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

2379 Results

Location: San Mateo x
2024.03.19 Motion to Stay Actions 507
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Fineman, Nancy L
Hearing Date: 2024.03.19
Excerpt: ...as it relates to a motorhome vehicle plaintiffs purchased from defendant. As part of the purchase process, the parties agree there is contained in the agreement of purchase a forum selection and choice -of -law clause providing that exclusive jurisdiction for deciding le gal disputes relating to the warranty shall be within the state or federal courts of Ohio, and that Ohio law will apply. (Declaration of Rick March, Ex. B at page 2.) Defendant n...
2024.03.19 Motion for Leave to File Complaint 560
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Fineman, Nancy L
Hearing Date: 2024.03.19
Excerpt: ...��led, defe ndant had not yet made an appearance; thus the motion did not need to be served on defendant. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1014.) Defendant filed an answer on March 1, 2024. Therefore, Liberty shall by 4:00 p.m. on March 18, 2024 provide notice to defendant of this motion and provide the tentative ruling. If defendant wishes to oppose the motion, she has until 10:00 a.m. on March 19, 2024 to notify the court and all parties of her intent to ...
2024.03.19 Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement 765
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Fineman, Nancy L
Hearing Date: 2024.03.19
Excerpt: ...hearing. Depa rtment 4 is not located in Redwood City as the notice states, but instead at the Central Courthouse, Courtroom G, 800 North Humboldt St., San Mateo, CA 94401. (See Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1110 [the notice “must specify” the location of the hearing].) A. Legal Standard on Motion to Determine Good Faith Settlement Any party to an action in which it is alleged that two or more parties are joint tortfeasors or co -obligors on a ...
2024.03.19 Demurrer 642
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Fineman, Nancy L
Hearing Date: 2024.03.19
Excerpt: ...s a whole, wi th a view to substantial justice between the parties. (Code Civ. Proc., § 452; Saxer v. Philip Morris Inc. (1975) 54 Cal.App.3d 7, 18.) The demurrer admits the truth of all material facts properly pleaded (i.e., all ultimate facts alleged, but not conten tions, deductions or conclusions of fact or law). (Aubry v. Tri -City Hosp. Dist. (1992) 2 Cal.4th 962, 966- 967.) Courts have repeatedly recognized that where a plaintiff “ "...
2024.03.19 Application for Writ of Possession 122
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Fineman, Nancy L
Hearing Date: 2024.03.19
Excerpt: ...Superior Court (1991) 230 Cal.App.3d 173.) In order to obtain a writ of possession though, plaintiff must show that he has the right to immediate possession of tangible personal property, and that the property is being wrongfully detained by Defendant. (Code Civ. Proc., § 512.010, subd. (b)(1), (2).) In this case, there is conflicting evidence as to who is Figo's owner. Plaintiff claims that he is Figo's owner. (Plaintiff's Decl., and attached ...
2024.03.19 Motion for Summary Judgment, Adjudication 634
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Fineman, Nancy L
Hearing Date: 2024.03.19
Excerpt: ...e court DENIE S the motion for summary judgment. In order to prevail on a motion for summary judgment, the moving party must demonstrate that “there is no triable issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” (C ode Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (c).) In this motion, plaintiff has failed to provide any argument concerning the second cause of action for account stated or third cause of acti...
2024.03.18 Motion to Transfer Venue 021
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Swope, Raymond
Hearing Date: 2024.03.18
Excerpt: ... Maduros' (collectively, “Respondents”) “Motion to Transfer Venue,” filed 12 -2223, is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc. Sect. 392 et. seq.) Background. Petitioners/Plaintiffs the City of San Bruno and Walmart.com USA, LLC (“Petitioners”) filed this Petition/Complaint against Respondents, seeking to set aside/invalidate certain decisions (“Reallocation Notices”) made by the CDTFA on April 17, 2023. Petitioners contend that the April 17, ...
2024.03.18 Motion for Summary Judgment, Adjudication 261
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Swope, Raymond
Hearing Date: 2024.03.18
Excerpt: ...plaint is DEN IED. Plaintiff and Cross -defendant Montgomery Sansome, L.P.'s Request for Judicial Notice is GRANTED as to all items, but only for the existence of these documents as court records and not for the truth of any fact therein. (See Lockley v. Law Office of Cantrell, Green, Pekich, Cruz & McCort (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 875, 883– 884.) Defendant and Cross-complainant Nathalie Anne Gachot's papers reference a request for judicial notice ...
2024.03.18 Motion for Summary Judgment 615
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Swope, Raymond
Hearing Date: 2024.03.18
Excerpt: ...aranty Agreement to guarantee the lease entered into by Plaintiff and its tenant, Green Haven LLC (“Tenant”). The Guaranty Agreement calls for joint and several liability among the Guarantors, of whom Defendant Hester is one. (Defendant's SSUMF ¶ 9.) The Tenant defaulted on its re nt obligations in January 2023. (Defendant's SSUMF ¶ 5; Kronenberg Decl. ¶ 3.) Plaintiff now moves for summary judgment against Defendant for breach of guaranty....
2024.03.15 Motion to Set Aside Default, Judgment 438
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Finigan, Jeffrey R
Hearing Date: 2024.03.15
Excerpt: ... and to set aside the default and default judgment, if applicable, under CCP §473. Defendant's Motion is GRANTED. Where a motion for relief is not accompanied by an attorney affidavit of fault but is timely made, the court may grant discretionary relief from default taken against a party due to that party's mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. (CCP §473(b).) The law favors judgment based on the merits, not based on procedural ...
2024.03.15 Motion for Entry of Default 630
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Finigan, Jeffrey R
Hearing Date: 2024.03.15
Excerpt: ...- defendants Nite sh Hissaria and Digitize Solutions Private Limited (DSPL) is DENIED. Cross - complainants move here to enter the defaults of Cross -defendants Hissaria and DSPL on the Amended Cross -Complaint. Hissaria and DSPL are purportedly located in the Republic of India . Service of process on a person outside the United States may be made (1) as provided in part 2, title 5, chapter 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure, or (2) “if the court...
2024.03.15 Demurrer 784
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Finigan, Jeffrey R
Hearing Date: 2024.03.15
Excerpt: ...) The Court continued this Demur rer for Defendants to establish compliance with the meet and confer requirement under Code of Civil Procedure section 430.41, and to file a supplemental declaration establishing compliance with this requirement. Defendants' counsel previously filed a decla ration stating that the parties met and conferred by telephone on September 8, 2023, and also attached a meet and confer email to Plaintiff to confirm the co...
2024.03.14 Demurrer to FAVP for Writ of Mandate 283
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2024.03.14
Excerpt: ...�City”), to the First Cause of Action in the First Amended Petition for Writ of Mandate (“FAP”) is SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND based on failure to allege facts sufficient to support a cause of action. Generally, a writ under section 1085 may only be employed to compel the performance of a duty which is purely ministerial in character. (Transdyn/Cresci v. City and County of San Francisco (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 746, 752.) “A ministerial...
2024.03.14 Motion for Sanctions, to Resolve Disputed Evidentiary and Legal Issues Affecting Determination of Compensation 560
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2024.03.14
Excerpt: ...n. 24, 2024, is DEN IED. (Code Civ. Proc. Sect. 2025.420(h).) Courthouse/hearing location. The Court notes that CLT's 1 -24- 24 Notice of Motion incorrectly states that the March 14 hearing will take place in the San Mateo courthouse. Department 3 (Judge Greenberg) is located o n the Second Floor of the Redwood City courthouse, located at 400 County Center in Redwood City. The Gearings' 3 -1 -24 Request for Judicial Notice, which requests that th...
2024.03.14 Motion for Attorney Fees 795
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2024.03.14
Excerpt: ...ber 16, 2023. Pla intiff now moves for attorney's fees pursuant to the lease agreement, which provides in section 31 that the prevailing party to the action shall be entitled to reasonable attorney's fees. Defendant argues that attorney's fees, as part of the judgment, are automatically stayed pending appeal. This is incorrect. Unlike in civil actions generally (see Cal. Civ. Proc. § 916), appeals from unlawful detainer judgments do not automati...
2024.03.14 Motion for Leave to File Amended Answer 032
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Greenberg, Susan
Hearing Date: 2024.03.14
Excerpt: ...e of Civ. Pro c., § 473, subd. (a)(1).) The proposed amendment would simply delete the first two affirmative defenses from the Answer. Plaintiff Alfredo Ortiz refused to stipulate to obtaining an advantage for himself and opposes this motion on the basis of delay and pr ejudice. However, both principles are founded upon a consideration of fairness. Ortiz presents no coherent argument as to why the elimination of his adversary's defenses works a...
2024.03.13 Motion to Strike Punitive Damages 307
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Healy, Nicole S
Hearing Date: 2024.03.13
Excerpt: ..., or oppre ssion” required under Civil Code, section 3294 to support an award of punitive damages. In order to survive a motion to strike an allegation of punitive damages, the plaintiff must plead the ultimate facts showing an entitlement to such relief. (Clauson v. Superior Court (Pedus Services, Inc.) (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 1253, 1255.) In order to state a prima facie claim for punitive damages, a complaint must set forth the elements as stat...
2024.03.13 Motion to Strike 489
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Healy, Nicole S
Hearing Date: 2024.03.13
Excerpt: ... The Notice of Motion incorrectly states that the hearing on this Motion will take place in the Redwood City courthouse. The Court notes that Department 28 (Judge Healy) is located at Courtroom I, 800 North Humboldt St., San Mateo, California 94401. Meet and co nfer. The December 21, 2023 Declaration of Azim Khanmohamed does not comply with Code of Civil Procedure, section 435.5, which requires that the declaration supporting a motion to strike s...
2024.03.13 Motion for New Trial 399
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Healy, Nicole S
Hearing Date: 2024.03.13
Excerpt: ...y wages on termination; to provide rest periods or compensation; and to provide accurate, itemized wage statements. (First Amended Complaint, filed April 13, 2018.) The case was tried in two phases. On December 6, 2023, the Honorable Marie S. Weiner (retired) issued a final statement of decision and judgment after court trial in favor of plaintiffs, awarding penalties totaling $274,900 against defendants Lisa Meteyer and Sunnyvale Massage, join...
2024.03.12 Motion to Tax Cost Bill 974
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Fineman, Nancy L
Hearing Date: 2024.03.12
Excerpt: ..., rule § 3.1700(b).) A verified memorandum of costs is a prima facie evidence of the propriety of the items listed on it. (Adams v. Ford Motor Co. (2011) 199 Cal.App.4th 1475, 1487.) “If the items appearing in a cost bill appear to be proper charges, the burden is on the party seeking to tax costs to show that were not reasonable or necessary. On the other hand, if the items are properly objected to, they are put in issue and the burden of pr...
2024.03.12 Motion for Preliminary Injunction 582
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Fineman, Nancy L
Hearing Date: 2024.03.12
Excerpt: ... cour t strongly suggests that the parties engage in mediation with a private mediator experienced in these type of disputes or some other form of ADR. Plaintiff Puja Gupta's Request for Judicial Notice is GRANTED as to items nos. 1 –5 as to the existence of the documents as court records but not as to “the truth of matters stated therein.” (Herrera v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co. (2011) 196 Cal.App.4th 1366, 1375 (Herrera).) Defendant ...
2024.03.12 Demurrer, Motion to Strike 308
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Fineman, Nancy L
Hearing Date: 2024.03.12
Excerpt: ...d at the Central Courthouse, Courtroom G, 800 North Humboldt St., San Mateo, CA 94401. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1110 [the Notice “must specify” the location of the hearing].) Any party contesting the tentative ruling is to give notice to all other parties of the address for the hearing. Secon d, plaintiff failed to file a declaration that complies with Code of Civil Procedure section 430.41, subdivision (a)(3), showing that the parti...
2024.03.11 Motion to Strike, Demurrer 646
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Swope, Raymond
Hearing Date: 2024.03.11
Excerpt: ...icken is irrelevant, false, or improper under Code Civ. Proc. § 436(a).) A motion to strike may be used to attack the entire pleading, or any part thereof, even single words or phrases. (Baral v. Schnitt (2016) 1 Cal.5th 376, 393 -394.) The motion lies to strike any irrelevant, false, or improper matter inserted in any pleading, or to strike any pleading or part thereof which is not drawn or filed in conformity with the laws of this state, a co...
2024.03.11 Motion for Summary Judgment, Adjudication 238
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Swope, Raymond
Hearing Date: 2024.03.11
Excerpt: ...t (SAC), is GRAN TED. (Code Civ. Proc. Sect. 437c.) The State's alternative Motion for Summary Adjudication (“MSA”) is therefore DENIED AS MOOT. (Code Civ. Proc. Sect. 437c.) Plaintiff's 11 -6 -23 Objections to Evidence (to the 10 - 10 -23 Corrected Marshall Decl.) are ruled upon as follows: • Marshall Decl., Para. 4 -5. OVERRULED. Plaintiff's objections go to the weight of this testimony. Marshall testified in deposition that she does not...
2024.03.11 Demurrer to FAC 842
Location: San Mateo
Judge: Swope, Raymond
Hearing Date: 2024.03.11
Excerpt: ...lows: Demurre r to the Seventh Cause of Action for Breach of Duty of Common Carrier, based on failure to state facts sufficient to support this cause of action, is OVERRULED. The FAC alleges that the ambulances operated by Defendants are common carriers under Civil Cod e section 2168 because they hold themselves out to the public generally and indifferently to transport people from place to place for profit. (FAC, ¶ 129.) Defendants argue that ...

2379 Results

Per page

Pages