Excerpt: ...tate parks in order to provide ready access thereto by the public and to provide means of ingress and egress to highways and roads across state parks from lands separated from such highways and roads by state parks, and for that purpose may enter into contracts or agreements with cities, counties, and other political subdivisions of the State and with other state agencies or with persons, firms or corporations for the acquisition, construction, a...

Excerpt: ...ain (Civ. Proc. Code § 430.10(f)); and 3) Plaintiff has failed to join indispensable parties (Civ. Proc. Code §§ 430.10(a) and (d)). 1) COA No. 1 – Breach Of Civil Code § 2924m Civ. Code § 2924m provides means and requirements for the sale of property containing between one to four residential units through a foreclosure sale. For purposes of this matter, Plaintiff has alleged he is an “eligible tenant buyer” and provided a declaration...

Excerpt: ...omplaint on the basis that they fail to state sufficient facts to constitute COA against Defendants. (Civ. Proc. Code § 430.10(e).) 1) COA No. 2 – Intentional Misrepresentation “The elements of fraud, which give rise to the tort action for deceit, are (a) misrepresentation (false representation, concealment, or nondisclosure); (b) knowledge of falsity (or ‘scienter'); (c) intent to defraud, i.e., to induce reliance; (d) justifiable relianc...

Excerpt: ...separate pleading. (CRC 3.1354(b); Hodjat v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 1, 8-9—court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to consider objections not filed separately as required by rule). The City's evidentiary objections are OVERRULED. Allegations in the Complaint: Plaintiff's complaint asserts causes of action for premises liability and negligence based on general negligence and dangerous condition of public pro...

Excerpt: ...fendants Tesla, Inc., and Tesla Energy Operation, Inc. demur generally to all seven causes of action in the complaint. First and second causes of action for intentional and negligent misrepresentation, respectively. At the previous hearing of August 8, 2022, the court had issued a tentative ruling sustaining the demurrer to the first and second causes of action based on the economic loss rule. (See Food Safety Net Services v. Eco Safe Systems USA...

Excerpt: ...party is likely to sustain if the injunction is denied and the harm the opposing party is likely to suffer if the injunction is granted. (White v. Davis (2003) 30 Cal.4th 528, 554; Teamster Local 856 v. Priceless, LLC (2003) 112 Cal.App.4th 1500, 1509.) The moving party bears the burden of presenting facts establishing that it is reasonably probable that the moving party will prevail on the merits. (Fleishman v. Superior Court (2002) 102 Cal.App....

Excerpt: ... (“Aptim”) employees, David Gunn, Mark Matten, Jonathan Hunt and Sonjay Redway, to appear and produce documents at deposition is moot as the four witnesses have appeared for deposition. (Miner Declaration in Support of Opposition, ¶ 2; Reply at 1:28- 2:3.) The Court finds that sanctions are not warranted against either party. (C.C.P. § 2025.450(g)(1).) The correspondence shows that defense counsel was engaging in meet and confer efforts to ...

Excerpt: ... Amended Cross-Complaint This motion originally came on for hearing on August 8, 2022. In its ruling, the Court indicated that The One Solution had failed to comply with the procedural requirements of Rule 3.1324(a). The Court permitted The One Solution an opportunity to submit further briefing. (See ROA 549.) The One Solution submitted further briefing on August 16, 2022, as requested by the Court. Based on the moving papers and the further brie...

Excerpt: ...f. In demurring, cross-defendant has asked for judicial notice of documents, including a minute order, that have been filed in this case. A request for judicial notice is not needed for the Court to review matters already on file in the case. In opposing the demurrer, the cross-complainants have submitted a declaration by counsel with exhibits consisting of extraneous matter recently produced by cross-defendant in discovery. The Court cannot cons...

Excerpt: ... in the case, despite two prior orders specifically addressing such conduct. (See M.O.s of 10/18/21 and 4/18/22.) As previously noted, personal attacks on opposing counsel are unprofessional and inappropriate. (See Lasalle v. Vogel (2019) 36 Cal.App.5th 127, 130, 132–134.) Yet Plaintiff's Opposition to this motion again refers to defense counsel having acted “with their usual, deceptive, and dishonest practices.” (See ROA 654 at pp. 2 and 5...

Excerpt: ...e motion. The court, on noticed motion and for good cause shown, may order that specified discovery be conducted notwithstanding this subdivision.” “In the anti-SLAPP context, ‘good cause' requires ‘a showing that the specified discovery is necessary for the plaintiff to oppose the [anti-SLAPP] motion and is tailored to that end.' [Citation.]” (Balla v. Hall (2021) 59 Cal.App.5th 652, 692 (Balla).) (emphasis added.) Here, Plaintiffs hav...

Excerpt: ...or violation of Civ. Code § 5105. That code section in relevant part states: “(a) An association shall adopt operating rules in accordance with the procedures prescribed by Article 5 (commencing with Section 4340) of Chapter 3, that do all of the following: (1) Ensure that if any candidate or member advocating a point of view is provided access to association media, newsletters, or internet websites during a campaign, for purposes that are rea...

Excerpt: ...aint by plaintiff Colleen Windsor (“plaintiff”) is SUSTAINED WITH 30 DAYS LEAVE TO AMEND. Individual defendants demur to the third cause of action for hostile work environment (Gov. Code §§12923 & 12940(j)) pled in plaintiff's complaint. A demurrer tests the legal sufficiency of the pleading, accepting as true the material facts properly pleaded, but not assuming the truth of contentions, deductions or conclusions of fact or law. (Brown v. ...

Excerpt: ... used by Defendant's technicians. This would include, for example, repairs for things such as flat tires, broken tail lights, or windows that won't go up/down, none of which are related to the specific issues which Plaintiff sought to be repaired on his Vehicle. The definition of “TRANSMISSION DEFECT” also contains “include, but not limited to,” which explicitly does not limit the defects as to those allegedly suffered by the Vehicle. Pla...

Excerpt: ... unauthorized writ of attachment. “An attachment may be issued only in an action on a claim or claims for money, each of which is based upon a contract, express or implied, where the total amount of the claim or claims is a fixed or readily ascertainable amount not less than five hundred dollars ($500) exclusive of costs, interest, and attorney's fees.” § CCP 483.010. Here, the complaint asserts a tort claim within unknown damages. Furthermo...

Excerpt: ...the matters on which examination is requested, and the deponent must designate and produce at the deposition those of its officers, directors, managing agents, employees, or agents who are most qualified to testify on its behalf as to those matters to the extent of any information known or reasonably available to the deponent. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2025.230.) Code of Civil Procedure Section 2025.480 provides, in part: “(a) If a deponent fails to ...

Excerpt: ...terminating sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010). In lieu of, or in addition to, that sanction, the court may impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010).” (Civ. Proc. Code § 2031.310(i).) The court's 04/05/21 order in relevant part states: “No. 16 – This request is granted as to all non-privileged documents, including emails and ESI. Plaintiff is ordered to produce a list of relevan...

Excerpt: ...force an arbitration agreement bears the burden to establish standing to enforce the agreement. (Jones v. Jacobson (2011) 195 Cal.App.4th 1, 15.) FCA has failed to meet this burden. Felisilda v. FCA USA LLC (2020) 53 Cal.App.5th 486 (Felisilda), upon which FCA relies, is distinguishable. Unlike in Felisilda, the complaint in this case does not allege or otherwise indicate that the sales contract between Plaintiff and the nonparty dealer is the so...

Excerpt: ... (Food Safety Net Services v. Eco Safe Systems USA, Inc. (2012) 209 Cal.App.4th 1118, 1124.) Where plaintiff seeks summary judgment, the burden is to produce admissible evidence on each element of a “cause of action” entitling him or her to judgment. (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)...

Excerpt: ...ENIES the motion as to Pogue's Special Rogs in its entirety. The Court DENIES the motions as to the Corporate Entity Defendants' Special Rogs, Nos. 6-17, 126, 129-130, 132-136 and 162-202. The Court GRANTS the motions as to the Corporate Entity Defendants' Special Rogs, Nos. 21-65 and 67-125. The Court DENIES both parties' requests for sanctions. A. Jurisdiction A party moving to compel further discovery responses must file and serve the motion �...

Excerpt: ...ived. James did not move for relief from that waiver under C.C.P. § 2033.280. All of the objections in the RFAs at issue here are thus improper. The Opposition incorrectly asserts that this is effectively a motion for reconsideration in light of the Court's prior refusal to deem these RFAs admitted in its 12/20/21 ruling. But, on the prior motion, the tardy responses were viewed as a whole to determine whether they were in “substantial complia...

Excerpt: ...uashing the subpoena entirely, modifying it, or directing compliance with it upon those terms or conditions as the court shall declare, including protective orders. Plaintiff argues that the materials at issue are irrelevant and improperly seek to invade his financial privacy rights. Where privacy rights are at issue in discovery, the party asserting the privacy right must establish a legally protected privacy interest, an objectively reasonable ...

Excerpt: ...with these motions demonstrate that Plaintiff's counsel still has not fully complied with C.C.P. § 1010.6(e), which provides that any party who has appeared in this action “shall accept electronic service” and shall, upon the request of any other party, provide electronic service, for any “notice or document that may be served by mail, express mail, overnight delivery or facsimile transmission.” This conduct has continued even though thi...

Excerpt: ...lement & Mutual Release Agreement, Ex. 1 to Cross-Complaint, page 4, section 7 stating that San Bernardino County Superior Court shall retain jurisdiction over enforcement of the Agreement 4. The Settlement and Mutual Release Agreement, Ex.2 to the FACC wherein Judge Bryan F. Foster of the San Bernardino Superior Court has already retained jurisdiction and made a ruling regarding the Settlement Agreement. II. Merits Cross-defendants assert that t...

Excerpt: ...a)(1), “[t]he court may… in its discretion, after notice to the adverse party, allow, upon any terms as may be just, an amendment to any pleading or proceeding in other particulars…” “If the motion to amend is timely made and the granting of the motion will not prejudice the opposing party, it is error to refuse permission to amend and where the refusal also results in a party being deprived of the right to assert a meritorious cause of...