Excerpt: ...th, and Tenth Causes of Action of the verified Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) of Plaintiffs Doug Le and Ke Van Nguyen (“Plaintiffs”). Request for Judicial Notice Attorney Defendants' Request for Judicial Notice is denied. Rules of Court Rule Judicial 3.1113(l) requires that “[a]ny request for judicial notice must be made in a separate document listing the specific items for which notice is requested and must comply with rule 3.1306(c)...

Excerpt: ...motion requests that the Court issue an Order to Show Cause re: Contempt, rather than make a finding that Defendants and Defendants' counsel are in contempt. The threshold issue is thus whether Plaintiff's allegations are sufficient to support a showing of contempt. (fn.1) In order to make out indirect contempt (i.e., alleged contempt that is not committed in the immediate view and presence of the court), Plaintiffs must show: 1) the rendition of...

Excerpt: ...) A motion to strike may also seek to strike legal conclusions, (Weil & Brown, Cal. Prac. Guide, Civil Proc. before Trial, ¶ 7:179 (2010), although conclusory allegations are permitted if they are supported by other factual allegations in the complaint, (Perkins v. Superior Court (1981) 117 Cal.App.3d 1, 6). Civil Code section 3294(a) allows a plaintiff to seek punitive damages for “oppression, fraud, or malice.” (Civil Code. § 3294, subd. ...

Excerpt: ...ng for summary judgment bears an initial burden of production to make a prima facie showing of the nonexistence of any triable issue of material fact . . . .” (Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 850.) Once the defendant meets their burden, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to show that a triable issue of material fact exists as to that cause of action. (Villacres v. ABM Industries, Inc. (2010) 189 Cal.App.4th 562, 575.) A...

Excerpt: ...Amended Cross-Complaint (“FACC”). A defendant moving for summary judgment bears the initial burden to show the plaintiff's action has no merit. The defendant may do this by demonstrating the action has no merit, that plaintiff cannot prove an element of their claim, or that the defendant has a complete defense entitling the defendant to judgment as a matter of law. (Civil Proc. Code, § 437c, subd. (p)(2); Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2...

Excerpt: ...s U.S., Inc. (“WDPR”) and Nancy Schaefer-Jones move for summary judgment in favor of Defendants and against Plaintiff Maria Gillies. In the alternative, Defendants move for summary adjudication. A defendant moving for summary judgment bears the initial burden to show the plaintiff's action has no merit. The defendant may do this by demonstrating the action has no merit, that plaintiff cannot prove an element of their claim, or that the defend...

Excerpt: ..., but not a school district, but Section 51.9 does not define a “person” to include a school district. (Civil Code, § 51.9, subd. (a)(1).) Civil Code section 51.9 may be compared to Civil Procedure Code section 340.1, which extends the statute of limitations for sexual abuse to a “person or entities.” (Civil Procedure Code, § 340.1, subds. (a) (2) & (3), (c) & (d).) The fact that Civil Code section 51.9 did not include liability for an ...

Excerpt: ...�not the defendant's professional standing—that makes the defendant potentially liable for neglect.” Winn v. Pioneer Medical Group, Inc. (2016) 63 Cal.4th 148, 152 (emphasis added). Further, “statutory causes of action must be pleaded with particularity.” Covenant Care, Inc. v. Superior Court (2004) 32 Cal.4th 771, 790. The Complaint alleges in general and conclusory terms “[t]hat Defendants had a substantial caretaking or custodial rel...

Excerpt: ...nd the material is not necessary, helpful, or relevant (see Zucchet v. Galardi (2014) 229 Cal.App.4th 1466, 1474, fn. 5 [citing Jordache Enterprises, Inc. v. Brobeck, Phleger & Harrison (1998) 18 Cal.4th 739, 748, fn. 6].) Demurrer by Defendants County of Orange and Paul Walters Defendants County of Orange's and Paul Walters' demurrer to Plaintiff Damon Tucker's Third Amended Complaint (TAC) is OVERRULED in part and SUSTAINED in part with fifteen...

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