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

6288 Results

Location: Sacramento x
2019.2.8 Motion to Compel Release of Subpoenaed Records 474
Location: Sacramento
Judge: Krueger, Christopher E
Hearing Date: 2019.2.8
Excerpt: ... as follows. The notice of motion does not provide the correct address for Dept. 53/54. Factual Background HCD commenced this action against Center and other defendants alleging six causes of action including breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, money had and received, money paid, and accounting. HCD alleges that it entered into contracts with Center, a non‐ profit corporation, to operate and mainta...
2019.2.8 Motion to Compel Forensic Inspection 723
Location: Sacramento
Judge: Brown, David I
Hearing Date: 2019.2.8
Excerpt: ...the inspection would be conducted by Califorensics. CDE offered to expand the existing protective order to protect any confidential or privileged material from production. Plaintiff objected to the discovery and refused to allow the inspection. “[A]ny party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action.” (CCP § 2017.010.) CDE argues that it has the right to de...
2019.2.8 Motion for Terminating Sanctions 723
Location: Sacramento
Judge: Brown, David I
Hearing Date: 2019.2.8
Excerpt: ...from her perceived entitlement to a promotion to an Attorney IV position. She also alleges whistleblower retaliation and fraud. On October 16, 2018, the Court entered an order granting CDE's motion to compel further responses to its request for production of documents. Plaintiff was ordered to provide further responses without objections that identify the documents that are responsive to each category and to produce the responsive documents respo...
2019.2.8 Motion for Summary Judgment, Adjudication 863
Location: Sacramento
Judge: Krueger, Christopher E
Hearing Date: 2019.2.8
Excerpt: ... is granted. Mr. Riley's objections to the City evidence are ruled upon as follows: overruled. City's objections to plaintiff's evidence are ruled upon as follows: Riley Dec. ‐ overruled as to Nos. 1, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13 Exh. D ; sustained Nos. 2, 3, 4, 8, 11; Brown Dec. ‐ overruled 16, 18, 20, 22; sustained 14, 15, 17, 19, 21; Howell Dec. ‐ overruled 23, 25; sustained 24. Plaintiff Mr. Riley sued City and two of its employees alleging v...
2019.2.8 Motion for Summary Judgment, Adjudication 802
Location: Sacramento
Judge: Krueger, Christopher E
Hearing Date: 2019.2.8
Excerpt: ...tions to evidence will be addressed at the hearing. The parties should be prepared to point to specific admissible evidence which is claimed to show the existence or non‐existence of a triable issue of material fact. *** Defendant Sutter Valley Medical Foundation's (“SVMF”) motion for summary judgment/adjudication is ruled on as follows. The court notes SVMF lodged conditionally under seal several documents offered in support of this motion...
2019.2.8 Motion for Summary Judgment, Adjudication 774
Location: Sacramento
Judge: Brown, David I
Hearing Date: 2019.2.8
Excerpt: ...eed to sell a 55% interest in Metro and its permitted cannabis retail store in exchange for $800,000. Plaintiffs allege that the parties also entered a Continuity Agreement and that Baystone would receive an equal number of seats on Metro's board. Plaintiffs allege that Defendant has failed to comply with the parties' partnership and has been attempting to exclude Baystone from Metro's operation. The Court considered Plaintiffs' opposition de...
2019.2.8 Motion for Summary Judgment, Adjudication 753
Location: Sacramento
Judge: Brown, David I
Hearing Date: 2019.2.8
Excerpt: ... school program at a Sacramento City Unified School District elementary school. Plaintiff alleges causes of action against moving Defendants and others for Negligent Supervision, Investigation and Retention of an Employee, Negligent Supervision of Plaintiff, a minor, the 3rd for Negligence and Negligent Failure to Warn. Both Plaintiff and the City of Sacramento have opposed the instant motion. Any party may move for summary judgment in any action...
2019.2.8 Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement 627
Location: Sacramento
Judge: Brown, David I
Hearing Date: 2019.2.8
Excerpt: ... a class action is fair. (Rebney v. Wells Fargo Bank (1990) 220 Cal. App. 3rd 1117, 1138.) The law favors settlement, particularly in class actions and other complex cases where substantial resources can be conserved by avoiding the time, cost, and rigors of formal litigation. (See Newberg on Class Actions 4th (4th ed. 2002) § 11.41 (and cases cited therein); Class Plaintiffs v. City of Seattle (9th Cir. 1992) 955 F.2d 1268, 1276; Van Bronkhorst...
2019.2.8 Application for Order Sealing Record 753
Location: Sacramento
Judge: Brown, David I
Hearing Date: 2019.2.8
Excerpt: ...ir ex parte application and conditionally sealed that document and allowed Defendants to file a redacted version and a formal motion to seal. The redacted “Documentary Evidence” has now been filed. (ROA 122.) The portions of that document sought to be sealed contain identifying information of children who were the victims of sexual molestation or witnesses to sexual molestation. In order to issue the requested order, the Court must find that ...
2019.2.7 Demurrer 140
Location: Sacramento
Judge: Krueger, Christopher E
Hearing Date: 2019.2.7
Excerpt: ...ited oral argument is permitted on law and motion matters. *** Plaintiff/Cross‐Defendant Creditors Adjustment Bureau, Inc.'s (“CAB”) demurrer to Defendants/Cross‐Complainants Advance Care for Seniors LLC and Advance Care for Seniors, LLC's (“ACS”) cross‐complaint (“XC”) is ruled upon as follows. The Court did not consider the declarations of Brian L. Mitteldorf and Melissa Klopstock which are attached as exhibits to the declarat...
2019.2.7 Demurrer 711
Location: Sacramento
Judge: Brown, David I
Hearing Date: 2019.2.7
Excerpt: ...xistence of each document in a court file, but can only take judicial notice of the truth of facts asserted in documents such as orders, findings of fact and conclusions of law, and judgments." (Bach v. McNelis (1989) 207 Cal.App.3d 852, 865.) Factual and Procedural Background The complaint pending before the Court contains one cause of action for declaratory relief against La Posta and the California Gambling Control Commission (“CGCC”)....
2019.2.7 Motion for Attorney Fees 003
Location: Sacramento
Judge: Brown, David I
Hearing Date: 2019.2.7
Excerpt: ...Plaintiffs also seek costs and expenses in the amount of $1,164.85. This is a lemon law action. Plaintiffs purchased a new 2013 Volkswagen Passat on June 18, 2013, for a purchase price of $34,205. Adding taxes, fees, an optional surface protection product, an optional service plan and finance charges on a six‐year loan, the total purchase price was $44,239.24. (Mikhov Decl. ¶ 3, Exh. C.) After the vehicle began experiencing repeated engine and...
2019.2.7 Motion for Summary Judgment, Adjudication 296
Location: Sacramento
Judge: Krueger, Christopher E
Hearing Date: 2019.2.7
Excerpt: ...hearing and the parties should be prepared to point to specific evidence which is claimed to show the existence or non‐existence of a triable issue of material fact. *** Defendant Dignity Health dba Mercy Hospital Folsom's (“Defendant”) motion for summary judgment, or in the alternative summary adjudication is ruled upon as follows. Defendant's request for judicial notice is granted. I. Overview This is an employment action. Plaintiff Aundr...
2019.2.7 Motion for Terminating Sanctions 168
Location: Sacramento
Judge: Krueger, Christopher E
Hearing Date: 2019.2.7
Excerpt: ... Plaintiffs filed this action on 1/8/2014. They were initially represented by the Poswall, White & Cutler law firm (“PWC”). On 7/29/2015, PWC substituted out and Nancy Hersh (“Hersh”) substituted in. On 8/25/2017, the Court granted Plaintiffs' motion to continue trial based on the parties' stipulation. (Declaration of Adam Hale (“Hale Decl.”), Exs. B, C.) The 9/25/2017 trial date was vacated and the parties were referred back to the T...
2019.2.7 Motion to Quash Deposition Subpoena 026
Location: Sacramento
Judge: Krueger, Christopher E
Hearing Date: 2019.2.7
Excerpt: ...arks' motion to quash deposition subpoenas is ruled upon as follows. This is a putative class action for race and sex discrimination, failure to prevent and various violation of the Labor Code, including failure to pay overtime. Defendant Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co. served subpoenas which can be split into two categories: 1. Teaching Position(s): subpoenas to the Davis School of Realty (“DSR”) and Superior School of Real Estate (“SS...
2019.2.5 Writ of Attachment 752
Location: Sacramento
Judge: Krueger, Christopher E
Hearing Date: 2019.2.5
Excerpt: ...ws. Factual Background This action arises out of two loans, the first in November 2017 for $450,000 relating to property on 48th Street in Sacramento (“November Note”) and the second in December 2017 for $410,000 relating to property on Walnut Avenue in Sacramento (“December Note”). According to the exhibits attached to the operative First Amended Complaint (“1AC”), it appears loans were made by AAJV to VPP with Johnny and Africa each...
2019.2.5 Motion to Vacate Entry of Sister State Judgment or Stay Enforcement 648
Location: Sacramento
Judge: Krueger, Christopher E
Hearing Date: 2019.2.5
Excerpt: ...l is directed to review the Local Rules, effective 1/1/2019. Factual Background In June 2018 plaintiff obtained in Ohio a money judgment of over $145,000 against defendants and thereafter obtained entry of a sister state judgment here in California. Defendants now move pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §1710.40 to vacate the entry of this sister state judgment or alternatively, pursuant to §1710.50 for a stay of enforcement of the sister stat...
2019.2.5 Motion to Set Aside Default 010
Location: Sacramento
Judge: Krueger, Christopher E
Hearing Date: 2019.2.5
Excerpt: ...se him/her of Local Rule 1.06 and the court's tentative ruling procedure and the manner to request a hearing, along with the correct address for Dept. 53/54. If moving counsel is unable to contact opposing counsel prior to hearing, moving counsel is ordered to appear at the hearing in person or by telephone. This is a collection matter. Defendant now moves pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §473(b) to set aside the default entered on 3/9/2018 a...
2019.2.5 Motion to Dismiss 551
Location: Sacramento
Judge: Brown, David I
Hearing Date: 2019.2.5
Excerpt: ... Plaintiff argues that she has not been able to schedule the matter for trial because self‐represented Defendant/Cross‐Complainant Karen Morcomb has not moved forward on her crosscomplaint as it relates to Cross‐Defendant Conrad Jimenez. She argues that while Defendant has served Mr. Jimenez with her cross‐complaint she has failed to take his default. The Court's records reflect that Defendant filed the cross‐complaint on October 22, 20...
2019.2.5 Motion to Dismiss 547
Location: Sacramento
Judge: Brown, David I
Hearing Date: 2019.2.5
Excerpt: ... notice are granted. “[A]n action shall be brought to trial within five years after the action is commenced against the defendant.” (CCP § 583.310.) “[A]n action shall be dismissed…after notice to the parties, if the action is not brought to trial within the time prescribed in this article.” (CCP § 583.360(a).) Dismissal is mandatory and not subject to extension, excuse, or exception, except as expressly provided by statute. (CCP § 5...
2019.2.5 Motion to Dismiss 475
Location: Sacramento
Judge: Brown, David I
Hearing Date: 2019.2.5
Excerpt: .... Appearance is required on February 5, 2019. Plaintiff Brian Spears shall be available, by COURTCALL, to participate in oral argument on the continuance date. Defendant Dean Kratzer's motion to dismiss is denied. Defendant moves to dismiss Plaintiff's complaint which was filed on July 7, 2015, on the basis that Plaintiff failed to serve the complaint within three years of filing. A motion to dismiss for delay in service of summons is not a gener...
2019.2.5 Motion to Compel Production of Docs 609
Location: Sacramento
Judge: Brown, David I
Hearing Date: 2019.2.5
Excerpt: ...ant to provide full and complete responses to certain requests for production. Requests Nos. 38, 41‐47, 56, and 59‐65 relate to Defendant's investigation and analysis regarding the defects. Requests Nos. 7, 113‐115 and 128 relate to Defendant's warranty and repurchase policies. Defendant interposed numerous objections to the requests for production, including those based on relevance, burden and oppression and trade secrets. Plaintiffs are ...
2019.2.5 Motion for Sanctions, to Quash or Dismiss, to Strike 829
Location: Sacramento
Judge: Brown, David I
Hearing Date: 2019.2.5
Excerpt: ...Defendant groups' oppositions is granted. An attorney who files a pleading with the court certifies that the pleading has merit “to the best of the [attorney's] knowledge, information, and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances.” (CCP § 128.7(b).) The attorney certifies that “[t]he allegations and other factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, are likely to have evident...
2019.2.5 Motion for Attorney Fees 530
Location: Sacramento
Judge: Krueger, Christopher E
Hearing Date: 2019.2.5
Excerpt: ...for defamation along with one for intentional infliction of emotional distress (“IIED”). Plaintiff is a physician whose hospital privileges were in 2014 suspended by defendant Dignity Health in response to allegations by various hospital employees. He alleges that when they learned plaintiff might be regain his privileges, certain employees “falsely and maliciously” reported to the FBI on or about 4/5/2016 that he had made threats against...
2019.2.5 Demurrer, Motion to Strike 116
Location: Sacramento
Judge: Krueger, Christopher E
Hearing Date: 2019.2.5
Excerpt: ...to plaintiff on 11/26/2018 but received no response and a subsequent telephone call to plaintiff was made on 12/3/2018, to which no response was received. First, Code of Civil Procedure §430.41(a) specifies that the demurring parties shall meet‐and‐confer “in person or by telephone” with the party filing the pleading that is the subject of the demurrer. Thus, merely sending a letter to plaintiff does not satisfy the express statutory req...

6288 Results

Per page

Pages