Excerpt: ... of the documents. This matter was continued to allow defendant to file a Reply to the untimely Opposition. In this action, plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint alleges causes of action against defendants and numerous other entities and individuals for Negligence (1st), Breach of Contract and of the Covenant of Good Faith and fair Dealing (2nd), Fraud by Concealment (3rd), Quiet Title (4th), Negligent/Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distr...

Excerpt: ...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 California Department of Toxic Substances Control's (“DTSC”) motion for summary judgment, or in the alternative, summary adjudication is ruled upon as follows. At the outset, the Court notes that DTSC's notice of motion fails to comply wit...

Excerpt: ...led this lawsuit in March 2017, asserting a sole cause of action for motor vehicle negligence. The named defendants include One Call Medical, Inc. (NJ) dba One Call Care Management as well as Zonecare USA of Delray, LLC (FL) dba One Call Care Transport + Translate (collectively “One Call”), which were sued as One Call Care Management, One Call Medical, Inc. and Coral Acquisitions, Inc. Plaintiff alleges that “One Call provides services to t...

Excerpt: ...other torts, punitive damages are available in FEHA cases. (See Commodore Home Systems, Inc. v. Superior Court (1984) 32 Cal.3d 211, 218‐220.) To obtain punitive damages, however, Scott must plead and prove the elements in CC § 3294. Under that section, punitive damages are available where the defendant is guilty of malice, oppression or fraud. Those terms are defined, respectively, to mean “conduct which is intended by the defendant to caus...

Excerpt: ...tem (collectively “Plaintiffs”). APM was the landlord's property manager. Co‐Defendant Ding Zhang (Zhang) was the landlord. In the operative fourth amended complaint (4AC), Plaintiffs allege they occupied the premises with a Section 8 HUD voucher. They allege a toxic mold infestation as well as other violations of housing laws, and they further allege that there were no timely attempts to repair despite their initial complaints. When repair...

Excerpt: ...�home marijuana cultivation operation. SMUD first noticed Defendant's deposition to be held on November 3, 2017. Defendant did not appear. On January 26, 2018, SMUD filed a motion to compel Defendant's deposition attendance, which was granted. SMUD then noticed Defendant's deposition to occur on March 8, 2018. Defendant again failed to appear. SMUD subsequently moved for issue, evidentiary, terminating, and monetary sanctions. On July 31, 2018, t...

Excerpt: ... oral contracts. The fiduciary duty claim includes an allegation that the conduct constituting the breach was done with oppression, fraud and/or malice within the meaning of Civil Code §3294. Both contract causes of action include in their respective final paragraphs a claim attorney fees according to proof. Defendants contend the complaint fails to plead facts necessary to establish the existence of malice, fraud or oppression to support an awa...

Excerpt: ... consider plaintiffs' supplemental opposition filed on 11/30/2018 since Code of Civil Procedure §1005 does not provide for the filing of supplemental papers. Factual Background This is a legal malpractice action brought by plaintiffs in pro per Charles and Victoria Yeager. According to the First Amended Complaint (“1AC”), defendants represented plaintiffs beginning in or about June 2009 and according to the moving papers, plaintiffs breached...

Excerpt: ...ents and maintained insurance on the Properties, Cenlar wrongfully claimed Plaintiff was in default and force‐placed insurance on the Properties. As a result, Plaintiff alleges his credit was damaged and he was forced to pay penalties for the purported defaults. Plaintiff brings six causes of action against Cenlar for (1) accounting, (2) breach of contract, (3) breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, (4) negligence, (5) Violation...

Excerpt: ... seek various sanctions against Defendant ZB, N.A. dba California Bank & Trust (“Bank”) for its purported “misuse of the discovery process.” Plaintiffs request monetary sanctions in the amount of $9,840, a contempt sanction, and/or issue sanctions. Alternatively, Plaintiffs seek Bank's further responses to RFAs. 1. Overview On September 20, 2017, Plaintiffs served Bank with Request for Admissions (set one) which included 81 RFAs. Plaintif...

Excerpt: ...tual Background. This is an elder abuse action which was commenced in 2015. On 8/20/2018 defendants propounded Special Interrogatories, Set Nine (consisting of Nos. 461‐562), on plaintiffs, who served on 10/8/2018 their objections and responses to these interrogatories. On 10/15/2018 defendants promptly commenced their efforts to meet‐and‐confer with plaintiffs' counsel regarding the deficiencies claimed to pervade plaintiffs' objections an...

Excerpt: ...ax Inc. and Equifax Information Services, LLC's (collectively “Equifax”) demurrer to Plaintiff Nabil Samaan's first amended complaint (“FAC”) is ruled upon as follows. Overview In this action, Plaintiff alleges that he owns multiple residential properties purchased with different mortgage loans being serviced by co‐defendants Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Cenlar Agency, Inc. and PennyMac Loan Services, Inc. (“Servicers”). The Servicers re...

Excerpt: ...e proofs of service in the court's files reflecting timely substituted service on 3/24/16. (See Patterson Decl., Exhs. C, E; see also id., Exh. H [minute order].) As the court explained in its minute order, the proofs of service are entitled to a presumption of validity, (Evid. Code § 647), and Defendants' first motion did not include evidence overcoming that presumption. The court denied the first motion without prejudice, however, and Defendan...

Excerpt: ...;s ("Admiral") motion for judgment on the pleadings on its entire Cross‐Complaint against Plaintiff/CrossDefendant Ghosia, Inc. dba Sinnister Wheels, dba A N A Motoring Accessories ("Ghosia") is UNOPPOSED but is DENIED. In its action, Ghosia alleges it has a general liability insurance policy with Admiral, but Admiral failed to provide coverage after Ghosia was sued in a personal injury action. Admiral filed a cross‐complaint ...

Excerpt: ...ring. 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 City of Sacramento's (“City”) motion for summary adjudication on plaintiff's two causes of action for inverse condemnation and premises liability is ruled on as follows. Moving counsel failed to comply with the mandatory provisions of CRC Rule 3.1350(b), requ...

Excerpt: ...e statement in opposition, the court now issues the following tentative ruling. Defendants Sutter Terrace Dental Group and Rae Ann Whitten, DDS' motion for summary judgment or alternatively, for summary adjudication is GRANTED since defendants' moving papers are sufficient to carry their initial burden under Code of Civil Procedure §437c(p)(2) and since plaintiff in pro per failed to carry her burden of producing admissible evidence sufficient t...

Excerpt: ...pecific categories for testimony or requests for production that will be addressed at the hearing. The parties are also reminded that pursuant to local rules, only limited oral argument is permitted on law and motion matters. *** Plaintiffs' motion to compel defendant General Motors' (“GM”) further responses to the former's Request for Production, Set One, is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, as follows. Both moving and opposing counsel fai...

Excerpt: ...on for writ of mandate and complaint filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner and Cross‐Defendant American Towers, LLC (“ATC”) against the State on March 4, 2015. On February 19, 2016, the writ proceeding was heard. On March 8, 2016, the ruling on the writ proceeding was issued, denying the petition and related request for declaratory relief. On August 31, 2016, the case was referred back for reassignment to the regular civil calendar following the co...

Excerpt: ...ey Defendants”) Special Motion to Strike (CCP §425.16) is GRANTED. The Court fully incorporates herein its ruling on the Attorney Defendants' Special Motion to Strike. (Item #12.) To reiterate, the anti‐SLAPP as to the breach of contract is DENIED. A breach of a settlement agreement after the underlying action is concluded is not protected activity. (Applied Bus. Software, Inc. v. Pac. Mortg. Exch., Inc. (2008) 164 Cal.App.4th 1108, 1118.) �...

Excerpt: ... and 23 through 32 in Plaintiffs' Second Set of Document Requests propounded to Defendant Sacramento County Emergency Medical Services (SAC EMS) is GRANTED. Warren's further request for an order compelling SAC EMS to produce responsive documents is DENIED as premature. The court may only compel a party to produce responsive documents after the party serves written responses indicating it will produce responsive documents and then fails to make th...

Excerpt: ...n satisfies the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 430.41(a). Defendant Sacramento Housing and Redevelopment Agency's (“Defendant”) demurrer to plaintiff Nikolay Koval's (“Plaintiff”) complaint is ruled upon as follows. Defendant has indicated the incorrect address in its notice of motion. The correct address for Department 54 of the Sacramento County Superior Court is 813 6th Street, Sacramento, California 95814. Defendant s...

Excerpt: ...roude's notice of motion inexplicably fails to provide notice of the court's tentative ruling system, as required by Local Rule 1.06. Moving counsel is directed to contact all counsel 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 any counsel prior to hearing, moving counsel is ordered to appear at the hearing in person or by telephone. Frou...

Excerpt: ...on this matter. First, this matter must be dropped from calendar due to plaintiff's defective service of notice. Plaintiff's service of the moving papers by mail on 6/21/2018 for a hearing on 7/10/2018 does not give 16 court days plus 5 calendar days' notice as required by Code of Civil Procedure §1005(b), since 7/4/2018 (Independence Day) was a court holiday. (Code Civ. Proc. §12c; Barefield v. Washington Mutual Bank (2006) 136 Cal.App.4th 299...

Excerpt: ...to comply with Code of Civil Procedure §1013a, requiring the “exact title” of each document being served. The court rejects plaintiff's claim that DHCS' opposition papers were not timely filed or served but even if they were, the court has exercised its discretion and considered them. DHCS' objections to plaintiff's reference to the parties' settlement negotiations are sustained. Factual Background This consolidated action arises from a 2013...

Excerpt: ... Abir, Cohen, Treyzon, Salo, LLP and Federico C. Sayre's First Amended Answer is SUSTAINED without leave to amend as follows. This is a legal malpractice action. Plaintiff alleges Defendants represented her in a personal injury case against the City of Sacramento (the “City”), which she intended to pursue on a theory of dangerous condition of public property. Plaintiff allegedly was injured while crossing in an unmarked City crosswalk. Her pe...