Excerpt: ...of Peide An and Xiao Chen Liu is DENIED. 1. Section 1008(b) Is Inapplicable. IMUSIC asserts Code of Civ. Proc. section 1008(b) as the basis for this motion. (Notice of Motion at 2:7-8.) Section 1008, subdivision (b), however, pertains only to renewed motions. The present motion is not a renewed motion. The previous proceeding was Liu's and An's demurrer and the order sustaining demurrer. Since the present motion is not a renewal of any motion bro...

Excerpt: ...re exists an overriding interest that overcomes the right of public access to the record; (2) The overriding interest supports sealing the record; (3) A substantial probability exists that the overriding interest will be prejudiced if the record is not sealed; (4) The proposed sealing is narrowly tailored; and (5) No less restrictive means exist to achieve the overriding interest. The clerk of the court is hereby ordered to seal the following doc...

Excerpt: ...ary Judgment (MSJ), filed 12-8-22, is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc. Sect. 437c). Continental's alternative Motion for Summary Adjudication (MSA) is GRANTED-IN-PART and DENIED-IN-PART, as set forth below. Preliminary comment regarding filed evidence. Both parties have submitted a large volume of documents/evidence, much of which is not cited with particularity (i.e., by page and line number) in the parties' papers. Much of the evidence is not reference...

Excerpt: ...ct Their Home is GRANTED. Any inspection by Defendants or Cross-defendant of the property located at 515 Summit Springs Road in Woodside, San Mateo County, California will be limited to exclude any inspection of the interior of the residential structure located on the property. Upon the motion of any person and a showing of good cause, a court is authorized to enter an order requiring an “inspection…be made only on specified terms and conditi...

Excerpt: ...layman's terms, the ‘barriers' that denied him full and equal access.” MPA, p.8. The Court agrees with Defendant. Plaintiff alleges that he “observed or encountered the following non-compliant conditions: There was not enough knee or toe clearance under the outdoor dining surfaces,” in violation of ADA Standard for Accessible Design, § 306. Complaint, ¶ 11. Plaintiff's assertion that he “observed or encountered” the condition, howev...

Excerpt: ...Cross-Complaint fail because Cross-Complainant admits that Plaintiff Juan Cid (“Plaintiff”) was Cross-Defendant's employee. (See Cross-Defendant's Request for Judicial Notice, Exh. A, Cross-Complainant's Case Management Conference Statement.) However, while the Court may take judicial notice of court records and GRANTS Cross-Defendant's request as to Exhibits A-C, it may not take judicial notice of the truth of the matters asserted in Cross-C...

Excerpt: ...quest for Production of Documents, Set Two (Motion) is GRANTED. Plaintiff's request for monetary sanctions is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. As a threshold matter, the Court notes that Defendant filed his opposition on February 10, less than 9 court days before the hearing date in violation of Code of Civil Procedure section 1005, subdivision (b) and rule 3.1300, subdivision (a) of the California Rules of Court. But even upon considering Def...

Excerpt: ...e the prevailing party on their anti-SLAPP motion and are therefore entitled to recover their attorney's fees and costs. Under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16, subdivision (c)(1),” a prevailing defendant on a special motion to strike shall be entitled to recover that defendant's attorney's fees and costs.” “Given the express legislative preference for awarding fees to successful anti-SLAPP defendants, a party need not succeed in stri...

Excerpt: ...order. Defendant's Motion to Strike is DENIED. Defendant's Request for Judicial Notice is GRANTED with respect to the items numbered 1–7, 10, and 13–16 and DENIED with respect to the items numbered 8–9 and 11–12. I. DEMURRER As a preliminary matter, Defendant's Demurrer addresses both the “Objection to Demurrer Motion [¶] Amended Complaint” (Objection) and “Amended Complaint and Petition for Protection under the American Disabiliti...

Excerpt: ... for Production Nos. 3 and 7 seek information relating to financial statements and financial reports from Philemon Investments during the period from 2015 to 2020. According to Defendants, “[Plaintiff's] restaurant was struggling financially and would have closed regardless of any failed purchase deal with third parties. The information sought in the Requests at issue here are clearly relevant to disprove an element of Plaintiffs' case . . . .�...

Excerpt: ...he date and nature of the acts and pleadings, but not necessarily for the truth of facts asserted within the documents. Julian Volunteer Fire Co. Assn. v. JulianCuyamaca Fire Protection Dist. (2021) 62 Cal.App.5th 583, 600, review denied (June 30, 2021); Williams v. Wraxall (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 120, 130, n. 7. The Court, as the parties point out, has already ruled on many of these issues. Now that evidence has been presented through Phase 1 of t...

Excerpt: ...ourt sets out the tentative provided for the February 14, 2023 hearing: The parties are to APPEAR (Zoom appearances are allowed) on Defendant/Cross-Defendant Broadway by the Bay's (“Broadway”) Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement. The Court's tentative, in evaluating the policies under Code of Civil Procedure §877.6 and Tech-Bilt Inc., v. Woodward-Clyde & Assoc. (1985) 38 Cal. 3d. 488, 499 is to continue the motion to allow disc...

Excerpt: ...and confer in person or by telephone due to delays caused by injuries to Plaintiff's counsel. The Court, in its discretion, has opted to reach the merits of the Demurrer. Basis for Defense on Face of Pleading Defendant argues that Plaintiff's statements in Plaintiff's March 2, 2021 letter, attached as Exh. B to the First Amended Complaint, that his Senior Inspector position was temporary, create a bar to recovery because they contradict the alleg...

Excerpt: ...aint, filed by Cross-defendants U.S. Bank and Viva Capital 3, is sustained with leave to amend. For purposes the statute of limitations, California law applies. The applicable statute of limitations is one year. A. Statute of Limitations 1. The Court Should Apply the California Statute of Limitations. In general, whether a claim is barred by a statute of limitations “is a procedural matter governed by the law of the forum, regardless of where t...

Excerpt: ...o strike, the allegations in the complaint are considered in context and presumed to be true: ‘(J)udges read allegations of a pleading subject to a motion to strike as a whole, all parts in their context, and assume their truth.' ” (Weil & Brown, supra, at § 7:197.5, quoting Clauson v. Superior Court (Pedus Services, Inc.) (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 1253, 1255.) Accordingly, a motion to strike “will be granted only if it is clear that the matte...

Excerpt: ...laint and the reasonable inferences that may be drawn from those facts.” (Miklosy v. Regents of the University of Cal. (2008) 44 Cal.4th 876, 883.) The Court may “also consider matters that may be judicially noticed . . . .” (Brown v. Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. (2016) 247 Cal.App.4th 275, 279.) The Court does “not, however, assume the truth of contentions, deductions or conclusions of law.” (Guerrero v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. (20...

Excerpt: ... Procedure § 387(d)(2) provides: “The court may, upon timely application, permit a nonparty to intervene in the action or proceeding if the person has an interest in the matter in litigation, or in the success of either of the parties, or an interest against both.” Plaintiff acknowledges that Claimant is seeking to intervene. See Memorandum filed January 24, 2023 at 6. Likewise, Defendant understands that “if I make this claim of possessio...

Excerpt: ... raised in trial courts throughout California as a result of the United States Supreme Court' s decision in by Viking River Cruises, Inc. v. Moriana (2022) 142 S.Ct. 1906 (“Viking River Cruises”).) There are cases winding their way through the California appellate courts on this issue. Based upon the ruling in Viking River Cruises and applicable California law, the Court GRANTS Defendant's motion to compel arbitration of Plaintiff Luz Saavedr...

Excerpt: ...88, 499 is to continue the motion to allow discovery as to Broadway's financial condition and its insurance coverage. See City of Grand Terrace v. Sup.Ct. (1987) 192 Cal.App.3d 1251, 1265. The parties shall meet-and-confer prior to the hearing to discuss the timing and scope of that discovery. The evidence demonstrates that liability is disputed and there is evidence where a fact finder could find Broadway the primary tortfeasor as well as eviden...

Excerpt: ...iv. Proc. Sect. 430.10(e)), that the Complaint is “uncertain” (Sect. 430.10(f)), and that this case should be “abated” pending resolution of an earlier-filed civil case involving these same parties (Sect. 430.10(c)). The Court disagrees. The Complaint sufficiently states a cause of action for unlawful detainer (UD). Civ. Code Sect. 1161(1). It alleges that Defendants Broers and Olabi entered into lease agreements for the Premises, that th...

Excerpt: ... its discretion to still consider it since there does not appear to be any prejudice to the County since it filed a substantive reply. It appears that the opposition was late because Plaintiff did not realize that Monday, February 13, 2023 is a court holiday, a mistake that many people make. The Demurrer is OVERRULED based on failure to allege facts sufficient to support the claim for dangerous condition of public property. “A public entity had...

Excerpt: ...n Rogue (“vehicle”) that came with express warranties by Defendant. (See Defendant's Request for Judicial Notice, Exh. 1.) Plaintiff filed this action on September 7, 2021 claiming that the vehicle was delivered with serious defects and nonconformities to warranty, and that Defendant was unable to repair it and also failed to promptly replace the vehicle or make restitution. (Ibid.) The Complaint alleges three causes of action for violations ...

Excerpt: ...native Motion for Summary Adjudication is also DENIED as to each of the five issues set forth in Woodland's 11-10-22 Notice of Motion. In denying this Motion, the Court offers no opinion as to the ultimate merit of the two claims (negligence and breach of warranty) asserted against Woodland. The Court merely finds, based on the evidence presented here, that these two claims cannot be resolved via summary judgment/adjudication. Legal standard on s...

Excerpt: ...on, and $4,108.43 in costs for a total of $53,675.43 pursuant to Cal. Civil Code § 1794(d) and the parties' settlement agreement. Plaintiff's Request for Judicial Notice is GRANTED pursuant to Cal. Evidence Code §452(d). Defendant's Opposition was due to be filed by January 30, 2023, nine court days prior to the hearing on this Motion. The Opposition was untimely filed on January 31, 2023. The Court, in its discretion, has considered the late-f...

Excerpt: ...t (“FAC”) is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. Plaintiffs shall file a Second Amended Complaint no later than ten (10) days after service of written notice of entry of this order and the order on the concurrent motion to strike. Legal Standard on Demurrer A defendant may demur to a cause of action in a complaint on the grounds that, inter alia, the pleading does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, the pleading is uncertai...