Accordingly, a demurrer reaches only to the contents of the pleading and such matters as may be considered under the doctrine of judicial notice. Id. The allegations of th...

Excerpt: ...tions 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 Cal.App.4 th 1544, ...

Excerpt: ... below the superior court jurisdictional amount, and the court affords the parties an opportunity to contest transfer.” Walker v. Superior Ct. (1991) 53 Cal.3d 257, 262. Having read and considered the arguments and evidence submitted by Plaintiffs and Defendant, the court cannot conclude that this case will necessarily result in a verdict below the superior court jurisdiction amount. See Small Decl. ¶¶ 2-4 & Exs. 1 & 2. Plaintiffs to give not...

Excerpt: ...s do not contend that service of summons did not result in actual notice in time to defend the action. See Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 473.5(a). Section 473 applies to Defendants' motion. Defendants argue that the defaults were entered due to Defendants' mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect. See id. § 473(b). Specifically, Defendants argue that their prior counsel failed to communicate with them and, in particular, failed to advise t...

Excerpt: ...ses its discretion pursuant to section 426.16(f) to hear Defendant's motion despite its filing more than sixty days after service of the complaint. The circumstances of this case are not like those in Newport Harbor Ventures, LLC v. Morris Cerullo World Evangelism (2018) 4 Cal.5 th 637, which involved a special motion to strike filed after “much litigation” and against causes of action contained in an amended complaint that had also been cont...

Excerpt: ...lure to serve responses to the requests, Plaintiff 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 protection for work product . . . .” Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2030.290(a). Plaintiff shall provide responses, without objections, to Defendant's Special Interrogatories (Set One) by May 31, 2018. Defendant's reque...

Excerpt: ...r from recording or filing any documents concerning the Property. The court denied Plaintiffs' previous motion for a preliminary injunction in an April 5, 2018 order. For the following reasons, Plaintiffs' renewed motion is denied. A trial court may not consider an application to reconsider an order or renew a motion unless it is made in accordance with the requirements of California Code of Civil Procedure § 1008. Section 1008 is jurisdictional...

Excerpt: ...ations regarding Defendant's intoxication at the time of automobile collision at issue in this case to allege entitlement to punitive damages at this stage. See, e.g., First Amended Complaint ¶¶ 6, 8, 9. Dawes v. Superior Court (1980) 111 Cal.App.2d 82, on which Defendant relies, supports the conclusion that Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint alleges sufficient facts to support her punitive damage prayer. Defendant to serve and file an answer ...

Excerpt: ...ment may be issued; (2) the plaintiff has established the probably 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 only if the plaintiff's claim has ...

Excerpt: ...nary injunction shall be granted without notice to the other party.”); Pacific Decision Sciences Corp. v. Superior Ct. (2004) 121 Cal.App.4 th 1100, 1110 (“Prior notice is always required before the court issues a preliminary injunction.”) (emphasis in original). A preliminary injunction may be sought by noticed motion pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure § 1005 or by an application for an Order to Show Cause (OSC). Cal. R. Ct. 3...

Excerpt: ...not serve and file Judicial Council forms MC-052 and MC-053 in support of the motion. See Cal. R. Ct. 3.1362(c), (e). Counsel also request in the March 2, 2018 motion that the court continue the May 14, 2018 trial date. That request is denied. Counsel has not provided evidence of good cause for a trial continuance, which is not addressed at all in Attorney Sobti's declaration in support of the March 2, 2018 motion. The March 8, 2018 motion is den...

Excerpt: ...nts Derek Phan and Tung Phan pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 998, and Goldstein [sic] v. Bank of San Pedro, 27 Cal. App. 4 th 899 (1994), hereby jointly offer to compromise and settle his [sic] matter as to Plaintiff Karrie Sartin upon payment to her of the total sum of $1,000.00 [one thousand dollars]. All parties to bear their own attorney's fees and costs. After Plaintiff's timely acceptance of this statutory offer by fi...

Excerpt: ...intiff to file any amended complaint by December 21, 2017. See id. Plaintiff did not do so. Accordingly, Plaintiff's first and second causes of action, and the punitive damages allegations related to those two causes of action, remain dismissed. There is no need for Defendant to move separately to strike those portions of the FAC. Defendant's motion to strike is therefore denied. Defendant's Request for Judicial Notice is denied. Defendant need n...

Excerpt: ...a) states that “[u]pon request from a borrower who requests a foreclosure prevention alternative, the mortgage servicer shall promptly establish a single point of contact and provide to the borrower one or more direct means of communication with the single point of contact.” Cal. Civ. Code § 2923.7(a). The statute defines “single point of contact” as “an individual or team of personnel each of whom has the ability and authority to perf...

Excerpt: ...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 only if the plaintiff's claim has probable validity; i.e., where it is more likely than not that the plaintiff will obtain a judgment against the def...

Excerpt: ... the court confirmed in a December 7, 2017 order. See 12/07/17 Order. On January 2, 2018, the court entered judgment in conformity with the Final Award, pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure § 1287.4. See 01/02/18 Judgment. The Final Award, upon which the court entered judgment, states: (i) “[c]ounsel for the parties met and conferred and agreed neither party will move for costs and fees;” (ii) Defendant Zucaro “shall not recover ...

Excerpt: ... Superior Ct. (1984) 157 Cal.App.3d 159, 166. Plaintiffs' Complaint states sufficient allegations related to Defendants' pit bull attacking and biting Plaintiffs, and Defendants' maintenance and control of the pit bull, to allege entitlement to punitive damages at this stage. Defendants to respond to Plaintiff's Complaint by May 14, 2018. Plaintiffs to give notice. ...

Excerpt: ...nterrogatories (Set One), Amended Special Interrogatories (Set One), Amended Requests for Production (Set One), and Amended Requests for Admission (Set One). Defendants claim Plaintiff waived her objections to these four sets of discovery by serving allegedly untimely responses. For the following reasons, Defendant's motions are denied. Plaintiff's responses to these four sets of discovery were initially due on December 26, 2017. In light of the ...

Excerpt: ...bmitted in support of Plaintiff's motion sets forth the attorneys' fees and costs Defendant has incurred. See Zech Decl. ¶ 2. The amount includes $1,600 in attorneys' fees anticipated to be incurred for reviewing Plaintiff's opposition and attending the hearing on this motion. Because Plaintiff did not file an opposition, the court will not award attorneys' fees for that work. Defendant is awarded $2,400 in attorneys' fees and $525 in costs, whi...

Excerpt: ...e private entity renders her complaint uncertain, confusing and ambiguous, as does her use of “Defendants” through the complaint when it appears that particular allegations only apply to one or the other of Defendants. See Cal. Civ. Code § 430.10(f). Defendant City of Santa Ana's demurrer is sustained. Should Plaintiff desire to file an amended complaint, she must file and serve it by May 14, 2018. Defendant's unopposed Request for Judicial ...

Excerpt: ...alleges that Defendant misrepresented to him that he required root canals on healthy teeth that did not require root canals, Complaint ¶ 25, and that Defendant knew the representations were false when made or made them recklessly and without regard for their truth. Id. ¶ 26. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant intended to deceive Plaintiff, id. ¶ 27, and that Plaintiff relied to his detriment and was damaged. Id. ¶¶ 28, 33. Plaintiff meets the ...

Excerpt: ...le an opposition. For the following reasons, Plaintiffs' demurrer is sustained in part and overruled in part. “Generally speaking, the determination whether an answer states a defense is governed by the same principles which are applicable in determining if a complaint states a cause of action.” South Shore Land Co. v. Petersen (1964) 226 Cal.App.2d 725, 732. Accordingly, a demurrer reaches only to the contents of the pleading and such matter...

Excerpt: ...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 complaint...

Excerpt: ...stantially comply with Code of Civil Procedure § 2033.220. Pursuant to section 2033.280(c), “[i]t is mandatory that the court impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010) on the party or attorney, or both, whose failure to serve a timely response to requests for admission necessitated” the motion. Accordingly, because Plaintiff's failure to serve timely and complete responses to Defendant's Requests for Admis...

Excerpt: ...roduce documents responsive to Plaintiff's Request for Production of Documents (Set One) Nos. 2 and 7. For the following reasons, Plaintiff's motion is granted. Request No. 2 seeks documents constituting, memorializing or referring to any communications Royal Pacific had with Defendant Christopher A. Calderon since January 1, 2016 concerning Royal Pacific's hiring of Calderon. Request No. 7 seeks documents reflecting or referring to compensation ...

Excerpt: ...Plaintiffs move for entry of judgment based on the settlement agreement, which Plaintiffs allege Defendants have breached. Defendants did not file an opposition to Plaintiffs' motion. For the following reasons, Plaintiffs' motion is granted. In a September 6, 2016 order, the court (Judge Andrew P. Banks) granted issue sanctions against Defendants, establishing liability against Defendant Ocampo on Plaintiffs' first cause of action for financial e...

Excerpt: ...tion is granted. Compliance with the statutory procedures for service of process is essential to establish personal jurisdiction. Ellard v. Conway (2001) 94 Cal.App.4 th 540, 544. Thus, a default judgment entered against a defendant who was not served with a summons in the manner prescribed by statute is void. Id.; see also OC Interior Servs., LLC v. Nationstar Mortg. (2017) 7 Cal.App.5 th 1318, 1330-31. Under section 473(d), the court may set as...

Excerpt: ...ued Terrazas, its former employee, and others on August 22, 2016, alleging that Terrazas and others embezzled from Avenal and otherwise misused Avenal funds. Cross-Defendants Yuan Hong Taiwan Enterprises (Yuan Hong) and Neoteric Entertainment, Inc. (Neoteric) also sued Terrazas the same day based on similar allegations. Yuan Hong alleges in its complaint that Cross-Defendant Reggie King is Yuan Hong's principal. Cross-Defendants contend Terrazas'...

Excerpt: ...ss and overbreadth. For the following reasons, Plaintiff's motion is granted in part and denied in part. Defendant hired attorney Michael Robbins and his firm EXTTI, Inc. “to provide limited legal services in the form of a workplace investigation” related to Plaintiff's allegations. Robbins Decl. ¶¶ 2, 5-8 & Ex. A. Defendant contends that the attorney-client privilege shields all of the information and documents sought by Requests for Produ...

Excerpt: ...6, alleging that the Controller had, in 2007, improperly paid Johannes-Surmenian one-half of the value of five properties for which Benavides had submitted a claim to the Controller. Plaintiff alleges that Johannes- Surmenian's claim to the Controller and subsequent refusal to return the proceeds she received from the State to Plaintiff resulted in more than $160,000 in damages to Plaintiff. Johannes-Surmenian subsequently filed a cross-complaint...

Excerpt: ...s allegedly have not exhausted required administrative remedies for that claim. For the following reasons, Defendants' demurrer is overruled. Defendants' demurrer to both causes of action based on uncertainty is overruled. Demurrers for uncertainty are disfavored. Lickiss v. Financial Indus. Regulatory Auth. (2010) 208 Cal.App.4th 1125, 1135. These causes of action are not “so incomprehensible that [Defendants] cannot reasonably respond.” Id....

Excerpt: ...ling any documents concerning the Property. Having read and considered all of the documentation submitted by the parties in support of and in opposition to Plaintiffs' motion, including the parties' briefs, declarations, and exhibits, the court denies Plaintiffs' motion for the following reasons. Plaintiffs allege that Defendant's deceased husband provided a usurious loan to Plaintiffs in April 2007. The purpose of the loan was to refinance the P...

Excerpt: ...an opposition to Plaintiff's motion. If a party does not obey an order compelling further responses to interrogatories, the court may make those orders that are just. Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 2030.300(e); see also id. § 2023.030. The discovery statutes evince an incremental approach to discovery sanctions, starting with monetary sanctions and ending with the ultimate sanction of termination. Doppes v. Bentley Motors, Inc.(2009) 174 Cal.App.4 th 9...

Excerpt: ...es, as well as the arguments of counsel at the February 8, 2018 hearing, the court grants Reliant's motion in part and denies it in part for the following reasons. The parties agree that Plaintiff's case should be arbitrated. SeePlaintiff's Opp. at 1:6-7; Plaintiff's Supp. Brief at 2:8-9. The parties dispute, however, whether Plaintiff is required to accept the American Arbitration Association (AAA) as the arbitration provider. When Plaintiff pur...

Excerpt: ...family way.'” Vinas's Compendium of Exhibits, Ex. 1 (at 15-16). Although these interrogatories refer to allegations in Cross-Complainants' Wayne Hayes and Amy Hayes's Cross-Complaint, see id. (Special Interrogatory No. 67), Cross-Complainants have filed a First Amended Cross-Complaint. The allegations to which Special Interrogatory Nos. 68 through 75 refer appear in paragraph 20 of the First Amended Cross-Complaint. Paragraph 20 alleges, in rel...