Excerpt: ...SAC) filed on 8/6/21 asserting a single cause of action of negligence. Jury trial is set for 2/24/23. Defendant Hilton Domestic (Hilton) moves for summary judgment, or in the alternative, summary adjudication, on the grounds that there is no vicarious liability as did not control the day to day operations of the hotel, and had no duty to Plaintiff. It argues that it is the parent company of the franchising arm. Urban Commons owns the subject hote...

Excerpt: ...murrer lies where the pleading does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. (CCP § 430.10(e).) In evaluating a demurrer, the court gives the pleading a reasonable interpretation by reading it as a whole and all of its parts in their context. (Moore v. Regents of University of California (1990) 51 Cal.3d 120, 125.) The court assumes the truth of all material facts which have been properly pleaded, of facts which may be inferre...

Excerpt: ...contends that Defendant's fictitious business name, which was registered after Plaintiff's, confuses consumers into believing that the two entities are the same or are affiliated companies, which is not the case. Plaintiff asserts that it is likely that Defendant chose its fictious business name to mislead the general public. On 8/3/22, Defendant's demurred to the original Complaint was sustained as to the first and third causes of action (violat...

Excerpt: ...tiff claims that there are additional improper charges included in the memorandum of costs, or charges that were miscategorized. As an initial matter, the Court rejects Plaintiff's unsupported contention that the Court lacks jurisdiction to award costs after an appeal is filed. That is not correct. (Korchemny v. Piterman (2021) 68 Cal.App.5th 1032, 1052; Carpenter v. Jack in the Box Corp. (2007) 151 Cal.App.4th 454, 461.) Further, there is no bas...

Excerpt: ...that a settlement had been reached in this matter. The Court dismissed the case on 1/24/22, retaining jurisdiction over the parties to enforce the settlement and its terms under C.C.P. § 664.6. On 6/3/22, a stipulated judgment was entered by the Court. Defendants brought a motion to set aside the judgment, which was heard by the court on September 9, 2022 and denied. In the instant motion, Defendants bring a motion to quash subpoena. It is uncle...

Excerpt: ...red that there was no discriminatory animus when Plaintiff's employment was terminated. However, Plaintiff submitted a status as to the sixth cause of action, in which Plaintiff agreed to dismiss the sixth cause of action and that both sides would bear their costs and fees. As such, the sixth cause of action is resolved. Plaintiff also objected to the declaration of Darnell in its entirety, as the declaration addressed issues that Defendant could...

Excerpt: ... Corp. v. County of Imperial (1983) 35 Cal.3d 63.) In exercising that discretion, the court evaluates two interrelated factors: the likelihood that the plaintiff will prevail on the merits at trial, and the interim harm that the plaintiff is likely to sustain if the injunction were denied as compared to the harm that the defendant is likely to suffer if the preliminary injunction were issued. (Nutro Products, Inc. v. Cole Grain Co. (1992) 3 Cal.A...

Excerpt: ...ersity of California (1990) 51 Cal.3d 120, 125.) The court assumes the Page 3 of 5 truth of all material facts which have been properly pleaded, of facts which may be inferred from those expressly pleaded, and of any material facts of which judicial notice has been requested and may be taken. (Crowley v. Katleman (1994) 8 Cal.4th 666, 672.) However, a demurrer does not admit contentions, deductions or conclusions of fact or law. (Daar v. Yellow C...

Excerpt: ...d by the attachments shall be $10,200,000 jointly and severally among the three Defendants. Plaintiff is ordered to post an undertaking in the amount of $10,000 within 30 days of the order. Factual / Procedural Context: On October 27, 2022, Plaintiff filed its Complaint arising out of a breach of a settlement agreement relating to the sale of a business. The operative First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) was filed on October 31, 2022, alleging the...

Excerpt: ...ontract with Rosenauer Construction, Inc. (“Defendant”). Under said agreement, Defendant was to perform a residential home renovation project for Plaintiff in exchange for $113,000.00. Defendant allegedly breached the agreement by failing to complete the work, failing to provide agreed upon credits, and for failing to pay for all materials pursuant to the agreement. The complaint asserts the following causes of action: (1) breach of contract,...

Excerpt: ...urrer without a declaration in compliance with CCP § 430.41(a)(3). Thus, the hearing is continued. *** Accordingly, the hearing on the demurrer is continued to February 9. 2023 at 8:30 a.m. in Dept. 2. Moving Defendant is ordered to meet and confer with Plaintiffs by telephone (or in person while observing applicable social‐distancing protocols) for the purpose of determining whether an agreement can be reached that would resolve the objection...

Excerpt: ... separate lawsuits, including for damages for medical injuries to Plaintiff Karli Collins, for wrongful death related to the delivery of a 21‐week‐old fetus at Rancho Springs Medical Center, and for later claims of medical negligence and resulting injury for care at Loma Linda University Medical Center, alleged to have been related to Ms. Collins' treatment at Rancho Springs Medical Center. (“RSMC.) All three separately filed lawsuits have ...

Excerpt: .../ Procedural Context Plaintiff Hal Hays Construction, Inc. (HHCI) was the prime contractor on a construction project involving the placement of the Humboldt County Juvenile Hall. The County of Humboldt is the project owner. Defendant Flooring Solutions, Inc. (FSI) was HHCI's subcontractor. In October of 2021, FSI's own subcontractor, All Bay Area Floors, Inc. (All Bay) caused a fire in the juvenile hall. The fire caused damaged to the structure a...

Excerpt: ...triking the entirety of plaintiff, SID KOHAN, M.D.'s ("Plaintiff') complaint and dismissing this action. The motion is and will be made on the grounds that the complaint intentionally ignores and completely contradicts multiple Court orders which specifically find that Plaintiffs deed(s) of trust are unenforceable and that Plaintiff is/was not entitled to paid on account of his deed(s) of trust upon the sale of Plaintiffs brother's real property ...

Excerpt: ...Item 8 c. $58,250.96 from Item 12 d. $843,486.28 from Item 16 2. Plaintiff Carlos‐ Tax Costs in the amount of $93,670.60 as follows: a. $14,122.73 from Item 8 b. $79,547.87 from Item 16 Factual / Procedural Context: This action arises from a motor vehicle accident between Plaintiffs and Defendant Premier General Engineering's employee Carlos Guevara. After trial, judgment was entered in favor of Sheena ($3,380,083.63), Carlos ($321,009.98) and ...

Excerpt: ...rial of an issue therein, or at the taking of a deposition, the court, upon motion reasonably made by any person described in subdivision (b), or upon the court's own motion after giving counsel notice and an opportunity to be heard, may make an order quashing the subpoena entirely, modifying it, or directing compliance with it upon those terms or conditions as the court shall declare, including protective orders. In addition, the court may make ...

Excerpt: ...he settlement was made in good faith shall bar any other tortfeasor or co‐obligor from any further claims against the settling tortfeasor or co‐obligor for equitable comparative contribution, or partial or comparative indemnity, based on comparative negligence or comparative fault.” (CCP § 877.6(c).) To reach a good‐faith determination, the court must assess whether the settlement figure falls within a reasonable range. (See PacifiCare o...

Excerpt: ...dant has failed to place the medical records before the court under the business records exception to the hearsay rule, or to provide the authenticated documents in its Appendix of Attached Exhibits. OVERRULE Defendant's Objections to Plaintiff's Evidence in support of the Opposition in their entirety. DENY Motion for Summary Judgment/Summary Adjudication. The Defendant has not met her burden on this motion pursuant to CCP § 437c(p)(2). Therefor...

Excerpt: ...fects, which could not be repaired after FCA was given repeated opportunities. Plaintiffs allege that FCA has been unable to repair the defects to conform to the express and implied warranties. Plaintiffs also allege that defendant Geovel, Inc. dba I‐10 Chrysler Jeep Dodge Ram (“Geovel”) is authorized by FCA to perform service on FCA‐manufactured vehicles and performed negligent repairs when the subject vehicle was brought into the dealer...

Excerpt: ...Court reconsider its ruling based on an argument Plaintiff claims to have raised at oral argument on the demurrer, but which was not included in Plaintiff's opposing papers, specifically that Plaintiff has a right of privacy under Article I section 1 of the California Constitution to be free from unwarranted medical toxins and the excessive use of force, citing Hill v. National Collegiate Association (1994) 7 Cal.4th 1, 8. Plaintiff argues that i...

Excerpt: ... entered into in “good faith, and that all actual and potential future claims, complaints, cross‐ complaints, demands, known or unknown, for equitable comparative contribution or implied, total or partial or comparative indemnity and/or comparative negligence against Defendant are dismissed and barred pursuant to CCP §§ 877 and 877.6. The settlement terms provide that Defendant MHSI, by and through its insurer, will pay Plaintiffs the total...

Excerpt: ...one‐fifth interest in property located at 175 Gran Via in Palm Desert (“subject property”) and that he owns his interest with his siblings, defendants Janet Rappaport (“Janet”), Valerie Rappaport (“Valerie”), James Rappaport (“James”), and Richard Rappaport (“Richard”) (collectively, “defendants”). Plaintiff alleges that he and defendants acquired the subject property by gift deed from their parents, Irving and Julia W. ...

Excerpt: ... agreement and proposed order do not comply with the CMO at § D.10. • The proposed order does not comply with the CMO at § D.11. • At the last hearing, the Court objected to the $7,500 release fee being paid to the plaintiff, in part on the ground that the plaintiff was receiving the entire release fee, without any deduction for the attorney's fees and costs incurred to obtain that release fee. As a result. the LWDA and the aggrieved employ...

Excerpt: ...iction is precluded, jurisdictionally, from rendering declaratory relief or injunctive relief regarding the administration of another superior court. Here, petitioners are not seeking to reverse a decision of the San Bernardino Superior Court having coequal jurisdiction, but rather are challenging the administrative orders of the presiding judge of San Bernardino. Demurrer is overruled on the basis of lack of jurisdiction. First Cause of Action f...

Excerpt: ...and age. Plaintiff claims he was discriminated on the bases of these protected classes, but does not provide factual assertions to support any of them. Plaintiff fails to allege facts that constitute circumstances suggesting discriminatory motive based on the protected class. With respect to the harassment claim, Plaintiff fails to allege the conduct by IA that he considered harassing in nature, how frequently the alleged harassment occurred, whe...