Excerpt: ...ot provided evidence that there is an excessive amount of work required to provide responses to the 103 interrogatories. It argues that 103 interrogatories are excessive in the context of this “simple collection action.” LuLaRoe disagrees with the characterization of the Page 2 of 2 action as simple, given the work allegedly performed by Mad Engine before the parties' dispute and given its damages claim. On its face, 103 interrogatories is no...

Excerpt: ...urly rates are reduced from $950.00 and $650.00 to $550.00 (an overall reduction of in fees for his 11.5 hours from $10,175.00 to $6,325.00). Plaintiff Mr. Kelly is awarded THE ALTMAN LAW GROUP'S attorney's fees of $10,175.00. HOURLY RATES: The Court finds the requested hourly rates to be reasonable, except as to those which exceed $550.00 (i.e., the $1,280.00 rate for attorney Kiesel at KNIGHT and the $950.00 and $650.00 rates charged by Bryan A...

Excerpt: ...Plaintiffs cannot establish actionable misrepresentations were made upon which Plaintiffs relied to their detriment. The burden shifted to Plaintiffs, but Plaintiffs failed to produce sufficient evidence showing a triable issue of fact. Evidentiary Objections: Defendant's evidentiary objections are SUSTAINED in their entirety for lack of foundation, lack of personal knowledge, and relevance. Plaintiffs Teodora Q. Tuazon's and Joshua Ryan Tuazon B...

Excerpt: ... evidence of the reasonable necessity of the costs claimed. Plaintiff put certain costs at issue by her motion. Defendant properly submitted supporting documentation with the Opposition, including the invoices for the expert fees, deposition costs, subpoenas and court reporter fees. (Aarvig Dec., Exs. 6‐11.) Thus, the burden is on Plaintiff to show the costs were not reasonable or necessary. Expert Fees (Item 8): Defendant served a 998 offer to...

Excerpt: ...1.) The Retail Installment Sales Contract (“RISC”) does not “clearly and unmistakably” provide that Plaintiffs and BMW agreed to arbitrate arbitrability. While Plaintiffs may have agreed to arbitrate arbitrability in a dispute with the Dealership, the terms of the arbitration clause is expressly limited to Plaintiffs and the Dealership, i.e., “either you or we may choose to have any dispute between you and us decided by arbitration.” ...

Excerpt: ...ed. UNCERTAINTY: A Demurrer for uncertainty will be sustained only where the Complaint is so uncertain that a defendant cannot reasonably respond (i.e., he or she cannot reasonably determine what issues must be admitted or denied, or what counts or claims are directed against him or her) (Khoury vs. Maly's of California, Inc. (1993) 14 Cal. App. 4th 612, 616). The allegations and causes of action in the Complaint are sufficient to put defendants ...

Excerpt: ...f action for concealment; and, sustained without leave to amend as to the first and fourth causes of action (for declaratory relief and remedy for equitable forfeiture of fees). The Motion to Strike is moot in part and granted in party with 20 days leave to amend. Request for Judicial Notice: Cross‐Defendant and Cross‐Complainant request judicial notice of a variety of legal documents and a transcript of a hearing. The requests for Judicial N...

Excerpt: ...laiming attorney‐client privilege to disclose contents of allegedly privileged communications to determine existence of privilege]; Solin v. O'Melveny & Myers, LLP (2001) 89 Cal.App.4th 451, 465. Regents of Univ. of Cal. v. WCAB (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 1530, 1535.) “[T]he court's factual determination does not involve the nature of the communications or the effect of disclosure but rather the existence of the relationship at the time the commu...

Excerpt: ...r Daugherty nor Bardin preclude a duty to disclose material information known to a manufacturer and concealed from a consumer.” A material defect can be sufficient. (Id. at 1175‐1176.) Contrary to Daughtery, Plaintiffs specifically pled that the defect causes a sudden hard shaking during deceleration, violent jerking, and a complete failure to function. (Complaint ¶18.) The Complaint also alleges that the defect increases the risk of a crash...

Excerpt: ...e or Reichart at their depositions. It objected to facts asserted in CISS' Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts (which is essentially a summary of their testimony). This is improper. Rule of Court 3.1354 requires objections be made to “specific evidence” and to “[q]uote or set forth the objectionable statement or material.” As to the remaining objections, the Court overrules number 8. It sustains numbers 9 and 10 for lack of pe...

Excerpt: ...males residing at the address at the time of service on 9/17/07. The description on the Proof of Service indicates the person served was “MRS. KHAN –, WHO REFUSED TO GIVE HER FIRST NAME, DOP SERVE on A Middle Eastern female approx. 40‐ 45 years of age 5'4”‐5'6” in height weighing 140‐160 lbs with brown hair.” (Proof of Service filed on 9/27/07.) Plaintiff Mr. Khan attests that his wife is of Asian and Pakistani descent, was 38 yea...

Excerpt: ...n et al., CAL. PRAC. GUIDE: CIV. PRO. BEFORE TRIAL (The Rutter Group 2019) §10:32 et seq., the Court has the power to grant summary adjudication as follows: that one or more causes of action has no merit; that one or more claims for damages has no merit; that there is no merit to a claim for punitive damages; that there is no affirmative defense to one or more causes of action or claims for damages; that there is no merit to one or more affirmat...

Excerpt: ...989) 48 Cal.3d 438, 447‐452; Alma W. v. Oakland Unified School Dist. (1981) 123 Cal. App. 3d 133, 144.) Sexual misconduct falls outside the course and scope of employment and should not be imputed to the employer even if the abuse occurred during work hours on the employer's premises. (Juarez v. Boy Scouts of America (2000) 81 Cal. App. 4th 377.) Sexual misconduct simply is not foreseeable, because it does not relate to employment duties or tas...

Excerpt: ...uld constitute a change in physical condition sufficient to defeat the design immunity. The Court granted the continuance and set a new hearing date of August 30, 2019. On August 14, 2019, Plaintiff filed a Supplemental Opposition. In the Supplemental Opposition, Plaintiff argued that another continuance was necessary to allow plaintiff to take the deposition of the other driver involved in the incident (Aguilar). The Court again continued the he...

Excerpt: ...he work performed by Plaintiffs' trial counsel, Hackler Daghighian Martino & Novak, PC (HDMN), took 21.5 hours to do. (Dec.Lebovitz, ¶13, Ex. “A”.) The tasks listed on the submitted billing are reasonable. They are also unchallenged on an individual basis. Defendant submitted a summary of the objectionable billing. (Dec.Gilefsky ¶2, Exs. “A” – “C”.) Defendant purports to demonstrate block billing. (Dec.Gilefsky ¶2, Ex. “A”.) ...

Excerpt: ...ed 3.5 hours, this is an overall reduction of $350. Under the Song Beverly Act, a vehicle manufacturer that willfully fails to comply with the act can be liable for civil penalties under Civil Code § 1794(c). Plaintiffs' fraud‐based claims overlap with the Song Beverly claims. Likewise, the negligent repair cause of action against Hemborg is based on the same facts as the Song‐Beverly claims. Therefore, apportionment is not necessary. The fa...

Excerpt: ...red its right to transact business in California. (Exhibit “1” to Opposition, Certificate of Surrender.) Ms. Bozner's argument that MJB Inc., lacks capacity to defend itself in this action is without merit. A suspended corporation lacks capacity to defend itself [see Rev. & Tax Code § 23301; Center for Self‐Improvement and Community Development v. Lennar Corp. (2009) 173 Cal.App.4th 1543, 1552]. No similar rule is applicable to a corporati...

Excerpt: ...mber 4 and Document Request No. 1 to 5 years before the incident. Trade secret “means information, including a formula, pattern, compilation, program, device, method, technique, or process, that: (1) Derives independent economic value, actual or potential, from not being generally known to the public or to other persons who can obtain economic value from its disclosure or use; and (2) Is the subject of efforts that are reasonable under the circ...

Excerpt: ...88 Cal.App.3d 283, 299; Pianka v. State of California (1956) 46 Cal.2d 208, 211.) Defendants are not just attacking the sufficiency of the pleadings. The Motion relies on facts far outside of those pled in the Complaint. The Motion contains numerous statements about: what Plaintiff testified to at trial (Motion, 2:7‐8); the jury's factual findings (Motion, 2:13‐18); how the Court “is bound by the jury's factual findings” (Motion, 5:25); w...

Excerpt: ...sed on Govt. Code §87100 and Educ. Code §35107. Plaintiff clarified in the First Amended Petition that this cause of action is based on Gov. Code § 54957. Because Plaintiff's Brown Act Violation cause of action is based on Gov. Code § 54957(b), Section 54960.1 does not apply. He was not required to make a demand in writing within 90 days from the date that the disciplinary action was taken to challenge the disciplinary action was void. This c...

Excerpt: ...e United States or California Constitution in connection with a public issue” includes … any written or oral statement or writing made in connection with an issue under consideration or review by a legislative, executive, or judicial body, or any other official proceeding authorized by law.” Defendant contends the act in furtherance of her right of petition is “specifically, Plaintiff and Defendant entered into a note secured by a deed of...

Excerpt: ...�1094.5. Petitioner challenges the constitutionality of Riverside County Ordinance No. 630 and the County's administrative hearing process on the grounds that they fail to satisfy due process requirements. (Phillips vs. San Luis Obispo County Dep't. of Animal Regulations (1986) 183 Cal. App. 3d 372). Petitioner also alleges that because of various actions and omissions specific to this case, it was denied its due process rights. (For instance, Pe...

Excerpt: ... motion for judgment on the pleadings, motion for summary judgment or raised as an affirmative defense. (Greener v. Workers' Comp. Appeals Bd. (1993) 6 Cal.4th 1028, 1036‐37.) The Court construes the present motion as a motion for judgment on the pleadings. Under the “Barton doctrine,” which is derived from the Supreme Court's decision in Barton v. Barbour, 104 U.S. 126 (1881), “a party must first obtain leave of the bankruptcy court befo...

Excerpt: ... Defendant requests judicial notice of the Court's file in the present action, the First Amended Complaint in the Los Angeles Action, and an Order Approving Compromise and Release in Plaintiff's worker's compensation action against Defendant. These documents are judicially noticed by the Court pursuant to Evid. Code §452(d), which permits judicial notice of court records. However, “although the existence of a document may be judicially noticea...

Excerpt: ...te whether VPE owned or controlled the Property, the evidence submitted does not demonstrate the existence of a triable issue of material fact. It is undisputed that: Levinson owned and kept the subject dog in a home he rented from Braswell; and, Braswell was the sole owner of the home and the Property on which it was located. There is no dispute that VPE leased a small portion of the Property (the dome area), which was not where the incident occ...

Excerpt: ...epted as true for the purpose of the Demurrer. Based on the allegations, Plaintiffs have stated sufficient facts to constitute a cause of action for concealment. As a result of the allegations, the cause of action falls within an exception to the economic loss rule. (Robinson v. Helicopter Co. Dana Corp. (2004) 34 Cal. 4th 979, 989 ‐ 990.) Page 2 of 2 Fifth cause of action for fraudulent inducement ‐ intentional misrepresentation: It is not c...

Excerpt: ...aused by the dangerous condition, that the dangerous condition created a reasonably foreseeable risk of the kind of injury which was incurred, and that either: (a) A negligent or wrongful act or omission of an employee of the public entity within the scope of his employment created the dangerous condition; or (b) The public entity had actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition under Section 835.2 a sufficient time prior to the injur...

Excerpt: ...laim for damages are limited to the insurance coverage available, pursuant to Probate Code section 550, et. seq. and Plaintiff's failure to comply with Probate Code section 554 bars him from seeking recovery for any of his claims for damages in excess of insurance coverage available. The Court notes that Defendants admit that Plaintiff filed a creditor's claim in the probate action on 6/23/17. Therefore, Plaintiff complied with Probate Code § 55...

Excerpt: ...ed in the Notice of Motion. The five page Separate Statement does not satisfy requirement that each cause of action be separately identified and supported by material facts that are relevant to that cause of action. The purpose of the Separate Statement and opposing Separate Statement is to permit the Court to determine quickly whether the Motion is supported by sufficient undisputed facts. (St. Paul Mercury Ins. Co. v. Frontier Pac. Ins. Co. (20...

Excerpt: ...d Amended Complaint still currently alleges negligence. The Third Amended Complaint also alleges that Plaintiffs “regularly visited decedent during the time she was a resident at defendants' facilities, and thus were present during the injury‐producing events at or near the time they occurred and were then aware of these injury‐producing events and their effects ….” (Third Amended Complaint, ¶32.) However, no specific Plaintiff alleges...

Excerpt: ...ent places, during different times with different witnesses. Paragraph 42 does not tie these claims together because it does not allege any specific policy or procedure which was not properly implemented as to each Plaintiff nor does it show that deliberate acts of any of Defendant's employees caused common breaches of law resulting in each of the Plaintiffs' claims. There may be facts regarding the newly alleged policies and procedures of paragr...

Excerpt: ...t Defendant Medina for conduct unrelated to sexual harassment will in any way help her to prove her claims. Plaintiff has shown good cause for portions of Defendant Medina's personnel file. The Court requires that the following documents be produced at am in camera review hearing: 1. Any and all documents relating to the alleged sexual assault incident, including the complaint, the investigation(s) and results of the investigation(s); 2. Any othe...

Excerpt: ...he rights and duties of the parties under the contract. The Demurrer to the fourth and fifth causes of action is sustained because plaintiff fails to plead facts necessary to avoid the statute of frauds and the “Repurchase Agreement” attached to the complaint fails to satisfy the statute of frauds since it is not signed by the party to be charged. ...

Excerpt: ...y penalties are not the same as punitive damages. Punitive damages are governed by Civil Code §3294, which sets forth different standards and requirements than those set forth in Public Utilities Code §7951. Hence, any requirements in Civil Code §3294 that are not specifically required in Public Utilities Code §7951 or under case law specifically pertaining to Public Utilities Code §7951, do not apply to the third cause of action. The wrongf...

Excerpt: ...sponsive documents have now been produced. Hence, the motion is moot as to these responses. RFP Nos. 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 and 31: Landscape is Ordered to produce responsive documents. If Landscape contends that some responsive documents are protected by attorney‐client privilege or the work product doctrine, it must produce a privilege log. Page 2 of 3 RFP Nos. 26, 27, 28, 30, 32, 33, 34, 38, 39, 40 an...

Excerpt: ... expert opinion, attorney‐client or attorney work product privilege, burdensome or invasion of privacy. 4. RIC1702898 BURTCH VS EMPIRECARE HEALTH ASSOCIATES INC MOTION TO/FOR COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS AND FORM INTERROGATORY BY BARBARA BURTCH Tentative Ruling: Request for admissions nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 10, 14, and 15: The terms “notice” and “notified” are not ambiguous terms. The existence of medical documents...

Excerpt: ...rivacy Protection Act (Ins. Code §791.01, et seq.) prohibits an insurance institution, agent, or insurance‐support organization from disclosing any personal or privileged information about an individual collected or received in connection with an insurance transaction unless the disclosure is in response to a facially valid administrative or judicial order, including a search warrant or subpoena. (Ins. Code §791.13(h.) The Act does not create...

Excerpt: ...ns to the Morgan Declaration are OVERRULED as to numbers 1 ‐ 9. Defendants' evidentiary objections to the Young Declaration are SUSTAINED as to numbers 1, 5, 7 ‐ 9 and OVERRULED as to numbers 2 ‐ 4 & 6. The Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED. The Motion for Summary Adjudication is GRANTED, IN PART, AND DENIED, IN PART, as follows: 1 st cause of action (sexual harassment). GRANTED. Defendants met their initial burden that the alleged sexu...

Excerpt: ...orney fees and costs in an interpleader action.” (Tri‐State, Inc. v. Long Beach Community College Dist. (2012) 204 Cal.App.4th 224, 232. Suit against public entity to enforce stop notice.) Civil Code §9506 specifically permits interpleader. Defendants contend that there are no other conflicting claimants as a matter of law. However, it provides no judicial notice of any documents demonstrating that. In a demurrer proceeding, the defects must...

Excerpt: ...atories, Requests for Production of Documents, and Requests for Admission (all set one) on or before March 28, 2018 and to pay sanctions in the total amount of $5,035.00 to defendant Alfa Business within 30 days of the Orders. Plaintiffs failed to comply with the three Orders, at all, which necessitated the filing of the subject motion by defendant Alfa Business. (Plaintiffs argued that they did produce some documents to defendant Alfa Business b...

Excerpt: ... Additionally, Plaintiffs did not properly plead the punitive damages claim against a corporate defendant. Civil Code Section 3294(b) sets forth the circumstances under which an employer may be held liable for punitive damages based upon acts of an employee. They include the employer's (1) advance knowledge of the employee's unfitness; (2) authorization or ratification of the wrongful conduct; and (3) personal culpability. (See Grieves v. Superio...

Excerpt: ... 634, 653.) Harbor Ventures, LLC v. Morris Cerullo World Evangilism (2018) 4 Cal.5th 637 is not applicable to this case. Plaintiff argued in his Opposition to Defendants' Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings that his emotional distress causes of action are based on conduct by Defendants that extended “well beyond simply terminating Plaintiff's employment.” As Plaintiff alleged in the Complaint, “Defendant's false allegations of the crime we...

Excerpt: ...$6,510.00. The matter of reasonableness of a party's attorney's fees is within the sound discretion of the trial judge. (Bruckman v. Parliament Escrow Co. (1989) 190 Cal.App.3d 1051, 1062.) ...

Excerpt: ... or a Request for Judicial Notice. Defendant Banning Library District: The Demurrer is sustained as to the 8th cause of action with 30 days leave to amend. Plaintiff failed to plead compliance with FEHA claims presentation requirements. It is sustained as to the 9th and 10th causes of action without leave to amend. Defendant Rodriguez: The Demurrer is sustained as to the 8th cause of action with 30 days leave to amend. Plaintiff failed to plead c...

Excerpt: ...ns were tendered.” (Stansfield v. Starkey (1990) 220 Cal.App.3d 59, 73.) A plaintiff must allege what was said, by whom, in what manner (i.e., oral or in writing), when, and, in the case of a corporate defendant, under what authority to bind the corporation. (Goldrich v. Natural Y Surgical Specialties, Inc. (1994) 25 Cal.App.4th 772, 782.) The first cause of action for violation of B&P Codes is based on the alleged fraud. ...

Excerpt: ...aining Order was in place. Hence, Plaintiff County of Riverside established the operation of a cannabis business at the subject property, in violation of Riverside County Ordinance numbers 348 and 725. Operating or allowing the operation of a cannabis business or a marijuana dispensary is an illegal use of the subject property under the Riverside County Ordinance. The proposed Preliminary Injunction prohibits defendants from operating or allowing...

Excerpt: ...ties regarding new service of the Summons, Complaint, etc., on Defendant. In that event, no personal appearances will be necessary at the hearing. The Court does not rule on whether service was proper. It finds that Defendant is entitled to relief under CCP §473.5. Service of the summons on Defendant, if any, did not result in actual notice to Defendant in time to defend the action. Moreover, the Judgment is void. Plaintiffs served the Statement...

Excerpt: ...ng waste or any other exceptional circumstance demonstrating a receivership is warranted in this case. Receivers may be used only where authorized by statute or where necessary to preserve the property rights of any party. (Miller v. Oliver (1917) 174 Cal. 407, 410; Turner v. Super. Ct. (Cooke) (1977) 72 Cal.App.3d 804, 811.) The burden is on the moving party to present evidence showing facts establishing one of the statutory grounds for receiver...

Excerpt: ...d must be based on a showing of mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect. (Id.) The problem is that defense counsel is not taking the blame—he instead blames Plaintiff for bad faith tactics during settlement negotiations. Nor does Defendant provide a declaration from Defendant as to why it did not forward the complaint to its insurance carrier or failed to provide a response. However, Plaintiff did take default immediately without w...

Excerpt: ...element, the defendant must establish that plaintiff's claims fail as a matter of law. (Eriksson v. Nunnick (2011) 191 Cal.App.4th 826, 849.) To demonstrate that the plaintiff lacks evidence, the defendant must show that the plaintiff does not possess and cannot reasonably obtain needed evidence. (Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Company (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 855.) A defendant may not simply point to an absence of evidence, but must show that the p...