Excerpt: ...ealth & Safety Code § 1430(b), is OVERRULED. For purposes of the Demurrer, Defendant has not demonstrated the § 1430(b) claim(s) are time‐barred. The parties dispute whether the applicable statute of limitations is one year under Code Civ. Proc. § 340(a) (applicable to statutory “penalties”) or three years under Code Civ. Proc. § 338(a) (applicable to “all other claims for liability created by statute”). Defendant cites no case appl...

Excerpt: ...(or former attorney), or both. The moving papers indicate Defendant Virginia Gualberto was represented during part of the relevant time period by attorney James Imperiale. The Notice of Motion does not provide proper notice unless it states the specific person or persons against whom sanctions are requested. Second, the 6‐10‐19 Proof of Service does not demonstrate proper service of the moving papers. It states the papers were mailed to defen...

Excerpt: ...CTION 2000 at: i:6‐7, 16‐28; ii:1‐5; 1:2‐3, 5‐6, 15‐17, 23‐ 28; 2; 3:1‐3, 20‐28; 4:1‐23, 27‐28; 5:19‐22; 6:25, 27‐28; 7:11‐28; 8‐14; 15:1‐4, 6‐9. The portions of the DECLARATION OF DAVID ANDRIGHETTO IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO CONFIRM VALUE OF SHARES IN ANDRIGHETTO PRODUCE INCORPORATED PURSUANT TO CORPORATIONS CODE SECTION 2000 filed herewith in redacted form at: 1:13‐28 2:1‐10, 16‐18, 22‐25; 3:1‐11; Exs. A...

Excerpt: ...otion Department. The Ceccatos assert that Bonis should be disqualified as counsel for the Montgomerys due to a conflict of interest based on concurrent representation and successive representation. Where the conflict of interest is alleged to be a concurrent representation, the “primary” value at issue is the attorney's duty, and the client's legitimate expectation of loyalty, rather than confidentiality. (Flatt v. Superior Court (1994) 9 Ca...

Excerpt: ...‐17 Order granting Plaintiffs' SLAPP motion. Code Civ. Proc. § 425.16(c); Ketchum v. Moses (2001) 24 Cal.4th 1122, 1131; Morrow v. Los Angeles Unified Sch. Dist. (2007) 149 Cal.App.4th 1424, 1446. Defendants have not challenged the charged hourly rates, which appear to be reasonable. Plaintiffs' appellate counsel is highly qualified. See 5‐17‐19 Sargent Decl. The charged rates of $650/hr. (for Mr. Russo) and $450/hr. (for Mr. Sargent, who ...

Excerpt: ...days after service of the demand. As a result, Plaintiff's waived any objections to the demand pursuant to CCP § 2031.260. Plaintiff contends that, pursuant to CCP § 2031.310, Defendant's motion is untimely because it was not filed within 45 days of Plaintiff's response on January 18. CCP § 2031.310 governs motions to compel further responses. Defendant, however, does not seek to compel further responses to the demand. Rather, Defendant seeks ...

Excerpt: ... counsel Jennifer Emmaneel told Plaintiffs' counsel Desmond Tuck that she was waiting for someone from the City to review and verify the discovery responses. (Email from Emmaneel to Tuck, April 29, 2019, Ex. 8 to Decl. of Emmaneel.) This suggests that the responses were substantially complete on that date. In the same email, Ms. Emmaneel stated that if she could not get a City representative to review and verify the responses, she might serve the...

Excerpt: ...efendant Little's capacity. There is a recognized right to privacy in medical records and communications. This privacy interest constitutes an overriding interest that overcomes the public right of access and supports sealing within the meaning of CRC 2.550. The proposed order is narrowly tailored. It seeks to seal only the document containing Dr. Landsverk's medical opinion relating to Defendant's Little's capacity. There does not appear to be a...

Excerpt: ...As a threshold matter, Defendant BMW argues this motion is preempted by federal law (Opp. at 6‐8). Because BMW's planned motion for summary judgment on the preemption issue has not yet been filed or decided, and that issue has not been properly raised, it is not a basis to deny or delay a ruling on this motion. Accordingly, the Court does not reach the merits of the preemption argument. However, the Court agrees that RFP Nos. 37‐38 and 40‐4...

Excerpt: ...limitations shall be tried separately from the issues of liability and damages. Defendant's request to have the issues tried before two separate juries is DENIED without prejudice at this time. The trial court is best positioned to weigh the issues of judicial economy and potential for prejudice to each party and determine whether separate juries are appropriate. If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court. Ther...

Excerpt: ...C”), Plaintiff relies on two documents: a “Notice to the Partners” and a “Partner Sale Agreement.” [Porter Decl., ¶ 6, Ex. A] According to Plaintiff, “It was not until mid‐to‐ late 2017, when a third party provided me with the ‘Notice to the Partners' and ‘Partner Sale Agreement,' that I realized Mete Tan had actually sold me thirty (30) shares in Fox.” [Id.] Plaintiff, however, has not alleged any personal knowledge regard...

Excerpt: ... AS SET‐ BACKED PASS‐THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2007—PA3 (“HSBC”), AND MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC. (“MERS”) (COLLECTIVELY “DEFENDANTS”) TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT TENTATIVE RULING: A. First through Fifth Causes of Action – Statute of Limitations. Demurrer to the first, second, third, fourth, and fifth causes of action is sustained on the ground that they are barred by the applicable statutes of...

Excerpt: ...69–70; Cent. Pathology Serv. Med. Clinic, Inc. v. Superior Court (1992) 3 Cal. 4th 181, 190.) The allegations of “willful and conscious disregard” (para. 41, 49, 50) are not mere conclusions. They are supported by allegations of specific fact that AMERIGAS knew the pipes were non‐ compliant with the ordinance and that continuing to fill the tanks was dangerous. (Proposed SAC paras. 36‐39, 47, 48.) Allegations of director/officer approva...

Excerpt: ... or cause unnecessary delay or needless expense under CCP § 128.7. Notably, Defendant's motion for sanctions was not denied on the merits. Rather, as noted in the court's May 20, 2019 order, Defendant's motion was denied because Defendant failed to follow the safe harbor procedures mandated by CCP § 128.5. If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court. Thereafter, counsel for Defendant shall prepare a written or...

Excerpt: ...‐Bilt v. Woodward‐Clyde & Associates (1985) 38 Cal.3d 488. The Tech‐ Bilt decision requires this Court to consider “the allocation of settlement proceeds among plaintiffs”. Id. at 499‐500. Given that Ms. Geipe is not a Plaintiff in this action and has not articulated a persuasive reason why $1 million of her son's settlement should be allocated to her personally for the purpose of buying a house, the Court declines to find that the se...

Excerpt: ...iffs”) for Terminating Sanctions Against Defendants Cevera Automotive Group, LLC and Robert V. Branzuela (“Defendants”), or Alternatively, for Issue and Evidentiary Sanctions, and Contempt, is ruled on as follows: The Motion for Terminating Sanctions, or Alternatively, for Issue and Evidentiary Sanctions, is DENIED. A trial court has broad discretion in selecting discovery sanctions, and considers both the conduct being sanctioned and its e...

Excerpt: ...”) on Plaintiff's former counsel, David G. Finkelstein, Esq. (“Mr. Finkelstein”). Procedurally, Plaintiff filed a Separate Statement with his motion that fails to comply with Cal. Rules of Court Rule 3.1345. The separate statements must include the text of the request or demand. (See Cal. Rules of Court Rule 3.1345(c).) Plaintiff's counsel failed to include the entire text in the separate statement, and therefore is admonished to comply wit...

Excerpt: ...sed in the briefing, even where requested documents are relevant, in assessing discoverability, the Court considers both the requesting party's discovery rights and the corresponding burden imposed on the responding party. Given the asserted claims here, the Court generally agrees that the requested documents are reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Code Civ. Proc. § 2017.010. It also appears, however, that a co...

Excerpt: ...ration states “I was not contacted by counsel for Plaintiffs prior to the filing and service of this Motion to Compel. The only communications I had with counsel regarding the issues in this Motion were my repeated requests for production by Plaintiffs of a list of all patients Plaintiffs allege Defendants ‘stole' from Advance Male Medical, Viceroy Health and/or Dr. Shah.” Because the declaration required by CCP §§ 2016.040 and 2031.310(b...

Excerpt: ...ation”), is DENIED. Suntrek contends that it only manufactured the solar system installed at the property, and therefore has no liability for the claims alleged in Plaintiff Tremin Corporation's (“Tremin”) Complaint (and therefore no liability on Warm Corporation's Cross‐Complaint seeking equitable contribution, indemnity and apportionment) because Tremin's claims do not allege the solar system was defective. However, Warm Corporation sho...

Excerpt: ...aim that the matters raised in Plaintiffs' Petition are not reviewable because they do not fall within the grounds identified in CCP § 1286.2. The Court disagrees. The Court finds the parties expanded the scope of review under the following provision of the arbitration agreement: . . . The determination of the arbitrator shall be accompanied by written findings of fact and conclusions of law of the arbitrator and the decision shall be reviewable...

Excerpt: ...erials were publicly “scattered, spread widely, broadcast or disperse[d]” to a significant number of persons in California. But paragraph 15 (quoted above) alleges that the false material was “distributed” to Defendant's “existing and prospective customers . . . .” (para. 15.) 2. On demurrer, the Court must construe the complaint liberally in the plaintiff's favor. The allegation that Defendant “distributed to . . . existing and pro...

Excerpt: ...ice of responses to his RFA's. The request is therefore DENIED: Plaintiff's Motion to Deem Facts Admitted and request for sanctions are DENIED. Plaintiff did not demonstrate that his Request for Admissions was properly served. Motion to Compel Defendant has stipulated to an order compelling responses to Plaintiff's Request for Production of Documents and Interrogatories. This portion of the Motion is therefore GRANTED: Plaintiff's Motion to Compe...

Excerpt: ...llegations, if proven, are sufficient to permit a jury to find that Defendant's actions were malicious or fraudulent. The Complaint need not allege approval or ratification by an officer, director, or managing agent. The allegation of corporate approval or ratification is necessary only when punitive damages are sought against an “employer,” based on the wrongful acts of an employee. (See Civ. Code sect. 3294, subd. (b).) The allegations for ...

Excerpt: ... limitations defect, which appears clearly and affirmatively on the face of the FAC. McMahon v. Republic Van & Storage Co., Inc. (1963) 59 Cal.2d 871, 874. Plaintiff admits that he waited nineteen years to assert a claim to the Subject Property, despite his claim allegedly accruing in November 1999, and despite having had, at all times, the right to be placed on title to the Subject Property “upon his request”. (FAC ¶¶ 22‐23.) The demurre...

Excerpt: ...T LEAVE TO AMEND. Code Civ. Proc. § 430.10(e). Plaintiff has filed four versions of the Complaint. In response to the Court's 2‐25‐19 Order sustaining Defendants' Demurrer to the Second Amended Complaint (SAC), Plaintiff filed the operative TAC, which is virtually identical to the SAC, with the exception of minor additions to ¶¶ 36‐37. These minor changes, however, do not cure the defects raised in Defendants' Demurrer to the SAC. For th...

Excerpt: ...t to “postpone stressful, prolonged legal proceedings, until a course of treatment has been established,” (2) that she was in the process of hiring an assistant to help search documents to respond to the request for production, and (3) she was willing to participate in a deposition when medically able. In the intervening month, Defendant has not offered any evidence updating her medical status, has not responded to document requests, has not ...

Excerpt: ...or O'Keefe‐Mikumo Co., Inc. (OKM) and Mr. Mikumo such that the separate personality of the corporation no longer exists, and that an inequitable result would follow if the corporate separateness were recognized. Sonora Diamond Corp. v. Superior Court (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 523, 538‐ 9. The Court finds the following facts/factors to be relevant and persuasive. First, the evidence suggests a unity of interest between OKM and Mr. Mikumo, which re...

Excerpt: ...articular interpretation of the document. Cross‐Defendant's Demurrer to AW Distributing Inc.'s First Amended Cross‐Complaint is SUSTAINED without leave to amend as to the Third Cause of Action for Breach of the Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, and as to the Fourth Cause of Action for Equitable Indemnity. Cross‐Defendant's Demurrer is OVERRULED as to the Second Cause of Action for Breach of Contract. Second COA Reading the pl...

Excerpt: ...UEN CHENG WONG TRUST. Code Civ. Proc. § 437c. On its merits, the motion is denied due to the existence of multiple triable issues: (1) whether the relationship between Plaintiffs and Defendant YASUO ITO was fiduciary in nature (UMF No. 8); (2) whether any Defendant failed to diligently pursue a Certificate of Occupancy (UMF Nos. 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 28, 34, 35); (3) whether any Defendant misrepresented the status of the project (UMF Nos. 29, ...

Excerpt: ... burden in moving for summary judgment. (See C.C.P. § 437c(p)(1).) Plaintiff's Memorandum of Points and Authorities and Separate Statement address the open book account and account stated claims. However, the Complaint also alleges a claim for goods, wares and merchandise sold and delivered to Defendant Jeffrey Chen (“Defendant”) and for which Defendant promised to pay Plaintiff. (See Complaint, p.3, ¶ CC‐1(b)(3).) Plaintiff also appears ...

Excerpt: ...f's motion for costs, expenses and attorney fees. OVERRULED. 2. ¶7 – Speculation, Relevance, Prejudicial, Lacks Foundation, Argumentative/Conclusory The language objected to describes a Bill of Costs filed in another case. The speculation and relevance objections are not well‐taken. The language is laying foundation for the document. OVERRULED. 3. ¶9 – Argumentative, Inadmissible Opinion, Speculative, Relevance, Prejudicial The paragraph ...

Excerpt: ...” (CRC Rule 3.1320(a).) Cross‐defendant's demurrer is embedded within the Notice. It states none of the grounds set forth in Code of Civil Procedure section 430.10. Since the Notice does not identify any specific cause of action, the Court deems the demurrer to be on the ground that the entire crosscomplaint fails to state a cause of action. The supporting points and authorities, however, argue that only the first cause of action for indemnit...

Excerpt: ...r conditions or covenants alleged to have been violated.” The court disagrees. The 3‐day notice, which is attached to the complaint as “Exhibit 3,” clearly advised Defendant that he was in violation of Section 19A of the parties' lease agreement, and the notice quotes that lease provision in full. Defendant further contends that “the complaint fails to state a cause of action for unlawful detainer in that the complaint fails to allege t...

Excerpt: ...rtinent part: “The court may, in furtherance of justice, and on any terms as may be proper, allow a party to amend any pleading or proceeding...” The power of the courts to allow amendment of pleadings is to be liberally exercised so that cases may be decided on their merits. Desny v. Wilder (1956) 46 Cal. 2d 715, 751. Courts are bound to permit amendments to the complaint “at any stage of the proceedings, up to and including trial”, and ...

Excerpt: ... documents is GRANTED, in part, and DENIED, in part. The motion to compel Mr. Lopez's deposition is GRANTED. Defendant is ordered to appear for deposition within 14 days of this order. The motion to compel production of documents is DENIED. Plaintiff is entitled to take Mr. Lopez's deposition pursuant to CCP § 2025.010. Plaintiff noticed Mr. Lopez's deposition for April 10. Defendant asserted a general objection to the deposition notice on the g...

Excerpt: ...r Code Civ. Proc. § 1008. Plaintiff failed to serve timely responses to Defendant's discovery requests, and thus waived all objections. See Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2030.290(a); 2031.300(a); 2033.280(a). Plaintiff then did not oppose any of Defendant's underlying motions to compel. Plaintiff's attempted service of belated responses on 2‐1‐19 was ineffective because they were unverified and included objections, which had been waived. Appleton v. ...

Excerpt: ...as not reasonably necessary or helpful. (The motion is not supported by any declaration.) The Motion to Tax costs for electronic filing (Item 14) is granted in the amount of $1,404.00. This Court does not require and did not order electronic filing. (Code of Civ. Proc. §1033.5, subd. (a)(14).) The Motion to Tax costs of hotels (Item 16) is granted. Counsel's explanation for staying at a hotel and for the room rates is accepted. (Decl. of Becker ...

Excerpt: ...re it is proven by clear and convincing evidence that a defendant is guilty of “oppression, fraud, or malice”. Punitive damages may not be pled generally, but must be pled with specificity. Brousseau v. Jarret (1977) 73 Cal.App.3d 864, 872. Both sides here cite to Taylor v. Superior Court (1979) 24 Cal.3d 890, in which punitive damages were permitted against an intoxicated driver. Taylor involved a defendant who had a history of prior arrests...

Excerpt: .... As indicated in the declaration of Plaintiff's counsel, Plaintiff contends that the disclosure sought is material to the litigation because it is relevant to Officer McAlindon's credibility and to establish a “pattern of practice”: Officer McAlindon's discovery answers regarding the facts surrounding the incident differs materially from Plaintiff's version of the events in that it is claimed that [Plaintiff] was not cooperating, yet [Plaint...

Excerpt: ...Opposition, p.1, 2] Plaintiff misunderstands the burden of proof. On a motion to expunge lis pendens, it is the duty of the party opposing the expungement motion to defeat the underlying bases for the motion by establishing the existence of a real property claim, and the probable validity of the underlying real property claim, by a preponderance of the evidence. CCP §§ 405.30, 405.32. Plaintiff has presented no evidence, in the form of declarat...

Excerpt: ...ninth and tenth causes of action. A. Procedural Issues. 1. The Present Motion is Permissible. The minute order from Defendant's previous motion that the Court “declines the request to make these rulings either specifically with or without prejudice” is not a ruling that Defendant may not bring the present motion. A party may not “move for summary judgment based on issues asserted in a prior motion for summary adjudication and denied by the ...

Excerpt: ...OSSFELD LLP TENTATIVE RULING: The Motion of Michael G. King and Hennelly & Grossfeld, LLP (“Plaintiffs' counsel”) for Reconsideration is GRANTED. Plaintiffs' counsel provides new or different facts and circumstances to warrant reconsideration of the Court's April 8, 2019 orders denying Plaintiffs' counsel's Motions to be Relieved as Counsel for Plaintiffs. The Court notes that Plaintiffs Napean Capital Group, LLC and Frederic Shih‐Hsing Yan...

Excerpt: ...which would seek only the following documents: [Plaintiff's] personnel file, documents pertaining to [Plaintiff's] earnings, documents pertaining to any charges, complaints or lawsuits by [Plaintiff] against Advanced Medical Personnel and documents pertaining to the termination of her employment if applicable. Given the generally broad scope of discovery rights, the proposed narrowed subpoena above is reasonable and permissible and does not undul...

Excerpt: ... required by Section 2025.450(a). However, they did appear at an earlier‐scheduled, and then canceled, deposition and requested alternative dates for the rescheduled depositions based on medical need. Defendants are in agreement that the depositions should take place. Plaintiff's counsel's insistence on particular documentation regarding the medical excuse before agreeing to reschedule was made without legal support, but the short time for tria...

Excerpt: ...e a cause of action for fraud. Committee on Children's Television, Inc. v. General Foods Corp. (1983) 35 C3d 197, 216; Philipson & Simon v. Gulsvig (2007) 154 CA4th 347, 363. Further, although Plaintiff has named multiple defendants in this suit, Plaintiff has not identified the party or parties to whom this cause of action is directed pursuant to CRC 2.112. The Demurrer to the Second Cause of Action for negligent representation is SUSTAINED ...

Excerpt: ...tified grounds upon which punitive damages are recoverable. As noted in the court's ruling on Defendants' demurrer, Plaintiff's claim for fraud is unsupported by specific factual allegations. The motion to strike all claims for attorney's fees is GRANTED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. Attorney's fees must be authorized by contract, statute, or law. Code Civ. Proc. §§ 1021; 1033.5(a)(10). Plaintiff's complaint contains no allegations supporting the reques...

Excerpt: ...his order. Defendant Siatuu seeks to set aside the default and default judgment pursuant to CCP § 473(d). Defendant contends that she “was never served” with the summons and that the judgment is void because, without proper service, the court had no jurisdiction to issue judgment. Defendant states in her declaration that “I believe I was never served with the Summons and Complaint in the Unlawful Detainer Matter. Nobody ever handed them to...

Excerpt: ...d cause of action for breach of contract (third party beneficiary) and Third cause of action for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The Court takes judicial notice of certain party admissions made by Plaintiffs and their counsel in their prior Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint, specifically that Plaintiff ELITE was only recently found to be a third party beneficiary in this action following “formal and...

Excerpt: ... 2.6 (Kelly Dinger). Granted. The supplemental response shall indicate all titles and lines of work. 2.7 (Kelly Dinger). Granted. Even if Kelly Dinger did not attend high school or other American educational institutions, she must respond as to any “other academic or vocational institutions,” as stated in the interrogatory. 3.7 (Kelly Dinger, Bruce Dinger, and BKD). Denied as to Kelly Dinger, who responded fully and unambiguously, “No.” D...

Excerpt: ... allegations against Defendant JP Morgan Chase. Further, where an action is based on an alleged breach of a written contract, the terms must be set out verbatim in the body of the complaint or a copy of the written instrument must be attached and incorporated by reference. Otworth v. S. Pac. Transportation Co., 166 Cal.App.3d 452, 459 (1985). Plaintiff has not attached or set forth the terms of any alleged agreement with Defendant JP Morgan. The ...

Excerpt: ...e the general practice is to hear a motion to seal concurrently with the motion that is the subject of that request. Plaintiffs believed that the Court was indicating that no order to seal was required, when the Court was actually explaining that an ex parte order was not necessary and that the motion to seal could be calendared with the present motion to enforce settlement. There is no order permitting the sealing of documents related to this mo...

Excerpt: ...e/exemplary damages is GRANTED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. The FAC's allegations of “malice,” “fraud,” and “oppression” are conclusory and unsupported by specific factual allegations. Further, the facts that are alleged are not specific as to each Defendant. Instead, Plaintiff groups all Defendants together, leaving each specific Defendant guessing as to which allegation(s) pertain to it. As to each Defendant, the Complaint must plead specif...

Excerpt: ...DENIED‐IN‐PART, as set forth below. The Ladnier‐Singal Family Trust is Revocable The parties dispute whether the Ladnier‐Singal Family Trust (Trust) is revocable, and thus subject to Probate Code § 18200 (creditors may reach its assets), or irrevocable. Based on the evidence submitted, the Court finds the Trust is revocable. See 5‐22‐19 Request for Judicial Notice, Ex. AB (Sacramento County Superior Court reaching the same conclusion...

Excerpt: ...ed in bad faith or without substantial justification.” (Code of Civ. Proc. § 1987.2, subd. (a).) There is no showing that Debtor opposed the motion in bad faith or without substantial justification. Section 708.170 permits awarding sanctions or fees for this motion, but the Motion states expressly that the request is pursuant to only section 1987.2. (Moving P&A at 3:22‐25.) The request for sanctions, therefore, is denied for lack of notice. ...

Excerpt: ..., 2015 form EJ‐190 Application for and Renewal of Judgment and October 16, 2015 Amended Application for and Renewal of Judgment constituted the unauthorized practice of law to the extent that the application was made on behalf of the seventeen other judgment creditors who were included on Attachment “A” to that Application and Amended Application. Timberline Inc. v. Jaisinghani (1997) 54 CA 4th 1361, 1367; People v. Landlords Professional S...

Excerpt: ...RRULED. Defendant argues the breach of contract claim fails to state a cause of action (Code Civ. Proc. § 430.10(e)) because (a) if § 8.1 is properly construed, the Complaint does not allege a breach; (b) § 8.1 is an unenforceable non‐compete provision; and (c) the liquidated damages clause is unenforceable. The Court addresses each argument in turn. First, the Court finds that the Complaint sufficiently alleges a breach of § 8.1. Defendant...

Excerpt: ...ready been conclusively established by Defendant's default, and Plaintiff may seek a judgment against Defendant. The court notes that the requirements for issuance of a writ of possession – that a plaintiff's claim have “probable validity” and that the plaintiff obtain an undertaking – have no meaning or purpose where a pre‐trial writ of possession is sought after the defendant's default. Further, even if Defendant had submitted an oppo...

Excerpt: ...t base this motion on the premise that Attorney Eassa presently represents Fox Bayshore on one side and Steven Porter on the other, and their respective positions are adverse. Fox Bayshore is named only as a nominal defendant, whose interests are not adverse to Plaintiff Stephen Porter. In the complaint, Attorney Eassa is not representing any interest that is adverse to Fox Bayshore. 2. The Cross‐complaint. The Cross‐complaint alleges that th...

Excerpt: ... WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. As noted in the moving papers, the FAC does not allege that Plaintiff performed under the contract or was excused from performance. Further, where an action is based on an alleged breach of a written contract, the terms must be set out verbatim in the body of the complaint or a copy of the written instrument must be attached and incorporated by reference. Otworth v. S. Pac. Transportation Co., 166 Cal.App.3d 452, 459 (1985)....

Excerpt: ... the authority cited by Plaintiff states only that a claim for spoliation may arise if a “duty based on contract” exists. (Cooper v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (2009) 177 Cal. App. 4th 876, 894) Plaintiff does not allege or contend that any contractual relationship exists between Plaintiff and Defendant. Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress “is not an independent tort, but the tort of negligence.” (Burgess v. Superior Court (199...

Excerpt: ...idence are OVERRULED. Cross‐Defendant Michelle Charles's Motion for Summary Judgment, or in the Alternative, Summary Adjudication is DENIED pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc. Section 437c. A reasonable trier of fact could find that Cross‐Complainant Danwen's evidence of online wire transfers from MAD's Chase bank account to Cross‐Defendant Michele Charles, as well as the testimony contained in Cross‐Defendant Charles's Exhibit 28 to her Compe...

Excerpt: ...intervention is GRANTED. BBSI shall separately file and serve its complaint in intervention as set forth in CCP § 387(e) within 14 days of this order. Intervention of a nonparty in an action or proceeding is governed by CCP § 387. That section provides in pertinent part: (d)(1) The court shall, upon timely application, permit a nonparty to intervene in the action or proceeding if either of the following conditions is satisfied: (A) A provision ...

Excerpt: ...eir counsel, can properly meet and confer further and, in good faith, attempt to resolve this dispute without Court intervention. The Court notes that on May 9, 2019, Plaintiff Tom Gehman, Jr. (Junior) obtained new counsel, Peter Myers. It does not appear Mr. Myers has had a chance to participate in a meet and confer. From the papers, it is unclear exactly which provisions/terms in the proposed irrevocable trust Junior finds objectionable, aside ...

Excerpt: ...the time for Oasis's response to January 31. On that date, Oasis submitted a declaration pursuant to CCP 430.41(2), extending the time to file a responsive pleading by 30 days. However, Oasis filed the present demurrer and motion to strike on March 6, after the time to file a responsive pleading expired. Accordingly, Oasis's motion is untimely. Because Oasis has provided no explanation for its untimely filing, the court overrules the demurrer on ...

Excerpt: ...the time for Oasis's response to January 31. On that date, Oasis submitted a declaration pursuant to CCP 430.41(2), extending the time to file a responsive pleading by 30 days. However, Oasis filed the present demurrer and motion to strike on March 6, after the time to file a responsive pleading expired. Accordingly, Oasis's motion is untimely. Because Oasis has provided no explanation for its untimely filing, the court overrules the demurrer on ...

Excerpt: ...ART and DENIED‐IN‐PART, as set forth below. The Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED. West Ridge's Complaint seeks both possession of the property and damages. The moving papers state: “For purposes of this motion, Plaintiff has reserved its claim for money damages.” The meaning of the above statement is unclear. Both West Ridge's proposed Order and proposed Judgment ask the Court to determine the amount of damages owed. West Ridge has n...

Excerpt: ...e first cause of action. 1. A Triable Issue Exists About Whether Plaintiff Knew or Should Have Known of the Damage Before March 2015. The statute of limitations is 3 years. Plaintiff filed his complaint on March 2, 2018. The issue is whether Plaintiff knew or should have known of the damage no earlier than March 2, 2015. CITY's argues that Plaintiff admitted that the Google Images accurately depict his house “at all relevant times.” (UMF 1.) ...

Excerpt: ...ervice of the moving papers, (2) a copy of the filed judgment, or (3) a proposed order. The court granted leave to file an amended motion to cure these defects. The court's prior ruling also indicated that Defendant had failed to provide authority for the relief sought; i.e. enforcement of a non‐money judgment. Now that the parties have provided a copy of the filed judgment, it is clear that the court must deny the present motion for the same r...

Excerpt: ...robable dangerous consequences of his conduct, and that he willfully and deliberately failed to avoid those consequences. Pacific Gas and Electric Company v. Superior Court, (2018) 24 Cal.App.5th 1150, 1159. The allegations in the complaint are not sufficient to establish that Defendant was aware of the probable consequences of his conduct and that Defendant willfully and deliberately failed to avoid those consequences. If the tentative ruling is...

Excerpt: ...mains and a dental bridge that were supposed to be from David Seid but which did not come from or belong to David Seid, a mix‐up that Plaintiffs have repeatedly sought to be corrected and acknowledged by Defendants, so far to no avail. 27. Repeated demands that the defendants help correct the mixed up remains issues have failed to result in cooperation and failed, to date, to result in defendants working to correct the mix up. [SAC, ¶¶ 3, 27]...

Excerpt: ...y dismissed from this action without prejudice. (See court's August 21, 2018 order.) The proposed First Amended Complaint includes additional allegations to support that Grecu is the alter ego of Defendant Interstates Vanlines, LLC (“IVL”). However, the court, in ruling on Grecu's prior motion to quash/dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, found that Plaintiff failed to meet her burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence t...

Excerpt: ...Complaint (TACC) alleging, inter alia, fraud and extortion, is DENIED. Code Civ. Proc. § 437c. Goguen's alternative Motion for Summary Adjudication (see 11‐21‐18 Notice of Motion, identifying Issues Nos. 1‐4), is also DENIED, for the reasons explained below. As a preliminary matter, Goguen's Reply brief argues that because Baptiste's 1‐25‐19 responsive Separate Statement does not cite to any evidence, as a matter of law, it cannot rais...

Excerpt: ...parties. The Motion to Compel the Request for Production of Documents in the Notice of Deposition is DENIED as to Request nos. 1 and 2, except as to copies of checks to or from Defendant, McDonald's Restaurants, and Travel Faire, Inc. that Plaintiff has agreed to produce. The requests for the remaining checks and deposits are denied because Defendant failed to provide a separate statement in compliance with CRC Rule 3.1345(a)(5). These requests a...

Excerpt: ...covery requests that may not impinge on Defendant's 5th Amendment right against self‐incrimination, the court finds no benefit in permitting only some limited discovery to proceed against Defendant Li. The piecemeal determination of which particular discovery requests or categories of information are discoverable will necessarily result in additional expenditure of judicial resources, as well as the resources of both parties. Further, the near ...

Excerpt: ... the forum state is such that the exercise of jurisdiction does not offend “traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.” International Shoe Co. v. State of Wash. (1945) 326 US 310, 316. Jurisdiction is proper where the contacts proximately result from actions by the defendant himself or herself that create a substantial connection with the form state. Burger King Corp. v. Rudzewicz (1985) 471 U.S. 462, 475. California has the br...

Excerpt: ...ry, Plaintiffs fail to establish that Defendant HOLTZMAN both purposefully availed himself of forum benefits with respect to the matter in controversy, and that the controversy is related to or arises out of Defendant's contacts with California. Accordingly, the motion to quash is GRANTED. If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court, pursuant to Rule 3.1308(a)(1), adopted by Local Rule 3.10, effective immediatel...

Excerpt: ... Release of All Claims,” Plaintiff appears to be entitled to a judgment in the amount of $50,000.00. Plaintiff, however, seeks only $33,333.64. Defendants contend their performance under the agreement is excused because Plaintiff materially breached the settlement agreement as a result of the fact that “Plaintiff's fiduciary simply had Plaintiff rubber stamp [the declaration identified in the agreement], which Plaintiff neither read for under...

Excerpt: ...ell as third party privacy rights. (See Defendant's Exh. A; see also Board of Trustees v. Sup. Ct. (1981) 119 Cal.App.3d 516, 528‐530 (disapproved on other grounds in Williams v. Sup. Ct. (2017) 3 Cal.5th 531, 557).) Privacy rights are not absolute, but rather the court must balance whether such privacy rights are outweighed by the relevance of the information sought to the subject matter in the pending action. Discovery will not be ordered if ...

Excerpt: ...ry Adjudication is DENIED. Based on the declarations of the parties, a genuine dispute of material fact exists with regard to the impact of the dispute between the LLC members on Plaintiff's membership interest such that dissolution would be reasonably necessary to protect the rights or interests of Plaintiff. A genuine dispute of material fact also exists with respect to whether management of the LLC is subject to internal dissention such that d...

Excerpt: ...reement to extend the 90‐day period for initiating an action to enforce the lien, Respondent failed to file an action in this court prior to the agreed upon deadline of February 15, 2019. As a result, the lien is unenforceable. Cal. Civ. Code § 8460; CCP § 392; Automatic Sprinkler Corp. v. S. Cal. Edison Co., 216 Cal. App. 3d 627, 634–35 (Ct. App. 1989). Respondent's opposition to the Petition relies on authority holding that “the grant o...

Excerpt: ...eccato and Beatrice Ceccato (“Ceccatos”) for Reconsideration of the March 1, 2019 Order (filed on March 5, 2019) Granting the Application of Cross‐Defendants Mansa Construction Corporation dba Era Green Banker Realty, Stanley Lo, and Mirna Gonzales (“Cross‐Defendants”) for Determination of Good Faith Settlement (hereinafter “Order”), the court rules as follows: By order of the Presiding Judge, this matter is assigned for hearing t...

Excerpt: ... of Court. Plaintiff shall comply with the California Rules of Court in all other respects. Plaintiff bears the burden of pleading and proving timely filing of a sufficient complaint with the DFEH and obtaining a right‐to‐sue notice. See Holland v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 154 CA4th at 945; Jumaane v. City of Los Angeles (2015) 241 CA4th 1390, 1402; Kim v. Konad USA Distribution, Inc., 226 CA4th at 1345‐1346. Plaintiffs' complaint appears to at...

Excerpt: ...e of limitations had not yet run at the time of the filing of the complaint on July 27, 2016. The first amended complaint adequately identifies which of the Plaintiffs were minors at the time of the decedent's death. With respect to the adult Plaintiffs, Defendants have the burden of proving that Plaintiffs discovered or should have discovered the facts alleged to constitute Defendants' wrongdoing more than one year prior to filing this action. S...

Excerpt: ... its claim to possession of the collateral identified in the 3‐28‐19 Declaration of Karen Tennant. The evidence indicates Defendant breached the parties' “Master Promissory Note and Security Agreement” (Note) by failing to make the required payments, giving Plaintiff the right to take immediate possession of the collateral. Defendant has not opposed the application. Because Defendant appears to owe more on the Note than the collateral's c...

Excerpt: ...LC did not seek leave to amend First American's answer, and First American is not seeking leave to amend Elevation's pleadings. Nonetheless, considering that there is no opposition to the request, First American's request is GRANTED to the extent it seeks leave to file its proposed amended answer. First American shall file and serve the amended answer within 10 days of this order. First American's request to bifurcate the trial, which is also not...

Excerpt: ... Cal.App.3d 327, 335 [“the prevailing view is that it is only in the truly exceptional case involving a single, simple issue with minimal evidentiary support that a court will consider the merits of a motion unaccompanied by a separate statement”].) The Complaint alleges three causes of action to which Plaintiff is seeking summary judgment. Plaintiff's Memorandum of Points and Authorities discusses the elements of each cause of action, but th...

Excerpt: ...r Summary Judgment is DENIED. The Complaint seeks both possession of the property and damages. West Ridge's moving papers state that “[fo]r purposes of this motion, Plaintiff has reserved its claim for money damages.” However, Plaintiff has not dismissed, or stated its willingness to dismiss from this case, its damages claim. The moving papers do not establish the amount of damages owed. Further, Plaintiff's proposed Order and proposed Judgme...

Excerpt: ...t Grand Century Secured Investments, LLC. Peak Foreclosure Services, Inc. and DOES 1‐50),” and not specifically against Defendant Migdal. However, paragraphs 55‐57 specifically refer to Defendant Migdal, and make allegations against him. Additionally, Plaintiff's prayer for relief requests relief against all Defendants, including Migdal, as to all causes of action. Also, as Defendants have pointed out, Plaintiff has alleged that Defendant M...

Excerpt: ...efendant Migdal. However, paragraphs 55‐57 specifically refer to Defendant Migdal, and make allegations against him. Additionally, Plaintiff's prayer for relief requests relief against all Defendants, including Migdal, as to all causes of action. Also, as Defendants have pointed out, Plaintiff has alleged that Defendant Migdal is Defendant Grand Century. Therefore, on the face of the pleading, Defendant Migdal has standing to contest the Fourth...

Excerpt: ... seek documents regarding any loans or loan applications with respect to the property at issue. Defendants have asserted that such documents are privileged pursuant to their constitutional right to privacy, and that the documents are therefore not discoverable. According to Plaintiff, the documents are “directly relevant to Defendants' efforts to obtain financing to pay their outstanding balance to NOLAN. Indeed, it was the promise of financing...

Excerpt: ...ue. A. Rough approximation of plaintiffs' recovery and settlor's proportionate liability. “The ultimate determinant of good faith is whether the settlement is grossly disproportionate to what a reasonable person at the time of settlement would estimate the settlor's liability to be.” (City of Grand Terrace v. Sup.Ct. (1987) 192 Cal.App.3d 1251, 1262.) That the settlement was 1.16 percent of the claimed damages does not, by itself,...

Excerpt: ...of Labor v. Chimes District of Columbia, Inc., U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, Case No. 1:15‐cv‐03315‐RDB (“Chimes”). That case has since concluded. Thus, the stated basis for the stay no longer exists. Heffernan argues another recently‐filed case against Plaintiff militates in favor of extending the stay, namely, Abraha, et. al. v. Colonial Parking, Inc., U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Case No. 16...

Excerpt: ...ablishing that plaintiff is entitled to the relief sought. Clauson v. Superior Court (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 1253, 1255. In establishing a claim for punitive damages, plaintiff must show by “clear and convincing” evidence that the defendant is guilty of oppression, fraud or malice. Civil Code § 3294(a). Plaintiffs fail to do so here, and fail to demonstrate how they may amend their Complaint to properly state a punitive damages claim. Accordin...

Excerpt: ...tiff has failed to set forth specific facts demonstrating malice or oppression by Defendant, as those terms are defined in Civ. Code § 3294. Further, although Plaintiff has attempted to add allegations relating to Defendants' ratification of the actions of their employees, Plaintiff has nonetheless failed to set forth specific facts demonstrating authorization of wrongful conduct or advance knowledge of the likelihood of wrongful conduct by Defe...

Excerpt: ...e, however, involved a dispute over the petitioner's claim to an easement. No easement is at issue in this case. Plaintiff does not allege that Defendant has presented any right to possession or title to Plaintiff's property. Plaintiff's first amended complaint asserts that “Defendant's conduct will eventually interfere with Plaintiff's possession of the Scott Property through the imposition of a servient easement in favor of Defendants across ...

Excerpt: ...es only that he is not seeking compensation “at this time.” Defendant shall supplement his response to indicate whether he incurred any injuries or damage, and describe the injuries or damage, regardless of whether he is seeking compensation at this time. Form Interrogatory 115.2. Granted. Even without discovery, Defendant highly likely has knowledge of some facts to support his general denial and affirmative defenses. Signing a paper filed w...

Excerpt: ...h, fifth, and sixth causes of action on the ground that the Court previously issued a tentative ruling in a different action is overruled. A tentative ruling is not a ruling. Plaintiffs dismissed the prior action before the Court ruled on the demurrer. Demurrer to the first cause of action (breach of contract) is sustained with leave to amend. The claim alleges that “Defendants failed to perform its duties” and “cancelled Plaintiff's loan m...

Excerpt: ...d. SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND as to the Seventh cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress. A cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress requires (1) extreme and outrageous conduct by the defendant; (2) intention to cause or reckless disregard of the probability of causing emotional distress; (3) severe emotional suffering; and (4) actual and proximate causation of the emotional distress. Heller v. P...

Excerpt: ...not provided a copy of the stipulated judgment with the moving papers. Further, Defendant has not provided a proposed order. Most significantly, however, Defendant provides no authority for the relief that he seeks; i.e. enforcement of a non‐money judgment. The court notes that lack of compliance with a non‐money judgment is generally enforced through contempt proceedings. CCP § 1209(a)(5). Further, the court notes that the merits of Defenda...