Search by Keyword:
Start Date:
End Date:
Tip: Wrap text in quotation marks when searching for phrases (e.g. "motion to dismiss").

16237 Results

Location: Orange County x
2019.7.1 Motion to Compel Further Responses 199
Location: Orange County
Judge: Hoffer, David A
Hearing Date: 2019.7.1
Excerpt: ...ns should be denied and sanctions awarded to the Plaintiff. Based on all the moving papers, the court finds that Defendant's counsel did meet and confer sufficiently to permit these motions to go forward. The request for sanctions is denied. Plaintiff's objection to each motion and each accompanying separate statement based on untimeliness is overruled. As explained in Pelton-Shepherd Industries, Inc. v. Delta Packaging Products, Inc. (2008) 165 ...
2019.7.1 Motion for Protective Order 517
Location: Orange County
Judge: Hoffer, David A
Hearing Date: 2019.7.1
Excerpt: ...conditions.” Id. Here, Plaintiffs allegedly informally requested a second inspection of the subject property located at 2826 N. Dayna Street in Santa Ana, CA (the “Property”), but have refused or failed to provide a date for the inspection. As Defendant received a Notice to Abate Public Nuisance from the City of Santa Ana on 09/10/18, Defendant risks large fines by not remediating the issues with the Property while Plaintiffs fail to comple...
2019.7.1 Demurrer, Motion to Strike
Location: Orange County
Judge: Griffin, Craig
Hearing Date: 2019.7.1
Excerpt: ...sts between himself and Beltran. Civ. Code § 1550. Plaintiff has also failed to allege any facts sufficient to show how, when, or why any such contract might have been breached. Richman v. Hartley (2014) 224 Cal. App. 4th 1182, 1186. As such, the Demurrer is sustained as to the cause of action for Breach of Contract. Plaintiff has also failed to pled facts sufficient to show that the cause of action for Bad Faith applies to Beltran. The Bad Fait...
2019.7.1 Demurrer 457
Location: Orange County
Judge: Hoffer, David A
Hearing Date: 2019.7.1
Excerpt: ...if such allegation is controverted, then plaintiff must establish, on the trial, the facts showing such performance. (CCP § 457). When a condition precedent imposed by the contract is an act to be performed by the plaintiff, the plaintiff may allege the performance in general terms. (4 Witkin, Cal. Proc. 5th Plead § 538 (2008).) Under these rules, it is not required that a plaintiff allege the specific facts showing his performance of the contr...
2019.7.1 Demurrer 120
Location: Orange County
Judge: Marks, Linda
Hearing Date: 2019.7.1
Excerpt: ...s request for judicial notice of Exhibits 1 and 2 pursuant to Evidence Code section 452(d). However, the Court declines to take judicial notice of hearsay statements contained in the court's records. (Sosinsky v. Grant (1992) 6 Cal.App.4th 1548, 1564.) As to the 1 st through 3 rd Causes of Action as shareholder derivative claims, the Court OVERRULES the demurrer. The Court finds that the SAC has adequately alleged demand futility in paragraph 20 ...
2019.7.1 Motion for Summary Judgment, Adjudication 676
Location: Orange County
Judge: Hoffer, David A
Hearing Date: 2019.7.1
Excerpt: ...5, 754). Per Robinson v. Grossman (1997) 57 Cal.App.4 th 634, a seller's agent does not owe “a duty to independently verify or disclaim the accuracy of the seller's representations…” (Id. at 643); however, “the sellers' agent is required…to act in good faith and not convey the seller's representations without a reasonable basis for believing them to be true.” (Id. [emphasis added]). Additionally, per Civil Code §1088, “[i]f an agen...
2019.6.8 Motion to Compel Arbitration 790
Location: Orange County
Judge: Sherman, Randall J
Hearing Date: 2019.6.8
Excerpt: ...Hearing is set for January 10, 2020 at 9:00 a.m. The parties must file a Joint Status Report at least a week before the hearing, and may request a continuance if arbitration is not yet complete. Defendant has shown that there exists a valid written agreement to arbitrate the claims asserted by plaintiff and that no grounds exist to bar enforcement of the agreement. CCP §1281.2. The FAA applies since defendant is engaged in interstate commerce. P...
2019.6.7 Motion for Summary Judgment, Adjudication 266
Location: Orange County
Judge: Moss, Robert
Hearing Date: 2019.6.7
Excerpt: ...ton. Day argues the ruling determines Day was not negligent in its work with regard to the project. Day also contends that because it is not liable to plaintiff, it is not liable to District. Day is incorrect with regard to both points. Under the “completed and accepted” doctrine, once a contractor or subcontractor has completed work that is accepted by the owner, the contractor is not liable to third parties injured as a result of the condit...
2019.6.7 Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement 670
Location: Orange County
Judge: Claster, William D
Hearing Date: 2019.6.7
Excerpt: ...October 24, 2018 Declaration (ROA 93), Attorney Scott Leviant stated the size was approximately 2700 at the preliminary approval stage. Additionally, Counsel previously represented that the average individual payment to be $925. However, despite the reduction in class size, the average payment is now represented to be lower, at $723.24. Please explain how a reduction in class size results in a reduction in the average payment as opposed to larger...
2019.6.7 Motion for Issuance of Writ of Execution, for Further Monetary Sanctions 431
Location: Orange County
Judge: Servino, Deborah C
Hearing Date: 2019.6.7
Excerpt: ...d is immediately enforceable through execution. (Newland v. Superior Court (1995) 40 Cal.App.4th 608, 615.) The Newland court stated: “Weil and Brown observe that many attorneys seem to be unaware that monetary sanction orders are enforceable through the execution of judgment laws. [Citation.] These orders have the force and effect of a money judgment, and are immediately enforceable through execution, except to the extent the trial court may o...
2019.6.7 Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint 903
Location: Orange County
Judge: Servino, Deborah C
Hearing Date: 2019.6.7
Excerpt: ...ice was not provided pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1005, subdivision (b). “Generally, leave to amend must be liberally granted [citation], provided there is no statute of limitations concern, nor any prejudice to the opposing party, such as delay in trial, loss of critical evidence, or added costs of preparation.” (Solit v. Tokai Bank (1999) 68 Cal.App.4th 1435, 1448.) If, however, the party seeking the amendment has been dilato...
2019.6.7 Motion for Leave to File Complaint 357
Location: Orange County
Judge: Servino, Deborah C
Hearing Date: 2019.6.7
Excerpt: ...erest in the property or controversy which is the subject of the cause [of action] brought against him.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 428.10 subd. (b).) Defendants may cross-complain against any person from whom they seek equitable indemnity. Defendants need only allege that the harm for which they are being sued is attributable, at least in part, to the cross-defendant. (American Motorcycle Assn. v. Superior Court (1978) 20 Cal.3d 578, 607; Paragon Re...
2019.6.7 Motion for Prejudgment Interest 302
Location: Orange County
Judge: Delaney, Thomas A
Hearing Date: 2019.6.7
Excerpt: ...eeds, the vesting date was 11/13/1 4 Plaintiff knew that the face value of the policy of $4 mi l Complaint). This amount was fixed. It was only reduce d the subsequent settlements. Attorney Fees and Costs: In an effort to mitigate da m $1,520,874.27 in legal fees and costs in the Transame r BVI Action. In the SAC filed on 5/30/17, Plaintiff requested “In e and costs arising out of the New Jersey Action [and] In and costs arising out of the BVI ...
2019.6.7 Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement 412
Location: Orange County
Judge: Claster, William D
Hearing Date: 2019.6.7
Excerpt: ...SAR”) and/or proposed Class Notice is submitted, a redline version showing all changes, deletions and additions shall be submitted as well. As to the Settlement: 1. The SAR provides for a class of 1,206 persons (SAR § 1.03), while the subsequent declaration of George Hurley states the class, after the discovery of additional persons who should be excluded, consists of 1,174 persons. (Hurley Decl. ¶ 10.) The class sizes differ by 32, but the H...
2019.6.7 Motion for Summary Judgment 455
Location: Orange County
Judge: Moss, Robert
Hearing Date: 2019.6.7
Excerpt: ...he time of the alleged sexual abuse, RCOC knew, had reason to know, or was otherwise on notice of defendant Jonathan Ryan McKay's (McKay) unlawful sexual conduct, and failed to take reasonable steps to avoid acts of further unlawful sexual conduct by McKay. (See FAC ¶¶ 39, 41-44, 47, 76, 77, 81.) RCOC has not properly addressed these allegations. RCOC has presented no evidence showing that it did not know of and was not on notice of the alleged...
2019.6.7 Motion to Compel Further Responses 748
Location: Orange County
Judge: Moss, Robert
Hearing Date: 2019.6.7
Excerpt: ... for production No. 19 as follows (where underlined) to limit it in scope to vehicles of the same year, make, and model as the subject vehicle: All DOCUMENTS, including but not limited to electronically stored information and electronic mails, concerning customer complaints, claims, reported failures, and warranty claims related to POWERTRAIN DEFECT in vehicles of the same year, make, and model as the SUBJECT VEHICLE, including but not limited to...
2019.6.7 Motion to Compel Arbitration 808
Location: Orange County
Judge: Sherman, Randall J
Hearing Date: 2019.6.7
Excerpt: ...ters stated within documents. This action is ordered stayed pending completion of the arbitration. The Status Conference set for today is ordered off calendar. A Post-Arbitration Review Hearing is set for December 6, 2019 at 9:00 a.m. The parties must file a Joint Status Report at least a week before the hearing, and may request a continuance if arbitration is not yet complete. Defendants have shown that there exists a valid agreement to arbitrat...
2019.6.7 Motion to Compel Deposition of PMK 551
Location: Orange County
Judge: Servino, Deborah C
Hearing Date: 2019.6.7
Excerpt: ..., or tangible thing described in the deposition notice” if, “after service of a deposition notice, a party to the action or an officer, director, managing agent, or employee of a party, or a person designated by an organization that is a party under Section 2025.230, without having served a valid objection under Section 2025.410, fails to appear for examination, or to proceed with it, or to produce for inspection any document, electronically ...
2019.6.7 Motion to Compel Further Responses 104
Location: Orange County
Judge: Delaney, Thomas A
Hearing Date: 2019.6.7
Excerpt: ...l.App.4th 1 the court determined that Plaintiffs Mobile Authentication Corporation (“MAC”) an (“Palisades”) lacked capacity to maintain the instant action and sustained the De m Inc. and Miguel Medina. (See 4/12/19 Minute Order.) On May 13, 2019, Plaintiffs filed their Fourth Amended Complaint (“4AC”). Despit the 4AC, there is no evidence demonstrating that Plaintiffs have complied with C a 2203 by paying fees, penalties and taxes, ma...
2019.6.7 Motion to Consolidate 359
Location: Orange County
Judge: Delaney, Thomas A
Hearing Date: 2019.6.7
Excerpt: ...a Ion and Ra Global Resources, fact are substantially different in that the cases involved different parties and a d i 11 months apart. Also, there was substantial delay in bringing this motion. For a denied. Case Management / Trial Setting Conference and OSC Re Dismissal of Un There being no submission re good cause on the lack of service on Defendant Mi h cause otherwise available, Defendant Mihaela Ion is dismissed without prejudice. A Jury Tr...
2019.6.7 Motion to Dismiss Action 206
Location: Orange County
Judge: Sherman, Randall J
Hearing Date: 2019.6.7
Excerpt: ...“In computing the time within which service must be made pursuant to this article, there shall be excluded the time during which any of the following conditions existed: The validity of service was the subject of litigation by the parties.” Here, plaintiffs purported to serve defendant Nguyen with the Summons and First Amended Complaint by substituted service on April 28, 2018. Defendant failed to respond, and plaintiffs had his default enter...
2019.6.7 Motion to Join Four Indispensable Parties 127
Location: Orange County
Judge: Servino, Deborah C
Hearing Date: 2019.6.7
Excerpt: ...0.) Furthermore, Defendants have not shown on the merits that joinder should be compelled. A party is indispensable where the plaintiff seeks a type of affirmative relief that, if granted would affect the interest of a third person not joined. (Sierra Club, Inc. v. California Coastal Comm. (1979) 95 Cal.App.3d 495, 501; Code Civ. Proc., § 398, subd. (a).) In other words, Plaintiff is required to join as parties to the action any person whose int...
2019.6.7 Motion to Tax Costs 539
Location: Orange County
Judge: Delaney, Thomas A
Hearing Date: 2019.6.7
Excerpt: ... by the party against whom the costs are allowed.” The ordering of a copy of the transcript of Avrit's deposition was reasonable and n required to photocopy the original deposition for his expert. The statute specially videotaping witness's depositions. Item No. 4e: SDT Medical Records: Plaintiff ordered copies of the records that practice for Plaintiff to obtain the records that Defendant secured. Item No. 5: Costs of Service of Process: Altho...
2019.6.7 Special Motion to Strike 551
Location: Orange County
Judge: Servino, Deborah C
Hearing Date: 2019.6.7
Excerpt: ...Amendment rights.” (Finton Construction, Inc. v. Bidna & Keys, APLC (2015) 238 Cal.App.4th 200, 208.) The motion may be used to attack portions of a cause of action, even if the motion does not defeat the entire purported cause of action. (Baral v. Schnitt (2016) 1 Cal.5th 376, 393.) However, if the allegations are “merely incidental” or “collateral” to the claim, in the first instance, i.e., “they merely provide context, without supp...
2019.6.7 Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement 414
Location: Orange County
Judge: Sherman, Randall J
Hearing Date: 2019.6.7
Excerpt: ... add up, and because plaintiffs failed to provide the court with an updated figure for the amount of payroll taxes to be paid from the settlement funds, the court cannot figure this out for itself. Plaintiffs request attorneys' fees of $98,418.26 based on that number being 1/3 of the settlement amount minus the employer's share of payroll taxes to be paid from the settlement funds. Since 1/3 of $300,000 is $100,000, the difference of $1,581.74 su...

16237 Results

Per page

Pages