Excerpt: ...uisite to effective service. (Summers v. McClanahan (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 403, 413.) Actual notice of the action alone is not a substitute for proper service. (American Express Centurion Bank v. Zara (2011) 199 Cal.App.4th 383, 392 (“Zara”).) A summons may be served on an individual by delivering copies of the summons and complaint to him personally or to someone authorized to accept summons on his behalf. (CCP § 416.90; Zara, 199 Cal.App.4...

Excerpt: ...t by concealment of facts. Defendant moves to compel arbitration based upon the provisions of the Retail Installment Sales Contract under which plaintiffs purchased the vehicle. Defendant argues that it is a third‐ party beneficiary of the contract and relies on the Felisilda decision that compelled arbitration. In opposition, plaintiff argues that Felisilda should be distinguished because in that case the selling dealership was a party and sou...

Excerpt: ...available. (Abbott, et. al., Cal. Civil Discovery Practice (4th ed. Cal. CEB 2022) § 15.91 citing, CCP §§2023.010(g), 2023.030.) For example, CCP §2030.300(e) provides that if a party fails to obey an order compelling further responses to interrogatories, "the court may make those orders that are just, including the imposition of an issue sanction, an evidence sanction, or a terminating sanction," in addition to the imposition of further mone...

Excerpt: ...Drilling is an independent subcontractor and not an employee or agent of HP. The test to be applied to determine whether an individual is an employee or independent contractor is the ABC test set forth in Dynamex Operations W. v. Superior Court (2018) 4 Cal.5th 903. To establish that a worker is an independent contractor under the ABC standard, the hiring entity must establish all three parts of the ABC test. However, a court need not examine the...

Excerpt: ...eclaration, describing when he first became aware that the administrator had failed to mail the notices in a timely fashion, and explaining why counsel should not have discovered that delay sooner. No later than 3‐1‐23, the plaintiff shall file an amended declaration of Lee, curing the following inconsistencies and ambiguities in the declaration filed: 1. Paragraph 22 states: “Phoenix has agreed to perform all the listed Settlement Administ...

Excerpt: ...bing system burst at the residence of Plaintiffs Carlo F. Magno and Jasmine Rose Magno (“Plaintiffs”). A supply line in the wall behind the refrigerator burse which resulted in water flooding and damaging the kitchen, family room, dining room, and living room of Plaintiffs' property located at 1496 San Clemente Circle in Corona, California (the “Property”). The loss was discovered by Plaintiffs after coming down from the second level of t...

Excerpt: ...he parties previously deleted such a provision. Now they have put it back into the release. 2. The explanation for limiting the scope of the settled claims to butchers and meat cutters is still unclear. As the Court previously observed: “The LWDA claim letter was sent on behalf of all employees of the two defendants. Apparently, those employees numbered 143. The settlement focuses solely on those employees who worked as butchers and meat cutter...

Excerpt: ...s argue the SAXC essentially repeats the allegations of the original cross‐complaint and the FAXC and such allegations are insufficient to constitute a cause of action as to the first to sixth, the eighth to fourteenth, and sixteenth causes of action. Each of the causes of action are challenged under Code of Civil Procedure section 430.10(e) for failure to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action and for uncertainty under Code of ...

Excerpt: ...fs Richman Bry, Jr. and Kilimanjaro Partners II, LLC's (KPII) Second Amended Complaint (SAC) allege 6 causes of action (COA) for 1) fraud, 2) breach of fiduciary duty, 3) breach of contract, 4) quiet title, 5) conversion, and 6) declaratory relief against multiple defendants. Defendant Longbridge Financial, LLC demurs pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure §§430.10(c), (e), and (f) on the bases that there is an earlier pleading filed wh...

Excerpt: ...tion to Compel Further responses (Int. 25 and 26) is granted. A party may move for an order to compel a further response if it deems the responding party's objections are without merit or too general. “Absent a claim of privilege or attorney work product, the party who seeks to compel production has met his burden of showing good cause simply by a fact‐specific showing of relevance.” (Kirkland v. Superior Court (2002) 95 Cal. App. 4th 92, 9...

Excerpt: ...n the property since 2024. (See SSUF #1.) Here, the relevant time period is from 11‐19‐17 to the present. (SAC, ¶ 8.) Therefore, the facts listed in the separate statement fail to establish a prima facie showing that the plaintiffs' claims cannot be proven. Second, even assuming that the 2024 date is a typographical error, intended to be 2014, other SSUFs also fail to address the entire period during which the plaintiffs seek to establish he...

Excerpt: ...ecause Facebook was a party to the communications that were allegedly intercepted. (See Rogers v. Ulrich (1975) 52 Cal.App.3d 894, 899 [“only a third party can listen to what is said in private”].) The Court is not persuaded. The Complaint alleges that Plaintiffs provided their personal information to Defendant through accessing its website, which was transmitted to Facebook without Plaintiffs' consent or authorization. There is no allegation...

Excerpt: ... of all material facts which have been properly alleged, facts which may be inferred from those expressly alleged, and material facts of which judicial notice has been taken. Crowley v. Katleman (1994) 8 Cal.4th 666, 672. However, it does not assume the truth of contentions, deductions, or conclusions of law alleged within the complaint. Daar v. Yellow Cab Co. (1967) 67 Cal.2d 695, 713. REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE County seeks judicial notice of ...

Excerpt: ...ide. On 8/17/22, Plaintiffs Brandon Michael Clemison and Lauren Clemison filed the Complaint against defendants Congruex, LLC, Congruex Group, LLC, HHS Construction LLC and Jorge Humberto Quezado. The Complaint contains causes of action for 1) negligence asserted by Brandon Clemison and 2) negligence (loss of consortium) asserted by his wife Lauren Clemison. Plaintiffs seeks to add the third cause of action for vicarious liability to “protect t...

Excerpt: ... a risk that is inherent in an activity in which plaintiff chose to participate. (Knight v. Jewett (1992) 3 Cal.4th 296, 308; Nalwa v. Cedar Fair, L.P. (2012) 55 Cal.4th 1148, 1154.) Assumption of the risk does not depend on i) the reasonableness or unreasonableness of plaintiff's conduct to subject himself or herself to the risk of defendant's conduct, or ii) whether plaintiff subjectively knew of and voluntarily chose to encounter the risk of w...

Excerpt: ...ROPERLY NOTICED C.C.P., § 1005(b) requires that motions be filed and served at least 16 court days before the scheduled hearing. However, when service is affected through electronic mail, the moving party must provide 2 additional court days of notice. (C.C.P., §§ 1005(b), 1010.6(a)(4).) Here, Defendant e‐served the motion on January 5, 2023 ‐ exactly 16 court days before the scheduled hearing ‐ and did not provide the additional 2 days ...

Excerpt: ...ce coverage, who recommended and procured insurance through Defendant The Burlington Insurance Company. Planet Bingo had a distribution agreement with nonparty Leisure Electronics, LTD, a UK company, and it agreed to indemnify Leisure. Leisure leased the PHDs to Beacon Bingo, who subsequently suffered fire losses due to a PHD battery. Beacon made a claim against Leisure, who subsequently made a claim against Planet Bingo. Burlington knew that the...

Excerpt: ...floor, sustaining injuries. (Compl. 5.) On 4/14/2021, Plaintiff served Defendant with his first set of Requests for Production of Documents (“RFPs”). (Martirosyan Decl. ¶ 2, Ex. A.) On 6/18/2021, Defendant served its responses, objecting to the requests. Notwithstanding its objections, Defendant agreed to produce the following: “its relevant Standard Operating Procedures regarding store security,” in response to RFP Nos. 8, 9, 11, 12, 16...

Excerpt: ...ive First Amended Complaint (“FAC”). Defendants' motion is based on the court's lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and alternatively, based on an official immunity, and insufficiency of Lamar's pleading. Moving Defendants have not met their burden to demonstrate they are immune from suit. Defendants specially appear to challenge the Court's lack of subject matter jurisdiction under the protection of sovereign immunity and the official immun...

Excerpt: ...es, a plaintiff must plead allegations of fraud, malice, or oppression with sufficient particularity. (Hilliard v. AH Robbins Co. (1983) 148 Cal.App.3d 374, 392.) Generally, claims for punitive damages must be pleaded with particularity as to the facts constituting the alleged egregious conduct. (G.D. Searle & Co. v. Superior Court (1975) 49 Cal.App.3d 22, 29.) However, the court may read the complaint as a whole so that conclusory allegations ma...

Excerpt: ...205, 1208; Corp. Code § 14502; Penal Code § 597.1.) Level 1 humane officers also have the authority to carry firearms. (Corp. Code § 14502(h)(1).) Humane societies engage in quasi‐public function and are state actors for the purposes of 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Brunette v. Humane Society of Ventura County, supra, 294 F.3d at 1208.) Human societies are required to petition the court for appointment of humane officers and provide notice to various ...

Excerpt: ...damages must be pleaded with particularity as to the facts constituting the alleged egregious conduct. (G.D. Searle & Co. v. Superior Court (1975) 49 Cal.App.3d 22, 29.) However, the court may read the complaint as a whole so that conclusory allegations may be sufficient when read in context with the facts alleged as to the defendant's wrongful conduct. (Perkins v. Superior Court (1981) 117 Cal.App.3d 1, 6‐7.) Plaintiff is relying on malice, wh...

Excerpt: ...vide the supplemental responses within 10 days of this order. The request for sanctions is denied. Factual and procedural background: On 3/14/21, Plaintiff purchased a 2020 Chevrolet Traverse (“Subject Vehicle”), which was manufactured and/or distributed by Defendant General Motors, LLC (“Defendant”). In connection with the purchase, Plaintiff received various express warranties. Plaintiff alleges that several defects arose during the war...

Excerpt: ...urther, its scope of work did not include removal of the beige cabinet owned by Eastern Municipal Water District. Plaintiffs ask the court to deny the motion because Canyon Springs did not provide the entire public works contract and because the completed and accepted doctrine has been rejected by the California Supreme Court. The first cause of action is for negligence. The elements of such a cause of action are a duty of care, breach of that du...

Excerpt: ...App.3d 131, 138.) Injunctions are rarely granted where a lawsuit for damages provides an adequate remedy. (see Thayer Plymouth Ctr, Inc. v. Chrysler Motors Corp. (1967) 255 Cal.App.2d 300, 307; Pacific Decision Sciences Corp. v. Sup. Ct. (Maudlin) (2004) 121 Cal.App.4th 1100, 1110.) Kazarian and FCM characterize the need for a TRO as an emergency, which is necessary because Plaintiff, Luisine Babloyan and her attorney, Mike Gatto, are willfully v...