Excerpt: ...he incorrect date, time, and department. Plaintiff filed this action on March 21, 2019. This action concerns a motor vehicle accident that occurred on March 24, 2016, involving Plaintiff's insured, Diane Stanfield and Defendant. Plaintiff alleges Mr. Mobley was driving a vehicle owned by codefendant Victor Angel Flores dba Flores Trucking. The underlying accident is covered by an automobile policy Ms. Stanfield held with Plaintiff. A Proof of Ser...

Excerpt: ...ows. This action concerns Foremost's investigation and adjusting of a loss in 2016 caused by renters at Plaintiffs' Sacramento rental home. Plaintiffs allege Foremost conducted a subpar investigation and bad faith claims adjustment resulting in Foremost's failure to pay the true cost of the repair. Plaintiffs allege one cause of action against Foremost for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Plaintiffs served their seco...

Excerpt: ... show cause why it had not produced the documents required by the four investigational subpoenas issued by the Board on March 11, 2019 for patients J.B., J.C., and F.S., and on or about June 7, 2019, for patient J, and served upon the custodian of records for NRHC. Pursuant to Gov't Code § 11187(a), where a party refuses to comply with an administrative subpoena, the head of the department may petition the Court for an order compelling complianc...

Excerpt: ... action: (1) minimum wage violations; (2) failure to reimburse business expenses; (3) wage theft; (4) fraud; (5) rest period violations; (6) meal period violations; (7) unlawful failure to furnish personnel, payroll, and other records; (8) waiting time penalties; (9) violation of California's Unfair Competition Law ("UCL"); and (10) violation of PAGA. Plaintiff signed up to create an account with DoorDash in August of 2018. (Tang Decl. ¶¶ 5‐1...

Excerpt: ... Ms. Davis and codefendants Adesa California, LLC (“Adesa”), John L. Sullivan Investments, Inc., dba Roseville Toyota, erroneously sued herein as John L. Sullivan Family Limited Partnership (“Roseville Toyota”), and Randall Glen Williams (“Mr. Williams”). Plaintiff filed his First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) on August 17, 2018, against the same defendants and still including only a single cause of action for negligence. Plaintiff al...

Excerpt: ...ve documents in response to Plaintiffs' requests for production, set two, numbers 26 and 34‐37 and sanction Foremost pursuant to CCP § 2023.030 for its refusal to produce. Plaintiffs seek monetary sanctions against Foremost. Plaintiffs contend Foremost has promised to produce documents pursuant to requests for production, numbers 26 and 34‐37, for over three months and, only after a threat of discovery sanctions, produced incomplete and “d...

Excerpt: ..., including manufacturers and suppliers of numerous products to which Plaintiffs were allegedly exposed. Plaintiffs' complaint sets forth six causes of action; specifically, (1) negligence; (2) strict liability‐warning defect; (3) strict liability‐design defect; (4) fraudulent concealment; (5) breach of implied warranties; and (6) loss of consortium. Certain defendants have filed answers, while others chose to demur. This Court has already he...

Excerpt: ...anals, four crowns, and additional injuries, such as Temporomandibular Joint Disorder (“TMJ”) and tinnitus. After this litigation commenced, Defendant subpoenaed Plaintiff's medical and billing records from UC Davis Medical Center, UC Davis Medical Center/Billing, Regents of UC Professional Billing/Business Office, UC Davis Medical Center/Radiology, California Department of Veterans Affairs, Domestic Department of Veteran's Affairs, Veteran's...

Excerpt: ...ts' motion to compel plaintiff's further responses to special interrogatories is ruled on as follows. The notice of motion does not comply with Code of Civil Procedure §1010 or CRC Rule 3.1110(a). Both moving and opposing counsel failed to comply with CRC Rule 3.1110(b)(3)‐(4). Factual Background Plaintiff is a real estate agent who is now suing defendants for defamation. Plaintiff alleges that defendants sent a defamatory email to plaintiff h...

Excerpt: ...ough the notice of motion provided notice of the Court's tentative ruling system as required by Local Rule 1.06(D), the notice does not comply with that rule. Moving counsel is directed to review the Local Rules, effective 1/1/2019. Factual Background According to the complaint, plaintiff is a non‐profit mutual benefit corporation which was organized in 1964 as a cooperative housing project located in Sacramento County. The sole named defendant...

Excerpt: ...ntiff cannot establish it breached the applicable standard of care. In evaluating a motion for summary judgment the court engages in a three step process. First, the Court identifies the issues framed by the pleadings. The pleadings define the scope of the issues on a motion for summary judgment. (FPI Dev. Inc. v. Nakashima (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 367, 381‐382.) Because a motion for summary judgment is limited to the issues raised by the pleading...

Excerpt: ...(the “Premises”). Plaintiff alleges the following in the SAC. Defendants owned the apartment complex containing the Premises at all relevant times. (SAC ¶ 2.) Pursuant to a written property management agreement, non‐ party Catalyst Property Management, Inc. (“Catalyst”) acts as the property manager and authorized agent for Defendants at said apartment complex. (SAC ¶ 7.) As such, Catalyst (as agent for Defendants) took and processed a...

Excerpt: ...ers. *** Defendants Visit Elk Grove (“VEG”) and Rachael Brown's (“Brown”) demurrer to Plaintiff's second amended complaint (“SAC”) is ruled upon as follows. Overview Plaintiff Kristin Berkery owns and operates a marketing consulting firm and has done business in Elk Grove since 2013. Her firm provides clients with services such as strategic planning, web design, media buying, media relations, voiceover and event planning. Plaintiff ha...

Excerpt: ...06 (D). ACP's counsel is directed to contact Plaintiff Rafael Ayala Hernandez's (“Plaintiff”) counsel forthwith and advise counsel of Local Rule 1.06 and the Court's tentative ruling procedure. If ACP's counsel is unable to contact Plaintiff's counsel prior to the hearing, ACP's counsel shall be available at the hearing, in person or by telephone, in the event Plaintiff's counsel appears without following the procedures set forth in Local Rul...

Excerpt: ...l is unable to contact opposing parties' counsel prior to the hearing, moving parties' counsel shall be available at the hearing, in person or by telephone, in the event opposing parties' counsel appears without following the procedures set forth in Local Rule 1.06(B). Defendants Roger Biscay and Lynn Biscay (“Defendants”) move for 1) an order compelling Plaintiff Andrea Richard to provide responses to Defendants' form interrogatories, set on...

Excerpt: ...oni, DDS's dental practice, Plaintiff alleges she was required to perform work for all of the Defendants. (Compl. ¶ 18.) Defendants move to compel arbitration of this action pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.2 based upon an arbitration provision contained in a 26‐page employee handbook, which Plaintiff acknowledged receipt of when she was hired. The provision was headed “MUTUAL AGREEMENT TO ARBITRATE CLAIMS” and was found on...

Excerpt: ...ion. This is a Lemon Law action arising out of Plaintiff's purchase of a 2017 GMC Sierra. Plaintiff alleges that following his purchase of the subject vehicle, he made several visits to a GM dealer in an effort to have certain transmission and engine defects repaired. Plaintiff alleges GM failed to repair the defects or repurchase the subject vehicle in violation of the Song‐Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (the “Act”). He further alleges that...

Excerpt: ...her trial court's ruling on a discovery matter has no relevance to the instant motion. Factual Background In this elder abuse action Plaintiffs allege that Defendants' neglect caused Mrs. Williams to suffer stage 4 pressure sores to the bone. They allege that she was left in her own excrement for extended periods of time. They allege the neglect was the result of the failure to adequately staff the MCCH facility, the failure to train staff and th...

Excerpt: ... calendar days prior to the hearing. (See CRC 3.1342(a) [requiring a party seeking dismissal of a case to “serve and file a notice of motion at least 45 days before the date set for hearing of the motion”].) The Court does not consider Defendant Daniel Clark (“Clark”)'s notice of joinder in Differenbaugh's motion (ROA # 105) since it was untimely filed on November 12, 2019. Clark's “joinder” not only joins in Differenbaugh's dismissal...

Excerpt: ... the State of California for civil penalties and an injunction against Defendants alleging they disseminated false information (Business & Professions Code §§ 17500, et seq.) and engaged in unfair competition (Business & Professions Code §§ 17200, et seq.) in connection with their pesticide application business. Defendants filed an answer to the FAC on October 18, 2019, in which they allege fifteen affirmative defenses. Plaintiff moves to str...

Excerpt: ...ponse, Uber filed this Petition to Compel Arbitration and Stay the Proceedings pursuant to the arbitration provision in the December 11, 2015 Technology Services Agreement (the “TSA”), which Mr. Blair agreed to on March 8, 2016. Specifically, the TSA contains an arbitration provision which requires drivers such as Mr. Blair, if they do not opt out, to individually arbitrate all disputes arising out of or related to the agreement or their rela...

Excerpt: ... complex in Rancho Cordova, California. Defendants have learned that four of the Plaintiffs are deceased. To date, Plaintiffs' counsel has not filed a motion to appoint representatives or successors‐ininterest for the estates of any of the four deceased Plaintiffs, although two of them died a year ago. Defendants argue that because no successors or representatives have been substituted in for the deceased Plaintiffs, the Court's jurisdiction is...

Excerpt: ...intiff will be addressed at the 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 United Parcel Service, Inc.'s (“UPS”) motion for summary judgment, or in the alternative, summary adjudication on Plaintiff Madeline Martin's (“Martin” or “Plaintiff”) complaint is ruled upon as follows. I. Overview This is ...

Excerpt: ... affirmative defenses in his answer. (RJN Ex. 64.) Plaintiff served Defendant with form interrogatories seeking, among other things, facts, documents, and the identity of witnesses supporting those defenses. (LeLievre Decl. Ex. 61.) Defendant failed to respond to the interrogatories, so Plaintiff filed a motion to compel responses, which Defendant did not oppose. The Court granted the motion on August 26, 2019, ordering “No later than September...

Excerpt: ...t. The hearing date shall automatically be continued one week plus one court day for oral argument. The continuance date will always be an appearance required hearing so that Plaintiff need not request oral argument. The Litigation Coordinator shall make Plaintiff available, by COURTCALL, at 9:00 a.m. on the date of the continued hearing date, which will be December 18, to participate in oral argument. Defendant Dr. Daniel Jackson's (“Defendant...