Excerpt: ...ation “shall specify the time, place, manner, conditions, scope, and nature of the examination, as well as the identity and the specialty, if any, of the person or persons who will perform the examination.” (CCP §2032.310(b); Carpenter v. Superior Court (2006) 141 Cal.App.4th 249, 259.) Additionally, the Court's order “must set forth certain details of the examination: ‘An order granting a physical or mental examination shall specify the...

Excerpt: ...the Holt Law Firm's (collectively “Defendants”) demurrer to pro per Plaintiffs Victoria Yeager and Gen. Charles Yeager's (Ret.) (collectively “Plaintiffs”) third amended complaint (“TAC”) is ruled as follows. Defendants failed to comply with CRC Rule 3.1110(f)(3) which requires that each paper exhibit must be separated by a hard 8 ½” x 11” sheet with hard paper or plastic tabs extending below the bottom of the page, bearing the e...

Excerpt: ...ively, “Defendants”). Plaintiff was previously employed as a family physician with CDCR at California State Prison‐Sacramento, and Defendants Sahota and Bobbala were his supervisors. Plaintiff filed his initial complaint on December 12, 2019 alleging various employment causes of action, including religious and national origin discrimination, retaliation, and failure to accommodate. These claims stemmed from Defendants' responses to Plaintif...

Excerpt: ...oom telephonically, call (833) 568‐8864 and enter the Zoom ID: 16146506749. Defendant California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation's (“CDCR”) demurrer to incarcerated plaintiff in pro per Paul Anthony Moreno's (“Plaintiff”) Complaint is ruled upon as follows. Plaintiff filed his Complaint on January 31, 2022, alleging a single cause of action for “Negligence in Law [Penal Code § 4576 (e), (i)].” Plaintiff alleges that an...

Excerpt: ... Street, Sacramento, California 95814. Defendant shall notify Plaintiff immediately. On December 27, 2016, plaintiff Dawn Virginia Randall (“Plaintiff”) filed the Complaint in this action for personal injuries related to a fall that occurred on January 6, 2015. The initial trial date was September 25, 2018. (ROA 26.) On September 6, 2018, the Court granted Plaintiff's motion to continue trial pursuant to the parties' stipulation. (ROA 36.) A ...

Excerpt: ...following five causes of action against CDCR: (1) wrongful discharge in violation of public policy; (2) retaliation in violation of FEHA; (3) failure to prevent and investigate harassment and retaliation in violation of FEHA; (4) retaliation (Labor Code § 1102.5); and (5) intentional infliction of emotional distress. On December 15, 2020, the Court sustained CDCR's demurrer without leave to amend as to the first and fifth causes of action. (ROA ...

Excerpt: ...his action arises from decedent Theresa Marks' admission and stay with Defendant from September 16, 2020, through September 23, 2020. Plaintiffs filed the Complaint on September 15, 2021, asserting causes of action for: (1) elder abuse/neglect; (2) professional negligence; (3) wrongful death; (4) negligent infliction of emotional distress; and (5) violation of Patient's Rights. The 1AC was filed on February 25, 2022, alleging the same causes of a...

Excerpt: ...d a 2020 Honda Pilot. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant is a manufacturer and/or distributor under the Act. During the warranty period, the vehicle experienced defects and non‐conformities, including but not limited to, electrical and transmission issues. Plaintiff moves to compel Defendant's further responses to RFP Nos. 37‐43 and 45‐ 46. The parties entered into, and the Court signed, a stipulated protective order on October 21, 2022. RFP ...

Excerpt: ...o compel Magby's deposition, which this Court granted on February 22, 2022. Therein, the Court ordered Magby to appear for deposition no later than May 14, 2022. (ROA 71.) Magby's counsel agreed to a deposition date of March 8, 2022, and Bennett served a Second Amended Notice of Deposition reflecting the agreed‐upon date. On March 8, 2022, however, Magby's counsel again stated that neither he nor Magby would be appearing for the deposition as s...

Excerpt: ... City of Sacramento (“City”) and Brad Wasson's (“Wasson”) (collectively “Defendants”) motion for judgment on the pleadings is ruled upon as follows. I. Overview Plaintiffs Lanette and Bryan Davies (collectively “Plaintiffs”) allege that they are the owners of Canna‐Care, a lawfully operating medicinal marijuana dispensary. (First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), ¶¶ 1‐2.) Plaintiffs allege that defendant Wasson is the Revenue M...

Excerpt: ...venture. Plaintiff's deposition was originally noticed for September 9, 2021, but was rescheduled several times due to Plaintiff's inadequate responses to Defendants' written discovery. Eventually, Plaintiff sat for his deposition on May 4, 2022. However, after only two hours of testimony, Plaintiff and Plaintiff's counsel abruptly stopped the deposition due to Plaintiff's perception that defense counsel was harassing him with his questions, with...

Excerpt: ...ber 29, 2022 when they filed a petition to vacate contractual arbitration award. Petitioners and Respondent participated in contractual arbitration on March 29‐ 30, 2022. The arbitrator issued her opinion and award on June 23, 2022 and served the award on the parties the same day. In total, on September 29, 2022, Petitioners filed a petition to vacate on a Judicial Council ADR‐106 form (ROA 1), a civil case cover sheet (ROA 2), a summons (ROA...

Excerpt: ...greed to dismiss her cause of action against Defendant. After receiving the settlement proceeds, Plaintiffs' counsel's office mailed a Request for Dismissal to this Court on August 23, 2022. (Schuchhardt Decl., ¶ 6.) The dismissal did not specify that the dismissal was as to Ms. Sanchez Garcia only. (Id. at ¶ 6, Exh. B.) Counsel's office discovered the mistake the following day and contacted the Court that same day. (Id. at ¶ 7.) Counsel was i...

Excerpt: ...nd counsel for all other parties to the underlying action and advise them 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 Respondent and counsel for all other parties prior to hearing, moving counsel is ordered to appear at the hearing by Zoom or by telephone. Moving counsel is admonished for failing to comply with CRC Rule 3.1110(f)(4). Exhibits must be sep...

Excerpt: ...ed a 2018 Ford Ecosport (“the Vehicle”) from Defendant in Roseville on July 15, 2019, and Defendant issued express warranties in connection with that transaction. The Vehicle has since exhibited numerous defects and nonconformities covered by the warranties that substantially impair the use, value, and safety of the Vehicle. Plaintiff delivered the Vehicle to Defendant's authorized repair facilities for repairs but Defendant has failed to rep...

Excerpt: ...iff filed a First Amended Complaint (FAC), which identified an address of the alleged incident as 9230 Kiefer Boulevard in Sacramento, California. As to injury, however, the FAC states only as follows: “3. On or about September 7, 2020, Defendant(s) owned, operated managed, maintained, controlled, and/or was/were in possession and control of a residential apartment complex doing business as “The Retreat Apartments” located at 9230 Kiefer Bl...

Excerpt: ...oom telephonically, call (833) 568‐8864 and enter the Zoom ID: 16146506749. Defendant California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation's (“CDCR”) demurrer to incarcerated plaintiff in pro per Paul Anthony Moreno's (“Plaintiff”) Complaint is ruled upon as follows. Plaintiff filed his Complaint on January 31, 2022, alleging a single cause of action for “Negligence in Law [Penal Code § 4576 (e), (i)].” Plaintiff alleges that an...

Excerpt: ...�) is UNOPPOSED and DENIED without prejudice for lack of proper notice. Plaintiff's Application for Writ of Possession of the Collateral, as against Defendant Satpal Singh Brar (“Defendant Brar”) is UNOPPOSED AND GRANTED, provided that proof of service to Defendant Brar demonstrating compliance with the service requirements of Code of Civil Procedure sections 512.030 and 1005 are filed prior to the time of the hearing. If such proof of servic...

Excerpt: ...nrelated claim in her account with Defendant. (See Complaint, ¶¶ 10‐23.) Plaintiff's complaint asserts a total of nine causes of action including civil rights violations, unfair competition, defamation, and negligent hiring. Plaintiff served Defendant with the subject Requests for Production of Documents, Set One on April 14, 2022. Defendant served its initial responses on June 10, 2022. Plaintiff's counsel sent a meet and confer letter on Ju...

Excerpt: ...equires that each paper exhibit be separated by a hard 8 ½" x 11" sheet with hard paper or plastic tabs extending below the bottom of the page, bearing the exhibit designation. Failure to comply with this rule makes it cumbersome for the Court to review the corresponding exhibits and evidence. The Court does not consider Defendants' “rebuttal and supporting evidence” to White's responses to Defendants' UMFs. The summary judgment statute does...

Excerpt: ...lectively, “Defendants”) demurrer to Plaintiff in pro per Larry Redic's (“Plaintiff”) complaint is ruled upon as follows. Defendants' request for judicial notice of Executive Order N‐ 33‐20 is granted. The Court declines to take judicial notice that the Order “does not establish specific COVID ‐19 safety protocols for California's prisons.” (See, Def.'s RJN at 1:26‐27.) The Court notes that Plaintiff filed an opposition on Aug...

Excerpt: ...plaint for Refund of Property Taxes on December 7, 2020. After the Court granted Plaintiff's motion for leave to file a First Amended Complaint (“1AC”) on January 26, 2022, Plaintiff filed the operative 1AC on January 26, 2022. (ROAs 40, 41.) Defendant filed its Answer to the 1AC on February 25, 2022, asserting three affirmative defenses. (ROA 43.) Defendant's first affirmative defense states “[t]he first amended complaint and each and ever...

Excerpt: ...“2AC”) is ruled upon as follows. Defendants' request for judicial notice is granted. This action arises from Plaintiff's former employment with Defendants. Plaintiff alleges she was employed by Defendants since 1987 until she was forced to resign in May of 2019. (2AC ¶ 8.) Two months later, on July 1, 2019, Plaintiff filed a verified complaint with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (“DFEH”), and on the same day she received a...

Excerpt: ... Cathy Looc (“Plaintiff”) is GRANTED. Moving Defendants have indicated the incorrect address in the notice of motion. The correct address for Department 54 of the Sacramento County Superior Court is 813 6th Street, Sacramento, California 95814. Plaintiff filed this personal injury action on January 8, 2021, against Moving Defendants and defendant Lai alleging claims of general negligence and premises liability arising out of a dog bite/attack...

Excerpt: ...mended Complaint (“2AC”) is ruled upon as follows. Defendants' request for judicial notice is granted. This action arises from Plaintiff's former employment with Defendants. Plaintiff alleges she was employed by Defendants since 1987 until she was forced to resign in May of 2019. (2AC ¶ 8.) Two months later, on July 1, 2019, Plaintiff filed a verified complaint with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (“DFEH”), and on the same ...