Search by Keyword:
Start Date:
End Date:
Tip: Wrap text in quotation marks when searching for phrases (e.g. "motion to dismiss").

2838 Results

Location: San Francisco x
2019.4.29 Motion for Approval of PAGA Settlement 896
Location: San Francisco
Judge: Department 302
Hearing Date: 2019.4.29
Excerpt: ...tlement is fair and adequate in view of the purposes and policies of PAGA, taking into account such factors as the adequacy of the civil penalties in light of the potential maximum if the matter were to go to verdict and the risks of litigation. (Lab. Code § 2699(l)(2); s.See Flores v. Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc. (C.D. Cal. 2017) 253 F.Supp.3d 1074, 1077; O'Connor v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2016) 201 F.Supp.3d 1110, ...
2019.4.26 Motion to Compel Arbitration, Stay Proceedings 553
Location: San Francisco
Judge: Department 302
Hearing Date: 2019.4.26
Excerpt: ... this employment dispute. First, plaintiff says she did not sign the putative arbitration agreement; Pacific Specialist says she did. Second, plaintiff says Pacific Specialist is not a party to the arbitration agreement; Pacific Specialist says Hayes Valley Surgery Center is its "dba ‐ doing business as." As plaintiff proposes, I will hold an evidentiary hearing on these two issues. (See Hotels Nevada v. L.A. Pacific Center, Inc. (2006)...
2019.4.26 Motion to Strike 317
Location: San Francisco
Judge: Department 302
Hearing Date: 2019.4.26
Excerpt: ...alski. Fink and Neilson show that the cross‐complaint arises out of protected activity of filing a lawsuit. (Sheley v. Harrop (2017) 9 Cal.App.5th 1147, 1165.) However, the cross‐complaint is "legally sufficient and supported by a sufficient prima facie showing of facts to sustain a favorable judgment if the evidence submitted by the plaintiff is credited." (Tuchscher Development Enterprises, Inc. v. San Diego Unified Port Dist. (2003...
2019.4.25 Demurrer, Motion to Strike 030
Location: San Francisco
Judge: Department 302
Hearing Date: 2019.4.25
Excerpt: ... its moving papers, the court reversed the trial court's order sustaining the defendants' demurrer, holding squarely that "the Rosenthal Act's definition of 'debt collector' applies to a mortgage servicer who engages in debt collection practices in attempting to obtain repayment of mortgage debt." (Id. at 304; see also id. at 303 ["In our view, those federal courts that have concluded that section 1788.2 's def...
2019.4.25 Motion for Terminating and Monetary Sanctions 850
Location: San Francisco
Judge: Department 302
Hearing Date: 2019.4.25
Excerpt: ...udge, has been assigned to hear this motion. Prior to the hearing all parties to the motion will be asked to sign a stipulation agreeing that the motion may be heard by the Pro Tem Judge. If all parties to the motion sign the stipulation, the hearing will proceed before the Judge Pro Tem who will decide the motion with the same authority as a Superior Court Judge. If a party appears by telephone, the stipulation may be signed via fax or consent t...
2019.4.25 Motion to Compel Deposition 180
Location: San Francisco
Judge: Department 302
Hearing Date: 2019.4.25
Excerpt: ...d to hear this motion. Prior to the hearing all parties to the motion will be asked to sign a stipulation agreeing that the motion may be heard by the Pro Tem Judge. If all parties to the motion sign the stipulation, the hearing will proceed before the Judge Pro Tem who will decide the motion with the same authority as a Superior Court Judge. If a party appears by telephone, the stipulation may be signed via fax or consent to sign given by email....
2019.4.25 Motion to Compel Docs, Request for Sanctions 125
Location: San Francisco
Judge: Department 302
Hearing Date: 2019.4.25
Excerpt: ...isticated Home Builder, Inc. In The Amount Of $892 Pro Tem Judge Naomi Gray, a member of the California State Bar who meets all the requirements set forth in CRC 2.812 to serve as a temporary judge, has been assigned to hear this motion. Prior to the hearing all parties to the motion will be asked to sign a stipulation agreeing that the motion may be heard by the Pro Tem Judge. If all parties to the motion sign the stipulation, the hearing will p...
2019.4.25 Motion to Quash Service of Summons and Complaint 576
Location: San Francisco
Judge: Department 302
Hearing Date: 2019.4.25
Excerpt: ...the complaint identifies the name of the defendant as David Farbe, a slight misspelling does not render service defective if the person served is aware that he is the person named as a defendant. (Sakaguchi v. Sakaguchi (2009) 173 Cal.App.4th 852, 857.) Here, the proof of service shows that Mr. Farber was personally served with the summons and complaint and confirmed his identity to the process server. Mr. Farber's contention that he was the ...
2019.4.25 Motion to Tax Costs 888
Location: San Francisco
Judge: Department 302
Hearing Date: 2019.4.25
Excerpt: ...t‐A‐Car Company Of San Francisco, LLC. Plaintiff Rachel Archuleta's motion to tax costs sought by Defendant Enterprise Rent‐A‐Car Company of San Francisco, LLC is denied. Plaintiff sued and served Enterprise as National Car Rental. On February 13, 2019, Defendants Enterprise and Enterprise Holdings, Inc. filed a demurrer to the complaint. On February 14, 2019, Plaintiff filed a request for dismissal without prejudice as to National Ca...
2019.4.24 Motion to File Amended Complaint for Violation of Equal Pay Act and Retaliation 177
Location: San Francisco
Judge: Department 302
Hearing Date: 2019.4.24
Excerpt: ...on for order to allow Plaintiff to file a first amended complaint for violation of Equal Pay Act and retaliation is granted. The liberal policy of amendment supports the motion. Plaintiff need not prove the corrected allegations she seeks to make, but need only specify those matters listed in Rule 3.1324, including when the facts giving rise to the amendment were discovered. Defendant Github, Inc. has not shown that the minor changes Plaintiff se...
2019.4.9 Demurrer 484
Location: San Francisco
Judge: Department 302
Hearing Date: 2019.4.9
Excerpt: ...stained with 20 days leave to amend as to the second cause of action for intentional misrepresentation, and sustained without leave to amend as to the third and fourth causes of action for negligent misrepresentation and for preliminary and permanent injunction. Plaintiff has sufficiently alleged a cause of action for breach of contract because plaintiff's interpretation of the two prohibitions in para. 4, read in conjunction with para. 5 of ...
2019.4.5 Motion to Use Pseudonym 368
Location: San Francisco
Judge: Department 302
Hearing Date: 2019.4.5
Excerpt: ...huldiner's prior motion for the same relief. As Judge Quinn found, use of a pseudonym impairs important public rights to access court records (see, e.g., CRC 2.550(c)) and violates the requirement that a complaint include "names of all the parties" (CCP §422.40). Moreover, Schuldiner's new motion again fails to demonstrate the kind of prejudice that could outweigh public rights and statutory requirements. (See Doe v. Lincoln Unif...
2019.4.5 Demurrer 570
Location: San Francisco
Judge: Department 302
Hearing Date: 2019.4.5
Excerpt: ...his demurrer. The school district's demurrer to the third cause of action for vicarious liability is OVERRULED. The district could be vicariously liable if the teacher's assault arose from a work‐related conflict or event, such as a dispute with the student during class time, and such facts are adequately pled. (See, e.g., Lisa M. v. Henry Mayo Newhall Memorial Hospital (1995) 12 Cal.4th 291, 300; Carr v. Wm. C. Crowell Co. (1946) 28 Ca...
2019.4.5 Motion Contesting Claim of Privilege 839
Location: San Francisco
Judge: Department 302
Hearing Date: 2019.4.5
Excerpt: ... Niesar & Vestal, Llp's Motion Contesting The Claim Of Privilege Assserted By Non‐ Party The Central Valley Fund, L.P. Pursuant To Code Of Civil Procedure, Section 2031.285(D)(1) This discovery dispute regards an attorney‐client‐privileged e‐mail into which a non‐privileged text message was apparently pasted electronically. Non‐party CVF Capital Partners, Inc. (which produced, then clawed back, the entire e‐mail) and defendants ...
2019.4.4 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings 137
Location: San Francisco
Judge: Department 302
Hearing Date: 2019.4.4
Excerpt: ...n his termination. Those claims are a creature of an employment relationship. There are no allegations in the cross‐complaint that Adams had an employment relationship with Plaintiff Reisner. Because no such relationship is alleged, Adams cannot be a joint tortfeasor and UBC cannot plead a claim for equitable indemnity. "Where multiple tortfeasors are responsible for an indivisible injury suffered by the plaintiff, each tortfeasor is jointl...
2019.4.4 Motion for Leave to Intervene, to Quash Service by Publication 749
Location: San Francisco
Judge: Department 302
Hearing Date: 2019.4.4
Excerpt: ...4; (Simpson Redwood Co. v. State of California (1987) 196 Cal.App.3d 1192, 1199 [citation omitted].) As an insurer for Defendant Yasinia Kennedy, Farmers has a direct interest in this litigation and a sound basis to intervene to defend against default on Ms. Kennedy's behalf under Code of Civil Procedure section 387 and Insurance Code section 11580. "[W]here the insurer may be subject to a direct action under Insurance Code section 11580 ...
2019.4.4 Motion for Protective Order, Request for Sanctions 931
Location: San Francisco
Judge: Department 302
Hearing Date: 2019.4.4
Excerpt: ... State Bar who meets all the requirements set forth in CRC 2.812 to serve as a temporary judge, has been assigned to hear this motion. Prior to the hearing all parties to the motion will be asked to sign a stipulation agreeing that the motion may be heard by the Pro Tem Judge. If all parties to the motion sign the stipulation, the hearing will proceed before the Judge Pro Tem who will decide the motion with the same authority as a Superior Court ...
2019.4.4 Motion to Consolidate 223
Location: San Francisco
Judge: Department 302
Hearing Date: 2019.4.4
Excerpt: ...8‐569262 With Case No. CGC‐17‐562223 GRANTED and case No. CGC‐17‐562223 shall be the lead case. Because the two actions pending before this court involve common questions of law and fact, they are consolidated for all purposes pursuant to Code Civ. Proc., § 1048. Both actions concern defendant Swanrock's installation of solar panels on the roof of plaintiff Katherine Roberts' building and the damage Ms. Roberts suffered as a re...
2019.4.3 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings 860
Location: San Francisco
Judge: Department 302
Hearing Date: 2019.4.3
Excerpt: ...Legislature has met its burden to show the applicability of the exception for "entrance to or use of state property" from the general definition of "tax" in Article XIIIA, section 3(b)(4) of the California Constitution. Therefore, the toll increase imposed by SB 595 is not a tax subject to a two-thirds supermajority vote requirement. The Court takes judicial notice of the documents provided by the Legislature and by Co-Defendant B...
2019.4.3 Motion for Approval of PAGA Settlement 980
Location: San Francisco
Judge: Department 302
Hearing Date: 2019.4.3
Excerpt: ...S Motion For Approval Of Private Attorneys General Act (Cal. Labor Code 2698, Et Seq.) Settlement Agreement And Award Of Attorneys' Fees And Costs, Incentive Payments, And Administrator Costs DENIED without prejudice to a renewed motion following appropriate amendments to the proposed settlement agreement and/or a further showing as to the following issues. First, while the Total Settlement Amount of $1.7 million is undoubtedly substantial, P...
2019.4.3 Demurrer, Motion to Strike 230
Location: San Francisco
Judge: Department 302
Hearing Date: 2019.4.3
Excerpt: ...ault of Dr. Salais in causing plaintiff Grissom's injuries. Although the pleadings do not allege what specific acts by Dr. Salais constitute a breach of the applicable standard of care, general allegations in a medical malpractice cause of action are sufficient to withstand a general demurrer. (See Landeros v. Flood (1976) 17 Cal.3d 399, 407 ["'In this state negligence may be pleaded in general terms, and that is as true of malpractic...
2019.4.3 Motion to Dismiss or Stay for Forum Non Conveniens 705
Location: San Francisco
Judge: Department 503 Asbestos
Hearing Date: 2019.4.3
Excerpt: ...ecause it did not show that all defendants are subject to jurisdiction there. (See Stangvik v. Shiley, Inc. (1991) 54 Cal.3d 744; American Cemwood Corp. v. American Home Assurance Co. (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 431.) Defendants also failed to show that the balance of private and public interest factors makes it "just" that the litigation proceed in the alternative forum. If a hearing is requested, it will be at 9:30 a.m. A court reporter will ...
2019.4.3 Motion to Quash Service of Summons and Complaint, Set Aside Request for Entry of Default 639
Location: San Francisco
Judge: Department 302
Hearing Date: 2019.4.3
Excerpt: ...Hancila's motion to quash service of summons is denied and his alternative motion to set aside entry of default per Code of Civil Procedure § 473 (b) is granted. Service of process was in substantial compliance with the statutory requirement for substitute service on an individual defendant under Code of Civil Procedure § 415.20 (b). (Pasadena Medi‐Center Associates v. Superior Court (1973) 9 Cal.3d 773, 778 ["[s]ervice of process sta...
2019.4.3 OSC Re Application to Stay Revocation of Teaching Credentials 591
Location: San Francisco
Judge: Department 302
Hearing Date: 2019.4.3
Excerpt: ...1094.5(h)(1).) Petitioner has not shown that the administrative law judge committed a prejudicial abuse of discretion in applying the Morrison factors (Morrison v. State Board of Education (1969) 1 Cal.3d 214, 229; 5 Cal. Code Regs. § 80302) or that the ALJ's findings regarding those factors are not supported by the weight of the evidence. (See Broney v. California Comm'n on Teacher Credentialing (2010) 184 Cal.App.4th 462, 476‐479.) B...
2019.4.3 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings 816
Location: San Francisco
Judge: Department 302
Hearing Date: 2019.4.3
Excerpt: ...ent is no longer tenable in light of plaintiff Jane Doe's application to reopen her chapter 7 bankruptcy case; the decision by the appointed bankruptcy trustee for that case not to pursue Ms. Doe's litigation claims against TPMG; and thereafter the bankruptcy court's order closing the reopened case. At the hearing on March 12, 2019 counsel for TPMG stated that TPMG had three different arguments why its motion should be granted based o...

2838 Results

Per page

Pages