Excerpt: ...s." The filing of a complaint as a "Doe" impairs the public's right of access to court records. (See Cal. Rules Court, rule 2.550(c).) The California Legislature has expressly provided for certain exceptions to the standing rule, and has allowed the use of pseudonyms. (See e.g. Civil Code 1708.85.) Courts have affirmed the ability to proceed as a pseudonymous plaintiff under exceptional circumstances in which privacy rights are implicated. "The j...

Excerpt: ... default. See also Ins. Code 11580(b)(2). There are several reasons to grant intervenor's request. First, under CCP 473(b), "the court shall, whenever an application for relief is made no more than six months after entry of judgment ... vacate any (1) resulting default entered by the clerk" proVded that the moving party files an appropriate affidavit demonstrating "mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect." Here, intervenor has demonstrated, a...

Excerpt: ...per].) On its own motion, the court takes judicial notice of the following proofs of service filed as to this defendant: ROA 16, 148, 156, 183. (Evid. Code, S 452, subd. (d) [court records].) As to defendant Phan, plaintiffs' original proof of service indicates he was served on 9-29-22 via substitute service to Aileen De Los Santos, "office staff," at 340 S. Lemon Ave., # 8771, Walnut, California 91789. (ROA 16; Phan Decl. in support of motion, "...

Excerpt: ... Civil Procedure section 437c(f)(2) provides, in pertinent part: "A party shall not move for summary judgment based on issues asserted in a prior motion for summary adjudication and denied by the court unless that party establishes, to the satisfaction of the court, newly discovered facts or circumstances or a change of law supporting the issues reasserted in the summary judgment motion." The court has analyzed defendants' current motion and comp...

Excerpt: ...37c [authorizing motion].) Moving parties' request for judicial notice is GRANTED as to Exs. 8-11 (Evid. Code, S 452, subd. (d)), and DENIED as to Ex. 12. As to Exs. 8 and 10, the court takes judicial notce of the fact that the documents were filed, but not of the truth of their contents. (Williams v. Wraxall (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 120, 130, FN 7.) Responding parties' request for judicial notice is GRANTED as to Exs. A-D (Evid. Code, S 452, subd. ...

Excerpt: ..., Set One, and Request for Production of Documents, Set One, are GRANTED. (Code Civ. Proc., SS 2030.290, 2031.300.) Defendant George Katsivalis is ordered to provde full, complete, and verified responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One, and Special Interrogatories, Set One, without objection, within 15 days. Defendant George Katsivalis is further ordered to provide full, complete, and verified responses to Request for Production of Documents, Se...

Excerpt: ...urden then shifted to plaintiff to establish that the arbitration agreement was unconscionable or unenforceable for other reasons. (See OTO, LLC v. Kho (2019) 8 Cal. 5th 111, 126.) Unconscionability must be both procedural and substantive to avoid enforcement of the arbitration agreement. ld. at 125. Procedural and substantive unconscionability are evaluated on a sliding scale: "The more substantively oppressive the contract term, the less eviden...

Excerpt: ...hird amended complaint (TAC) continued to name Doe 1 as a defendant. The mere failure to specifically re-identify US Bank as Doe 1 in the TAC was at most a technical procedural error, which plaintiff could cure by amendment (as it has now done in the 4AC) without compromising the benefit of the relation-back doctrine. (See generally, Woo v. Superior Court (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 169, 176-177 (Woo) [failure of amended complaint to identify newly add...

Excerpt: ...trating the claim has no merit, that plaintiff cannot prove an element of the claim, or that it has a complete defense entitling it to judgment as a matter of law. (Code Civ. Proc., S 437c, subd. (p)(2); Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 850-851 (Aguilar).) If the defendant fails to 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....

Excerpt: ...s of material fact as to Noticed Issue No. 1. (See Code Civ. Proc„ S 437c, subd. (p)(2) [burden]; Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 851 [burden.] A triable issue of material fact exists as to undisputed material fact ("UMF") 25 as to whether Falcon purchased lights from Luxx in 2019. This triable issue is created by Plaintiff's Exh. l, Nichols as PMK Depo., 139:1-25.) Triable Issues of material fact exist as to UMFs 29, 3...

Excerpt: ..., in that the court takes judicial notice of the fact that the documents were filed with the respective government agencies, but not of the truth of their contents. (Stevens v. Superior Court (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 594, 607-608.) The motion is GRANTED asto cross-defendant Diamond entirely, on grounds of failure to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. (Code Civ. Proc., S 438, subd. The only basis of liability alleged as to this c...

Excerpt: ... (See Calif. Rules Court, rule 1320 (a), (c); Code Civ. Proc. S 430.60.) As defendant has failed to file a demurrer, the court construes defendant's motion as a demurrer on the grounds of uncertainty and a general demurrer. The demurrer on the grounds of uncertainty is overruled. The complaint is not so poorly drafted that Defendant cannot reasonably respond. (See Khoury v. Maly's of California Inc. (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 612, 616.) The general de...

Excerpt: ...the burden of proof is on the party claiming them as costs." (Ladas v. California State Auto. Assn. (1993) 19 Cal.App.4th 761, 774 (Ladas).) Code of Civil Procedure section 1033.5 enumerates allowable costs and costs which are not allowable. Even those amounts that are defined as recoverable under section 1033.5, subdivision (a), may only be recovered if they are both reasonable in amount and reasonably necessary to the conduct of the litigation,...

Excerpt: ...oposal" or the "master lease." Defendants' argument that the "lease is not a contract fails at the summary judgment phase, as plaintiffs have shown triable issues. As it relates to the "master lease," the version defendants' attached to the motion is illegible. In reply, a legible version is attached, but it simply raises additional questions of material fact. Did the "master lease" su#rsede any other agreement? The evidence submitted shows dispu...

Excerpt: ...orders the dismissal of this matter pending in Orange County Superior Court, with prejudice. A party may seek confirmation by filing and serving a petition at least 10 days, but no more than 4 years, after service of the award on that party. (C.C.P. 1288, 1288.4). The petition must name as respondents all parties to the arbitration and may name any other persons bound by the award. (C.C.P. 1285). The petition must also set forth the substance of ...

Excerpt: ...s. Here, it is undisputed that the CC&Rs govern the Harbor Creek community which includes the units owned by Plaintiff. (See Response to SSUMF No. 1.) Paragraph 1.13 of the CC&Rs defines “Common Area” as “all areas on the Project, except the Units, and shall further include, without limitation, for maintenance purposes of the Association, but not necessarily by way of fee title, all gas, water and waste pipes, all sewers, all ducts, chutes,...

Excerpt: ...ing competent testimony based on personal knowledge of irreparable harm, immediate danger, or other statutory basis for granting relief ex parte. Newsom v. Superior Court (2020) 51 Cal.App.5th 1093, 1097 (citing Cal. R. Ct. 3.1202(c)). A trial court should deny an ex parte application absent the requisite showing. Newsom, 51 Cal.App.5th at 1097. None of the declarations filed in support of defendants' ex parte application establish irreparable ha...

Excerpt: ...ne or more elements of the plaintiff's cause of action cannot be established. A motion for summary judgment or adjudication is framed by the pleadings. Laabs v. City of Victorville (2008) 163 Cal.App.4th 1242, 1258; County of Los Angeles v. Superior Court (2009) 181 Cal. App. 4th 218, 226 (overruled on other grounds by Leon v. County of Riverside (2023) 14 Cal. 5th 910). There is no dispute between the parties regarding the elements of the single...

Excerpt: ...(Code Civ. Proc., 5 430.10, subd. (e). The remainder of the demurrers are OVERRULED. Plaintiff shall have 10 days to file an amended complaint. Defendants Max Sandoval, 6 Star, and Maxx's request for judicial notice is DENIED. (Evid. Code, 453, subd. (a) [adequate notice required]; Joslin v. H.A.S. Ins. Brokerage (1986) 184 Cal .App.3d 369, 374 ["The hearing on demurrer may not be turned into a contested evidentiary hearing through the guise of h...

Excerpt: ... claimed privilege. (See Lipton v. Superior Court (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 1599, 1619.) The privilege log raises two bases for defendant's objections: “proprietary business information,” and “third party privacy.” Proprietary Business Information. The court's June 5, 2023 order did not include objections on the basis of “proprietary business information.” Additionally, defendant's second amended verified responses failed to preserve any ...

Excerpt: ...Kirk has failed to engage in discovery throughout this case. As a result, defendant has successfully moved the court for multiple orders compelling plaintiff to comply. (Chung Decl.—June 16, 2022 and February 6, 2023 Orders). Those orders reflect that plaintiff was present for both hearings when those orders issued. Defendant's moving papers also demonstrate protracted meet and confer efforts expended by defendant to gain plaintiff's compliance...

Excerpt: ...dence to negate the plaintiff's claim. It may do this by demonstrating the claim has no merit, that plaintiff cannot prove an element of the claim, or that it has a complete defense entitling it to judgment as a matter of law. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (p)(2); Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 850-851 (Aguilar).) If the defendant fails to meet this initial burden, the plaintiff need not oppose the motion and the moti...

Excerpt: ... in which the defendant has engaged. [CCP 425.16(b) [defining protected activity]; Simpson Strong-Tie Co., Inc. v. Gore (2010) 49 Cal.4th 12, 21; Equilon Enterprises v. Consumer Cause, Inc. (2002) 29 Cal.4th 53, 66–67] If the defendant carries his burden, the plaintiff must then demonstrate the claims have at least “minimal merit.” [Navellier v. Sletten (2002) 29 Cal.4th 82, 89; Baral v. Schnitt (2016) 1 Cal.5th 376, 384] Based upon the all...

Excerpt: ...ments]; Construction Protective Services, Inc. v. TIG Specialty Ins. Co. (2002) 29 Cal.4th 189, 199 [a plaintiff may plead the legal effect of the contract rather than its precise language]; see also FAC ¶¶ 9-21, 31.) Second cause of action for fraud. The FAC states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action for promissory fraud, with the requisite specificity. (See Lazar v. Superior Court (1996) 12 Cal.4th 631, 638, 645 [promissory fraud...

Excerpt: ...) The motion is DENIED as to defendant OC Auto Imports, Inc. dba OC Autohaus, as this defendant has not met its initial burden of presenting evidence showing that plaintiff Romeo Buenaventura cannot establish an essential element of his claims, or that there is a complete defense. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (p)(2) [burden].) First, this moving defendant cites no authority allowing summary judgment / adjudication based on a minor's unreprese...