Excerpt: ...Plaintiffs' filed an untimely opposition only six court days prior to the hearing in violation of CCP § 1005. Defendants were served with the opposition seven court days prior to the hearing on January 10, 2022. (Arel Decl. ¶¶ 3‐ 4.) On reply, Defendants urge the Court to disregard the opposition as it only allowed them one day to prepare and file a reply brief. While the Court in its discretion has considered the untimely opposition in reac...

Excerpt: ...lure to Prevent Discrimination in Violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act and Attorney's Fees.” The complaint alleges that plaintiff was wrongfully terminated as a police recruit and from the Sacramento Police Academy. Plaintiff names as defendants, the City of Sacramento, and Does 1 through 20. Exhibit A to the complaint is a Department of Fair Employment and Housing right to sue letter. According to the complaint, plaintif...

Excerpt: ...nd SUSTAINED with leave to amend in part. This is a non‐judicial foreclosure action. Plaintiffs filed the Complaint on August 25, 2021, a day prior to the then‐scheduled trustee's sale, alleging the following four causes of action: (1) violation of Homeowners Bill of Rights (“HBOR”); (2) unfair business practices; (3) breach of contract; and (4) breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. Defendants demur to each cause of a...

Excerpt: ...ounty Assessment Appeals Board) “Final Decision” dated November 21, 2019, “adopted the Assessor's revised opinions of value, which were based on the assessable interest (leased fee or equivalent) used by the Assessor in violation of SBE Rules 2, 4 and 8, and California case law; the valuation methods used by the assessor which violated SBE Rules 4, 6 and 8; and the Board assessed the value of exempt intangible assets subsumed in the assessm...

Excerpt: ...efendant”) default was entered on 9/21/20. An Interlocutory Judgment After Default was entered on July 2, 2021. (Register of Actions (“ROA”) 36.) The Notice of Motion states that Plaintiffs seek “an order enforcing the Interlocutory Judgment After Default previously entered by this court for sale of 2526 El Cerco Court, Rancho Cordova, California 95670 ("Subject Property"), pursuant to California Civil Procedure §§ 128(a)(4) and 187 on ...

Excerpt: ... No. 15.1 is ruled upon as follows. Procedural History Plaintiffs served Form Interrogatory (set one) via email on October 7, 2021. Defendant timely served his responses on November 9, 2021. Defendant, however, failed to include a response to Form Interrogatory No. 15.1. On November 10, 2021, Plaintiffs emailed Defendant notifying him that a response to Form Interrogatory No. 15.1 was missing. (Declaration of Lisa R. Roberts (“Roberts Decl.”)...

Excerpt: ...ULED. However, the Court notes that many of the statements objected to by Plaintiff consist of counsel's description of factual contentions that CalFire anticipates raising as trial. The Court considers such statements only as evidence of what issues will be raised at trial, not as evidence of the truth of those contentions. Background This is an employment action arising from the alleged wrongful termination of Plaintiff based on alleged disabil...

Excerpt: ... party is directed to contact counsel for opposing party forthwith and advise counsel of Local Rule 1.06 and the Court's tentative ruling procedure. If counsel for moving party is unable to contact counsel for opposing party prior to hearing, counsel for moving party shall be available at the hearing, in person or by telephone, in the event opposing party appears without following the procedures set forth in Local Rule 1.06(B). In this action, se...

Excerpt: ...e any responses by the Court's October 15, 2021 deadline, and has not served any responses to date. Therefore, because Defendant failed to abide by this Court's order, Plaintiff requests that the Court strike the Answer and order a default be entered against Defendant. Plaintiff also seeks $1,410.00 in monetary sanctions to be paid by Defendant for abuse of discovery process. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.310(i), a court may im...

Excerpt: ...t part: “Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 998, Defendant Hyundai Motor America (“HMA”) hereby offers to compromise this action as follows: 1. With respect to Plaintiffs' 2012 Elantra VIN KMHDH4AE4CU415620 (“Subject Vehicle”), HMA will pay the total amount of $78,000.00 to Sarah G. Lopez and Julie A. Cosgrove‐Garcia (jointly "Plaintiffs") and Plaintiffs' lender, if any (if there is an outstanding loan on the vehicle, the lender s...

Excerpt: ...endants Sergey and Lyubov Petrashishin's (collectively “Defendants”) demurrer to Plaintiffs Tom and Gayle Smith's Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) is UNOPPOSED and is ruled upon as follows. This lawsuit arises out of a dispute between neighboring property owners. Plaintiffs allege that in June 2019, Defendants entered into a settlement agreement with Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs allege that paragraph 3(f) of the settlement agreement “included...

Excerpt: ...ndant. The Complaint alleges causes of action for (1) Sexual Assault/Battery (against Smithson only); (2) Negligence (against all Defendants); (3) Sexual Harassment (Civil Code § 51.9) (against all Defendants); and (4) Gender violence (Civil Code § 52.4) (against all Defendants). (See generally, Compl.) The Complaint alleges that Daniel Smithson was an uncredentialed teacher and custodian employee of Defendant, that he taught art and Dungeons a...

Excerpt: ...sed various nuisances, health and safety risks, and environmental degradation. Plaintiffs allege that they have suffered emotional distress. The parties entered into a protective order which was entered by this Court on May 19, 2020. (Minasian Decl. Exh. 1) The protective order provides that parties shall not file protected materials in the public record absent a motion to seal being filed or prior written authorization is given by the party that...

Excerpt: ....) Plaintiff's Complaint against Defendants alleges: (1) violation of Labor Code sections 510 and 1198 (unpaid overtime wages); (2) violation of Labor Code sections 226.7 and 512(a) (unpaid meal premiums); (3) violation of Labor Code section 226.7 (unpaid rest premiums); (4) violation of Labor Code sections 1194 and 1197 (unpaid minimum wages); (5) violation of Labor Code sections 201 and 202 (final wages not timely paid); (6) violation of Labor ...

Excerpt: ...oad discretion to determine whether a proposed settlement in a class action is fair. (Rebney v. Wells Fargo Bank (1990) 220 Cal. App.3rd 1117, 1138.) The law favors settlement, particularly in class actions and other complex cases where substantial resources can be conserved by avoiding the time, cost, and rigors of formal litigation. (See Newberg on Class Actions 4th (4th ed. 2002) § 11.41 (and cases cited therein); Class Plaintiffs v. City of ...

Excerpt: ...h they contend was settled for an unreasonably low amount. Plaintiffs assert that they were essentially coerced into settling the underlying matter. Among other things, Plaintiffs have alleged that Scheidt failed to disclose in December 2015 that his cancer and that the treatment he received for “that condition” rendered him physically and mentally unable to try the underlying action. (Comp. ¶ 40(v).) At issue on this motion is a subpoena fo...

Excerpt: ...referenced by the objection number in the right column of a separate statement in opposition or reply to a motion . . . .”] In Defendant's response to Plaintiffs' Separate Statement of Additional Material Facts (“AMF”), Defendant responded with objections, but did not file a separate objection pleading or comply with the other format requirements of Rule 3.1354. Therefore, the Court declines to rule on Defendant's objections stated in its r...

Excerpt: ...can but he was terminated after Defendant contacted First American and lied about him. Plaintiff moves to compel Defendant Gateway Insurance Group, Inc. to provide further responses to requests for admission 4, 7‐ 20, 24, 25, 28 and 29. Plaintiff's approximately four page memorandum of points and authorities fails to discuss these subjects requests in any manner other than simply stating that Defendant “has evaded properly responding” to th...

Excerpt: ...State of Idaho, Canyon County, records from the Idaho Supreme Court, and the scheduling order issued by the arbitrator in the Idaho Arbitration. (Defendant's Request for Judicial Notice (“RJN”) Exs. A‐G.) Defendant's request for judicial notice is GRANTED in its entirety. Overview Allegations in this Action In 2018, Plaintiffs, Defendant, and non‐party Off‐Spec Solutions, LLC (“Off‐Spec”) entered into a Membership Interest Purchas...

Excerpt: ...r the production of business records issued by Respondent American Family Connect Property and Casualty Insurance Company. At the outset, while Claimant bases her motion on the contention that Respondent is inappropriately seeking her employment records, the motion refers to a number of subpoenas, but only one relates to employments records. The subpoena to Health Services Advisory Group seeks those records. The remaining subpoenas relate to medi...

Excerpt: ...n to set aside default is GRANTED. Plaintiffs Kan‐Di‐Ki, LLC dba Tridentcare and Community Mobile Ultrasound LLC db/a Tridentcare's (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) request for judicial notice is unopposed and granted. On April 1, 2021, Plaintiffs filed a Verified Complaint against Defendant asserting four causes of action for breach of written contract, open book account, constructive trust, and unjust enrichment. Defendant was served by sub...

Excerpt: ...Sharp Source (“Sharp Source”) to serve verified further responses to Plaintiff's Request for Production of Documents, Set One, numbers 11‐14, 17, 18, 27, 28, and 51‐54 and produce all responses records and to compel defendant Garib Karapetyan (“Karapetyan”) to serve verified further responses to Plaintiff's Request for Production of Documents, Set One, numbers 5, 13, 15, 17, 18, 44, and 47‐50 is DENIED. Sharp Source and Karapetyan s...

Excerpt: ...inding arbitration is GRANTED. Mercedes‐Benz' request for judicial notice of the Complaint in this action is granted. Plaintiff Ivan Makovey's (“Plaintiff”) objection to the entire declaration of Soheyl Tasildoost is overruled. This is a lemon law lawsuit involving the lease of a 2020 Mercedes‐Benz GLB 250 vehicle (the “Vehicle”). Plaintiff filed his Complaint on July 6, 2021, alleging claims for violation of the Song‐Beverly Consum...

Excerpt: ...ctively, “Defendants”) motion for summary judgment or, in the alternative, summary adjudication is GRANTED 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 exhibit designation. Plaintiffs Jeanne Brazzil and her husband, Tim Brazzil (collectively, “Plaintiff...

Excerpt: ...fendant Cathryn Tran moves for an order granting summary adjudication against Defendants/Cross‐ Complainants Chau Vo and Thi Ba Nguyen's eighth and twenty‐second affirmative defenses. The caption states the motion is also for the appointment of a receiver to fully dispose of Plaintiff's first cause of action for partition, but this request for relief is not included in the notice of motion. Legal Standard In evaluating a motion for summary ju...