Excerpt: ...16, 2001. On January 27, 2011, DFEH filed an amended judgment. (ROA 1.) The judgment required Jon Blake Harrison (“Harrison”) to (1) cease and desist from harassment and discrimination in employment on the basis of sex, (2) pay real party in interest Linda Marie Boncore (“Boncore”) back pay plus interest in the amount of $8,778.35 and damages plus interest in the amount of $43,046.75, and (3) pay the State's General Fund an administrative...

Excerpt: ...nt shall be served upon a defendant within three years after the action is commenced against the defendant. For the purpose of this subdivision, an action is commenced at the time the complaint is filed." (Code Civ. Proc., § 583.210, subd. (a).) If service is not completed upon a party within the three years, "the action shall not be further prosecuted and no further proceedings shall be held in the action." (Code Civ. Proc., § 583.250, subd. (...

Excerpt: ...'s work on the earlier‐filed anti‐SLAPP motion and the present motion for attorney's fees. Pro se Plaintiffs Muhammad Younas Malik and Nazia Jabeen Iqbal (“Plaintiffs”) oppose arguing that their filing of a Notice of Appeal on June 10, 2022 effects a stay on all proceedings in this trial court pending final resolution of the appeal. Plaintiffs alternatively argue that the amount of fees requested by Defendants be reduced to a reasonable a...

Excerpt: ...is action on November 9, 2021 alleging eight separate causes of action (“COAs”) related to her prior employment with Defendant FCCC. As relevant here, Plaintiff's claims include racial discrimination (first COA), harassment (second COA), failure to prevent discrimination and harassment (third COA), blocklisting (fifth COA), and retaliation (sixth COA). Defendants demurs on the following grounds: (1) For the first cause of action, Defendant Ir...

Excerpt: ...) Complaint is UNOPPOSED and SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND. Defendants' Request for Judicial Notice is granted in part. The court does not take judicial notice of the truth of any matters asserted in any pleadings or other documents in the Court file. Defendant's Request for Judicial Notice of the amended declaration of Harpreet Singh is denied and also disregards the contract between the parties contained therein. Evidence Code § 452(h) allo...

Excerpt: ...1(a). The Court admonishes the parties of this mandatory requirement, particularly given the apparent confusion between the parties as to the basic fact of who owns the subject property, which the meet and confer process could have alleviated. However, the Court exercises its discretion to rule on the demurrer despite this deficiency, and the Court's ruling is not based in any way on Plaintiff's failure to meet and confer. (See CCP § 430.41(a)(4...

Excerpt: ...prepared to point to specific evidence which is claimed to show the existence or non‐existence of a triable issue of material fact. *** The Motion for Summary Judgment, or in the alternative Summary Adjudication, filed by Defendant Capital Gastroenterology Consultants Medical Group, Inc. (“Defendant”) as to Plaintiff Noel Crowl's (“Plaintiff”) complaint is DENIED as follows. This matter arises out of Plaintiff's layoff by Defendant in w...

Excerpt: ...ment, the Court is to determine whether the settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate, in light of all of the circumstances. ( California v. Levi Strauss & Co. (1986) 41 Cal.3d 460, 471; Dunk v. Ford Motor Co. (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 1794, 1801.) The trial court has broad discretion to determine whether a proposed settlement in a class action is fair, adequate, and reasonable. ( Wershba v. Apple Computer (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 224, 244, 245; Rebne...

Excerpt: ...directed to contact Plaintiff forthwith and advise her of Local Rule 1.06, the Court's tentative ruling procedure, and the manner to request a hearing. FACTS Plaintiff, in propria persona, filed her Complaint in this action on September 8, 2020. Plaintiff filed her First Amended Complaint on May 24, 2021 (ROA 75). Therein, as near as the Court can tell, Plaintiff alleges that her uncle, defendant Leo Curry, defrauded her deceased mother, and thus...

Excerpt: ...n matters. *** Defendant Allstate Northbrook Indemnity Co.'s (“Defendant” or "Allstate") demurrer to Plaintiff Grach Kazaryan's (“Plaintiff”) first amended complaint (“FAC”) is ruled upon as follows. Overview This is an insurance breach of contract and breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing action. Plaintiff alleges that he has an automobile insurance policy with Defendant that includes a $100,000 limit per person for Unins...

Excerpt: ...inage on Plaintiff's property, resulting in flooding (Comp. ¶ 11); removing a concrete slab which resulted in additional flooding (Comp. ¶ 12); uncapping a water well leading to well contamination (Comp. ¶ 14); using all‐terrain vehicles (“ATVs”) which damaged a shared fence and created dust (Comp. ¶¶ 16, 20); harassing behavior, including verbal threats such as yelling “Why don't you have a heart attack and die!,” “taunting Wilc...

Excerpt: ...Court is to determine whether the settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate, in light of all of the circumstances. ( California v. Levi Strauss & Co. (1986) 41 Cal.3d 460, 471; Dunk v. Ford Motor Co. (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 1794, 1801.) The trial court has broad discretion to determine whether a proposed settlement in a class action is fair, adequate, and reasonable. ( Wershba v. Apple Computer (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 224, 244, 245; Rebney v. Wells...

Excerpt: ...Quack Car Wash Holdings, LLC dba Quick Quack Car Wash; Quick Quack Car Wash Management, LLC; and Quick Quack Development II, LLC (collectively, “Defendants”) is UNOPPOSED and tentatively GRANTED pending the final fairness hearing to be held on this date. (Code Civ. Proc. § 382; Cal. R. Ct. 3.769.) Regardless of its disposition of the motion herein, the Court must still hold a hearing on the motion as it may involve the receipt of evidence or...

Excerpt: ...nt (the “Vehicle”). Plaintiff alleges that within a week of purchase, Plaintiff had to take the Vehicle in for repair and discovered defects from exhaust and emission control system that had been removed, causing the Vehicle to emit a bluish‐white smoke which triggered the vehicle's warning system, making It unsafe to drive and violated California law. Plaintiff filed the operative First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) in this matter on Novem...

Excerpt: ...l deponents Kashif Ali (“Ali”), Michael Arca (“Arca”), Michael Felder (“Felder”), Anatole Moore (“Moore”), and Preetranjan Sahota (“Sahota”) (collectively “Deponents”) to answer questions is ruled upon as follows. This is a FEHA religious and national origin discrimination, retaliation, failure to provide reasonable accommodation, and failure to engage in the interactive process action. Plaintiff alleges that he was subjec...

Excerpt: ...cle Museum Tower Assn. v. Pinnacle Market Development (US), LLC (2012) 55 Cal.4th 223, 244 [145 Cal.Rptr.3d 514, 282 P.3d 1217].) “The party seeking arbitration bears the burden of proving the existence of an arbitration agreement, and the party opposing arbitration bears the burden of proving any defense, such as unconscionability.” (Id. at p. 236.) An arbitration agreement must generally be memorialized in writing, but acceptance of the agr...

Excerpt: ... pro per Sharmistha Barai within 48 hours of receiving it. 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 Sharmistha Barai need not request oral argument. The Litigation Coordinator shall make Sharmistha Barai available, by Zoom telephonically, at 9:00 a.m. on the date of the continued hearing date, which will be July 20, 2...

Excerpt: ...lly and dba Afifi Law Group (“Afifi”) to provide further responses to Cross‐Defendants' special interrogatories, Set One, numbers 1‐81 is GRANTED as follows. Factual and Procedural Background This is an action for legal malpractice, breach of contract, and breach of fiduciary duties against Afifi and Samuel Swenson arising from their joint representation of Sourcis in an underlying action filed by Bravo Development Group, LLC (Bravo Devel...

Excerpt: ...n (“Tulyathan Decl.”) ¶ 2.) As set forth in the PAGA Notice, Plaintiff alleged that Defendant: (1) failed to provide off‐duty rest periods in violation of Labor Code § 226.7; (2) failed to provide off‐duty meal periods in violation of Labor Code §§ 226.7 and 512; (3) failed to pay all wages owed upon separation of employment in violation of Labor Code §§ 201‐203; and (4) failed to provide accurate itemized wage statements in viola...

Excerpt: ...tions to compel Defendant's responses to written discovery. Defendant was ordered to serve verified responses to the subject discovery no later than November 24, 2021. (ROAs 13‐14.) Defendant has failed to provide responses despite multiple communications from Plaintiff's counsel, including granting an extension of time to provide the overdue responses. (Keith Decl. ¶¶ 4‐9, Exhs. 2‐5.) Plaintiff now moves for terminating sanctions based o...

Excerpt: ... to Plaintiff's Request for Production, Set One, numbers 7, 10, 14, 23‐28, 35, 40, 50, 52‐60, 62, 64‐67, and 69‐72. MAF was ordered to produce responsive documents in its possession, custody, or control no later than November 19, 2021. (ROA 81.) Neither party contested the Court's tentative ruling, which became the Order of the Court. On November 19, 2021, MAF produced its first set of more than 20,000 documents that were responsive to th...

Excerpt: ...l. Rules of Court, rule 3.1350 to submit a single compendium of the evidence offered by each party in support or opposition to the motion. While the parties are admonished for their failure to comply, the Court finds the parties were not prejudiced by their respective failures and will consider the evidence presented. As a further preliminary matter, Plaintiff's request for a continuance is denied. The Court previously denied Plaintiff's ex parte...

Excerpt: ...��) motion for reconsideration of the Court's order denying the Motion to Compel Arbitration and Motion to Stay Superior Court Action is DENIED. Defendant Windsor Sacramento Estates, LLC dba Windsor Care Center of Sacramento's (“Windsor Sacramento”) joinder to this motion for reconsideration is granted. On May 17, 2022, the Court denied defendant Windsor Sacramento's Motion to Compel Arbitration and Motion to Stay Superior Court Action to whi...

Excerpt: ...orms the same function as a general demurrer, and hence attacks only defects disclosed on the face of the pleadings or by matters that can be judicially noticed.” (Cloud v. Northrop Grumman Corp. (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 995, 999.) “In reviewing the sufficiency of a complaint against a general demurrer, we are guided by long‐settled rules. ‘We treat the demurrer as admitting all material facts properly pleaded, but not contentions, deduction...

Excerpt: ... 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 Phanikumar Vadarevu's motion for summary judgment as to the second cause of action in remaining Plaintiffs 421 San Juan, LLC (“San Juan”) and SEVA Assisted Living at Natomas, Inc. (“SEVA”), Third Amended Complaint (“TAC”), or in the alternative motion for summary adjudicatio...