Excerpt: ...007) 154 Cal.App.4th 498, 507‐508. It is irrelevant that more than one person could be the successor in interest and defendants offer no authority to the contrary. The court does not deal here with Defendants' Motion to Strike or Tax set next month. ...

Excerpt: ...plain: a. Why Mr. & Mrs. Oliver are named as plaintiffs in both cases. They were amended into the Wilder complaint on 1‐5‐18 but then filed their own action 19 days later on 1‐24‐18. Page 3 of 4 b. Why the consolidated complaint has not been served on the defendant. c. The plaintiffs' reference to “likely up to thirty or more subcontractors” (mtn., p. 2, l. 7), given that the developer has answered without filing any cross‐complaint...

Excerpt: ...he action as to that defendant. That same ruling applies in Randall v. William Lyon Homes, Inc. RIC1709214 and Escott v. William Lyon Homes, Inc. RIC1515142. Analysis: The plaintiff represents that a global settlement has been reached in this case and in four other related cases. The defendant agrees. However, the defendant asks the Court to proceed with a ruling on the motion to compel arbitration because the parties had previously stipulated th...

Excerpt: ...to this court that would tend to indicate he can plead around the failed allegations of statutory liability or that governmental immunity does not apply here. 1 st Cause of Action for General Negligence and 2nd Cause of Action for Violation of Statute The Complaint alleges that the Riverside County Coroners' Office has a mandatory duty under Govt. Code §27491 “to fully inquire into the circumstances, manner, and cause of all violent, sudden, o...

Excerpt: ...compliance with CRC 3.1306(c). Even if judicial notice were taken that a contract existed, the court cannot make factual or legal determinations based upon the contents of those documents. Further, the truth of statements made therein and their proper interpretation are not subject to judicial notice if the matters are reasonably disputable: Taking judicial notice of a document is not the same as accepting the truth of its contents or accepting a...

Excerpt: ...efore filing a demurrer, the demurring party shall meet and confer in person or by telephone with the party who filed the subject pleading, for the purpose of determining whether an agreement can be reached that would resolve the objections to be raised in the demurrer. As part of that meet and confer process, both parties are required to provide legal support for their positions, or amend/answer (§430.41(a)(1)). The cross‐defendants who filed...

Excerpt: ...s demurrer was originally filed 7/19/17. At the 1/31/18 hearing the court continued the hearing to 4/26/18 to be heard after the motion Re: Guardian ad Litem issue. On 3/22/18 the Court heard the motion for removal of Guardian ad Litem and Dismissal of Complaint by Lydia Brown. The Court vacated the order appointing the Guardian ad Litem and encouraged the parties to attempt to resolve the issue concerning a guardian Page 3 of 3 and/or dismissal ...

Excerpt: ...tice pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1019.5, forthwith. There is no provision in the Code of Civil Procedure or Rules of Court which provides that a motion is deemed to be meritorious because no opposition was filed. However, "[s]ome courts treat a party's failure to file opposition papers as an admission that the motion is meritorious, and therefore refuse to hear oral argument from such party. The purpose is to prevent intro...

Excerpt: ...) 212 Cal.App.4th 674, 676. Further, Defendants' argument that application of CCP § 1281.2 is barred by FAA is without merit. Nothing in the Arbitration Agreement indicates that it is governed by the FAA, much less subject to the FAA's procedural rules. See Avila v. Southern California Specialty Care, Inc. (2018) 20 Cal.App.5th 835, 840 (“The procedural aspects of the FAA do not apply in state court absent an express provision in the arbitrati...

Excerpt: ...nts. Plaintiff's attorney Andrew J. Knez failed to respond to a letter inviting the required telephone meet and confer, and failed to provide any legal support for plot's position regarding her Complaint. The defendant who filed the demurrer and motion to strike is ordered to meet and confer in person or by telephone with the plaintiff who filed the complaint for the purpose of determining whether an agreement can be reached that would resolve th...

Excerpt: ...37. However, the plaintiff has now submitted a “second corrected proposed” order, which re‐inserts language to the effect that the participating class members are bound by sections 5.01, 5.02, and 5.05 of the agreement. Unless the Agreement has been modified since the version attached to the declaration of Benowitz filed 3‐7‐18, section 5.02 requires the class members to covenant not to sue the defendants. (Pg. 22, ll. 3‐4.) As pointe...

Excerpt: ...alid in California as the vehicle was purchased outside the State of California. Summary adjudication is granted when a moving party establishes the right to entry of judgment on a particular cause of action as a matter of law. (Code Civ. Proc. § 437c(c).) A party moving for summary judgment/adjudication bears the initial burden of proving that there is no merit to a cause of action by showing that one or more elements of the cause of action can...

Excerpt: ...submission of new evidence (William Chu's declaration ¶¶ 28‐31). Second cause of action: The law of the case doctrine does not apply and Defendants failed to establish restitution is not applicable. Fourth cause of action: Defendants did not provide evidence that completely disposes of the entire cause of action. Fifth cause of action: Defendants failed to meet their initial burden. Sixth and seventh causes of action: There are triable issues...

Excerpt: ...fendant Red Mule Ranch, Inc. (“Ranch”). According to Defendants the accident occurred while Schriner was making a left hand turn and Waters attempted to pass him while he made the turn. Waters contends that Schriner made an improper left turn causing the collision. Defendants dispute that contention. The CHP officer investigating the accident determined that Waters made an unsafe attempt to pass the tractor and collided with the left front wh...

Excerpt: ...atement until long after the time limit had expired. Filing and serving a notice of the motion only within the 45‐ day time limit is insufficient to meet the requirements for filing a motion. (See Rules of Court, rule 3.1112 and rule 3.1345; CCP, §§ 2030.300(a) and 2031.310(a) [both providing that a party dissatisfied with responses may “move for an order” compelling further responses].) A motion is not sufficient unless the supporting me...

Excerpt: ...romptly serving written objections. (Cal. Code Civ. Pro. §2025.410.) Plaintiff argues that Defendant's objections were not timely served. Pursuant to Cal. Code Civ. Pro. §2025.410(b), if an objection is made three calendar days before the deposition date, the objecting party shall make personal service of that objection. Defendant served its objections to the January 8 deposition on January 4. Therefore, the objection was not made three calenda...

Excerpt: ... the interrogatory, and failed to substantiate its objections. RFP Nos. 3‐6, 10, 36. GRANTED. Defendant failed to provide a privilege log and failed to produce sufficient evidence that the dominant purpose of the incident report was for attorney review. Defense Counsel's declaration lacks foundation. Request for Sanctions: DENIED based on the court's mixed ruling. ...

Excerpt: ... separate statement until long after the time limit had expired. Filing and serving a notice of the motion only within the 45‐ day time limit is insufficient to meet the requirements for filing a motion. (See Rules of Court, rule 3.1112 and rule 3.1345; CCP, §§ 2030.300(a) and 2031.310(a) [both providing that a party dissatisfied with responses may “move for an order” compelling further responses].) A motion is not sufficient unless the s...

Excerpt: ...Ruiz DeLeon v. Estate of Vides (BC660530); and other cases as yet not received from Los Angeles County Superior Court. Into that same master file, the State seeks to consolidate three additional cases:  Hernandez v. Guilford (RIC1714082);  Car v. Guilford (RIC1714086); and  Alvarez v. USA Holiday (PSC1801449). Page 3 of 3 The State has failed to comply with the rules governing motions for consolidation in at least two respects. First, th...

Excerpt: ...the opposition, the Property was listed on October 4, 2017. With the exception of a short period in February 2018 during which the Property was delisted, it was relisted with a higher price. There is currently nothing for the court to enforce. Further, there is nothing in the current record to indicate that Plaintiff has acted in bad faith or that the price currently listed for the Property is unreasonable. ...

Excerpt: ...e the judgment. As to the remainder of the motion, regarding bank records of defendants from 2014 to the present, plaintiff has not met its burden to demonstrate that the subpoena is directly relevant to the causes of action and the subpoena is overbroad. Additionally, plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that the information is not available using less intrusive methods of discovery. ...

Excerpt: ...on, the vast majority of the documents that would be produced under these subpoenas are not relevant to this matter and protected by privilege. Personnel files from an individual's employer fall within a zone of privacy. Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford J. Univ. v. Sup. Ct. (1981) 119 Cal.App.3d 516, 528‐530. The accident in question occurred on 11/25/14. It is unclear why Defendants would need financial records that date back to 2004, when...

Excerpt: ... and Darryl Clare. Defendants failed to show that the filing of the cross‐complaint against such parties would be in the interest of justice. (CCP § 428.50(c).) ...

Excerpt: ...4th 453, 458.) Plaintiff is essentially asking the court to not enjoin any wrong actions by the Defendant to preserve the status quo, but rather, make a determination on the merits and award her full control of Defendant without a trial. This is not a proper preliminary injunction. Damages will not support an injunction, since an injunction is an equitable remedy which will not be granted if there is a remedy at law. (Department of Fish & Game v....

Excerpt: ...Motion could have been denied at this time. Moving party to give notice. Much information is currently missing, it is difficult to determine whether the Settlement is fair and reasonable. Counsel does not explain the strength of the case and there are few factual allegations contained in the Complaint. Counsel does not provide estimates as to the maximum amount of damages and other relief the class could be awarded if they prevail at trial. Furth...