Excerpt: ...ered the judgment in the amount of $60,000. (ROA 40.) Since that time, Plaintiff has engaged in efforts to enforce the judgment against Defendants. Plaintiff now seeks $185,400 in attorneys' fees and $2,119 in costs for enforcing the Judgment. Under California law, “[t]he judgment creditor is entitled to the reasonable and necessary costs of enforcing a judgment. Attorney's fees incurred in enforcing a judgment are not included in costs collect...

Excerpt: ...elthea Moriswala, Trustees of the Moriswala Revocable Trust's (collectively “Defendants”) demurrer to Plaintiffs' complaint is ruled upon as follows. Overview This is a landlord/tenant dispute. Pro per Plaintiffs Brandon Slagle and Lynda Slagle (collectively “Plaintiffs”) allege that they leased the property from Defendants, with Defendants representing that the property had no habitability defects. The property, however, had the followin...

Excerpt: ...ecorded land documents, not contracts, are the subject of judicial notice on demurrer].) The court, however, does not accept the truth of any facts within the judicially noticed documents except to the extent such facts are beyond reasonable dispute. (See Poseidon Devel., 152 Cal.App.4th at 1117‐18.) see also Fontenot v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (2011) 198 Cal.App.4th 256, 265 (“[A] court may take judicial notice of the fact of a document's rec...

Excerpt: ...rising out of damage to their home caused by water intrusion. The Complaint was filed February 4, 2021. Plaintiffs filed several claims under their policy with Nationwide concerning water damage to their residence. Bullseye was hired by Nationwide in January and February of 2017 to conduct an investigation of the water damage. Nationwide and Bullseye informed Plaintiffs after the first claim that the cause of the leak was wear, tear and cracks in...

Excerpt: ...ion, the Court found that Plaintiff failed to demonstrate that Defendant's cross‐complaint arose from protected activity. Defendant now seeks fees pursuant to CCP § 425.16(c)(1) on the basis that Plaintiff's anti‐SLAPP motion was frivolous. Defendant seeks $14,542 in fees representing $10,775 in fees for opposing the anti‐SLAPP motion and $3,767 in fees for the instant fees motion. The Court considered Plaintiff's untimely reply which was ...

Excerpt: ...“Plaintiff” or “Hogan”) was approached in September 2016 by CMI to manufacture sheets called “Top Skins” for CMI's customer, Newport (MKS's wholly owned subsidiary). Under the arrangement CMI would source the alloy products and Hogan would manufacture, pack and ship them to Newport. CMI and Plaintiff signed two letters of intent that recognized Plaintiff's need to purchase equipment in order to meet the desired production requested by...

Excerpt: ...addressed at the hearing. Counsel are also reminded that pursuant to local rules, only limited oral argument is permitted on law and motion matters. *** Plaintiff's counsel is admonished for citing at Page 8:20 of the opposition the unpublished decision of Bennett v. City of Visalia (2002) 2002 Cal.App.Unpub Lexis 2406; 2002 WL 501515, which decision is not citable (except as permitted by CRC Rule 977(B)). Factual Background This action arises fr...

Excerpt: ...Undisputed Material Facts, plaintiffs' 59 Additional Material Facts, defendant/cross‐complainant CCSD's 71 Additional Material Facts and/or WCA's objections to evidence will be addressed at the hearing. The parties should be prepared to point to specific admissible evidence already in the record which is claimed to show the existence or non‐existence of a triable issue of material fact. *** Moving and both opposing counsel failed to comply wi...

Excerpt: ...�SJUSD”) and Defendant Bryan Irwin, the vice‐principal of Bella Vista High School for negligence. The action arises out an incident on April 13, 2018 when Plaintiffs were allegedly assaulted by non‐moving Defendants Austin Shanks, Jaden Koenig and Hadi Mischal on the Bella Vista campus. Plaintiffs have alleged causes of action against the non‐moving Defendants which are not the subject of the instant motion. Plaintiffs allege that moving ...

Excerpt: ... parties to meet‐and‐ confer in person or by telephone regarding the disputed discovery requests and responses. According to the moving papers, defendants' counsel mailed on 6/11/2021 a letter to plaintiff in pro per regarding a variety of claimed deficiencies in plaintiff's responses to certain Special Interrogatories and to Requests for Production and requesting plaintiff to provide further responses to same. However, the opposition contend...

Excerpt: ...ed at the hearing. The parties are also reminded that pursuant to local rules, only limited oral argument is permitted on law and motion matters. *** The notice of motion does not provide notice of the Court's tentative ruling system, as required by Local Rule 1.06, and does not provide the correct address for Dept. 53/54. Moving counsel is directed to contact opposing counsel and advise him/her of Local Rule 1.06 and the Court's tentative ruling...

Excerpt: ...on based on physical disability/medical condition, retaliation, failure to accommodate, failure to prevent discrimination/retaliation, sexual and racial harassment and a cause of action for wrongful termination in violation of public policy. Plaintiff, who is an African‐American female worked for Defendant as a leasing agent for three years. She alleges that her superiors discussed their sex life around her, made derogatory racial comments and ...

Excerpt: ...ender and race and in retaliation for making a complaint of discrimination/harassment against her supervisor, James Leigh‐Kendall (“LeighKendall”). The Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) alleges causes of action for: (1) Retaliation; (2) Gender Discrimination (Cal. Gov. Code § 12940 et seq.); (3) Sexual Harassment/Discrimination (Cal. Gov. Code § 12940 et seq.); (4) Race Discrimination (Cal. Gov. Code § 12940 et seq.); (5) Race Harassm...

Excerpt: ...Client Fee Arbitration (Rejection of Award). According to the Complaint, Plaintiff signed a fee agreement with Defendant Desmond, Nolan, Livaich, & Cunningham (Desmond) on or about October 30, 2015, for Desmond's representation of Plaintiff and Defendant Jarvis Properties, a limited partnership of which Plaintiff is a general partner, in three eminent domain lawsuits that had been filed and pending in Monterey County. (Compl., ¶ 7.) The fee agre...

Excerpt: ...eve Brinsmead was at a bus stop designated by Defendant EGUSD waiting to be picked up and transported to school on an EGUSD bus. EGUSD provided bus transportation and Brinsmead rode bus number 169 from the Kavala Ranch bus stop in Rancho Cordova, CA to Pleasant Grove High School. Bus number 169 was scheduled to pick up Brinsmead at approximately 6:40 a.m., but Plaintiffs allege the bus failed to arrive and Brinsmead did not receive any instructio...

Excerpt: ...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 Zoom, telephonically, at 9:00 a.m. on the date of the continued hearing date, which will be August 18, 2021, to participate in oral argument. To appear on Zoom telephonically, ca...

Excerpt: ... on as follows. Defendant's request for judicial notice is granted. The Court does not grant Plaintiffs' late requests for judicial notice. Plaintiffs filed their complaint on October 5, 2020, alleging causes of action for (1) violation of the California Voting Rights Act, and (2) violation of 52 U.S.C. § 10301(b) and constitutional provisions. Defendant's motion is made on the grounds there is no effective relief for the Court to grant because ...

Excerpt: ...gs in this action and in the Winkey action, are unopposed and are granted. In taking judicial notice of these documents, the Court accepts the fact of their existence, not the truth of their contents. (See Professional Engineers v. Dep't of Transp. (1997) 15 Cal.4th 543, 590 [judicial notice of findings of fact does not mean that those findings of fact are true]; Steed v. Department of Consumer Affairs (2012) 204 Cal.App.4th 112, 120‐121.) This...

Excerpt: ...appear to be directed at the declaration of a Wells Fargo employee, but Wells Fargo is not a party to this action and did not file any declarations in support of this motion. Therefore, the Court will not consider Defendant's objections. (See Hodjat v. State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co. (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 1, 8‐9.) Request for Judicial Notice Plaintiff's Request for Judicial Notice is GRANTED. Defendant's Failure to File Responsive Separate State...

Excerpt: ...1.06. Moving counsel is directed to contact Plaintiffs' counsel and advise counsel of Local Rule 1.06 and the Court's tentative ruling procedure and the manner to request a hearing. If moving counsel is unable to contact Plaintiffs' counsel prior to hearing, moving counsel is ordered to appear at the hearing via Zoom or by telephone. Ford's request for judicial notice of a prior ruling from this Court on March 24, 2021, in Dickerson v. Ford Motor...

Excerpt: ...ley (“Smedley”) did not file any opposition. Plaintiff filed its Complaint on June 30, 2021, alleging causes of action for “Interference with Access to Healthcare [Civil Code 3427, et seq.]; Request for Civil Damages and Provisional Remedies.” In the instant motion, Plaintiff argues that Brennan, an elderly patient, and her patient advocate Smedley, have been preventing Brennan's discharge from MHF and her acceptance of a suitable placeme...

Excerpt: ...of motion does not provide notice of the Court's tentative ruling system, as required by Local Rule 1.06. Moving counsel is directed to contact Plaintiff's counsel and advise counsel of Local Rule 1.06 and the Court's tentative ruling procedure and the manner to request a hearing. If moving counsel is unable to contact Plaintiff's counsel prior to hearing, moving counsel is ordered to appear at the hearing via Zoom or by telephone. Background Pla...

Excerpt: ...f default and default judgment, the Court's electronic docket does not reflect that default judgment has actually been entered against her. The Court cannot set aside a default judgment that has not actually been entered. Accordingly, the Court construes this motion as a motion to set aside the entry default as against Defendant on June 7, 2021 (Register of Actions (“ROA”) 14‐15). Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section § 473(b) and (d...

Excerpt: ...t Plaintiff Michael Trainor (“Plaintiff”) failed to disclose material information to a buyer of residential property in which Plaintiff not only held an ownership interest but also acted as the realtor for the sale. According to the FAC in the present action, Plaintiff had a variety of disputes with Hallmark Specialty, the insurance carrier for his real estate brokerage, but was ultimately provided a defense under a reservation of rights. Pla...

Excerpt: ...otion to set aside and quash service of summons on the ground that he was not personally served with summons and complaint on November 19, 2017, or at any time, as specified in the Proof of Service. Plaintiff conceded that the proof of service identified an incorrect address as the place of service for Defendant. The court granted the motion on 11/8/2019 and quashed the service of the summons. (ROA 25.) Since the court quashed service of the summ...