Excerpt: ... Proce dure, section 473 provides that a court may, in its discretion and after notice to the adverse party, allow an amendment to a pleading upon any terms as may be just. (Code Civ. Proc., § 473, subd. (a)(1).) The court's discretion will usually be exercised liberally to permit amendment of the pleadings. (Howard v. County of San Diego (2010) 184 Cal.App.4th 1422, 1428 (Howard).) “The policy favoring amendment is so strong that it is a rare...

Excerpt: ...urt DE NIES defendant's request for judicial notice. It is unclear if the parties satisfied the requirements to have an Informal Discovery Conference, but if the requirement has not been met, the court waives the requirement since the parties have had multiple c onferences with the civil commissioner. The court notes that the parties raise several collateral issues in their briefing. In ruling on the motion, the court only considered facts rele...

Excerpt: ...ding o f proposed orders. The court will sign the proposed order submitted on February 9, 2024 with the date of the hearing changed to February 21, the date for the final approval hearing filled in, and any other changes that are appropriate based upon this tentative. The court adopts the language in the proposed order as part of its tentative ruling. The proposed order shall be submitted electronically through the clerk's office. On January 30...

Excerpt: ...itted on January 26, 2024. The court modifies Local Rule 3.403(b)(iv) (amended effective January 1, 2024) regarding the wording of proposed orders. Plaintiff shall submit an order which incorporates the tentative and the non- contradictory language in the submi tted proposed order. On August 23, 2024, the court granted preliminary approval to this class and PAGA (Private Attorney General Act) settlement. This case is the third case involving sim...

Excerpt: ...plain t is DENIED. 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 Off ice 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 notic...

Excerpt: ... efendants Brius, LLC, Brius Management Co., Rockport Healthcare Support Services, LLC, San Mateo Wellness GP, LLC, San Mateo Healthcare & Wellness Centre, LP, Susan Ehrlich, Nora De Leon, Bryan Guillermo, Shirley Faller, Kristine Guillermo, Chester Kuna ppilly and Shlomo Rechnitz (collectively “Defendants”) to the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) of Plaintiffs Rosario Custodio (“Rosario”), et al. (collectively “Plaintiffs”) is rul...

Excerpt: ...ve plea ding, the pleading is OVERRULED. However, Plaintiff's Complaint on its face discloses a fatal defect which requires the Court to instead render judgment on the pleadings in favor of Defendant. Plaintiff has failed to comply with statutory notice requirem ents. “Due to the summary nature of [an unlawful detainer] action, a three -day notice is valid only if the landlord strictly complies with the provisions of section 1161, subdivision 2...

Excerpt: ... Relief is DENIED. The Court's tentative ruling from December 28, 2023, as modified, is restated here. The controversy involves the Opperman's October 15, 2021 application to build an Accessory Dwelling Unit ADU on their property, which cross defendants denied. The project is referred to interchangeably in the Cross- Complaint as the “ADU” and the Opperman Application.” (Cross- Complaint ¶¶7 and 19.) The Opperman's Fifth Cause of Action ...

Excerpt: ...a nd DENIED IN PART. Defendants David M. Bragg and Silicon Valley Real Ventures, LLC shall pay $10,000 to Plaintiffs' counsel no later than March 8, 2024. Plaintiffs move here for terminating sanctions, monetary sanctions, and a finding of contempt with re spect to Defendants David M. Bragg and Silicon Valley Real Ventures, LLC (“SVRV”). They contend that sanctions and contempt are warranted by Bragg's and SVRV's refusal to comply with the C...

Excerpt: ...s of action a gainst Stiles and second Cross -Defendant Johnson (“Johnson”). In short, the Cross- Complaint alleges that Homa held title to the Ferrari at all times, including when it was sold for $200,000.00, but was forced by the Cross -Defendants to pay $175,000 and var ious other sums of money because CrossDefendants were upset that the car had been sold. According to the Cross -Complaint, Johnson told Homa that she should pay the money t...

Excerpt: ...te of Li mitations Where a complaint shows on its face that the cause of action is barred by the applicable statute of limitations, it is subject to demurrer. Sirott v. Latts (1992) 6 Cal.App.4th 923, 928. Here, the FAC alleges that Plaintiffs purchased the Subje ct Property from the Defendants on July 15, 2019. FAC ¶11. It further alleges that Plaintiffs discovered the storm drain by chance in June 2022 when they were doing landscaping on the S...

Excerpt: ... S ani alleges that on or about 2022 a[n] oral agreement was made between Plaintiff, Monney Car Audio, and ISSIMI MECCANICA INC. The essential terms of the agreement are as follows: Plaintiff entered into an oral contract with Defendants Monney Car Audio and ISSIMI MECCAHNICA INC for installation of a rearview camera, radar, recording camera, and side signals to address visibility concerns unique to his 2020 Lamborghini SVJ ("vehicle") in...

Excerpt: ...ked merit and that Defendant is entitled to recover attorneys' fees and costs as a prevailing party in the amount of $38,265.26. For the reasons set forth below, Defendant's motion is DENIED. Defendant sets forth a litany of inconsistencies in Plaintiff's testimo ny, and argues that Plaintiff is a serial litigant whose counsel has brought high numbers of meritless claims against businesses, seeking a payout for ADA and Unruh Act violations withou...

Excerpt: ...� in Plaintiff's O pposition brief (pp. 1-6). OVERRULED to the extent that Defendant objects to the entirety of Plaintiff's “Statement of Facts.” However, the Court disregards any referenced “facts” or “evidence” that is/are not identified, and properly cited, in Plaintiff's Separate Statement. San Diego Watercrafts, Inc. v. Wells Fargo Bank (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th 308, 315 -316. • Objection to Plaintiff's assertion of theories not ...

Excerpt: ...hip o f, and benefits flowing from, six real properties in Hayward, California. On January 10, 2023, defendant/cross- complainant Ashwani Kumar Bhakri (defendant) filed a cross -complaint alleging, inter alia, promissory fraud and breach of written contract, argu ing an alternative version of facts in which the two oral contracts alleged in the FAC never existed, and that the parties never entered into the fiduciary relationship which forms t...

Excerpt: ...is o ver 70 years of age may petition the court for a preference, which the court shall grant if the court finds both that the party has a substantial interest in the action as a whole, and that the health of the party is such that a preference is necessary to prevent prejudicing the party's interest in the litigation. Section 36, subdivision (a) “is mandatory and absolute in its application in civil cases whenever the litigants are 70 yea...

Excerpt: ...D. Initial ly, the court notes that defendant Owl, Inc. (Owl) has provided the incorrect address for the hearing. Department 28 is not located in Redwood City as the notice states, but instead at the Central Courthouse, Courtroom I, 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].) As another preliminary matter, the declaration submitted by Owl is insu...

Excerpt: ...pe r annum of $28,554.79, and costs of $1,383.85 for a total award of $54,938.64. (Aug. 11, 2023 Default Judgment.) Schreiner moves here to set aside and vacate that judgment or to strike the prejudgment interest portion of it. Defendant contends that the aw ard of interest was improper under subdivision (a) of Civil Code §3287, which entitles a prevailing party to prejudgment interest on damages that are certain. (C.C. §3287(a).) However, as P...

Excerpt: ...ndant' s Request for Production of Documents (“RFPs”), Set One (the “Motions”). These are the fourth and fifth discovery motions brought by Defendant and Plaintiff has already been sanctioned $18,005.40, none of which has been paid. Defendant's Motions and requ est for terminating sanctions are GRANTED and the matter is ordered DISMISSED with prejudice. The proof of service (“POS”) for the Motions indicates they were sent to Plaintif...

Excerpt: ...wers to interrogatories, depositions, and matters of which judicial notice shall or may be taken.” Under Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Company (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, the party moving for summary judgment has the burden of production to make a prima facie showing that there is no triable issue of any material fact. The burden then shifts to the nonmoving party to make a prima facie showing that there is a triable issue of material fact. Here, t...

Excerpt: ..., inter a lia, the following causes of action (“COAs”) against Grove: private nuisance under Civil Code § 3479, trespass under Civil Code § 3334, negligence, injunctive relief, and violation of Bus. & Prof. Code § 7000. Defendant's demurrer is SUSTAINED -IN -PART wit hout leave to amend OVERRULED -IN -PA R T. A demurrer tests the legal sufficiency of the pleadings, raising issues of law but not fact regarding the form or content of the opp...

Excerpt: ...are reason ably subject to dispute by CCSF and irrelevant. (Evid. C. §452(h); AL Holding Co. v. O'Brien & Hicks, Inc. (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 1310, 1313 fn. 2 [“a court must decline to take judicial notice of material that is not relevant”] (internal citation omitted).) Accordingly, the Court has not considered Plaintiffs' extrinsic evidence. (See Ion Equipment Corporation v. Nelson (1980) 110 Cal.App.3d 868.) This case is brought by Plaintiff...

Excerpt: ... 430.10 CALIF. RULE OF CT., RULE 3.1320] TENTATIVE RULING: Defendants Wayne Podesta's, Gary Podesta, Jr.'s; and Podesta Family Investments II, LLC's (collectively, “Defendants”) 11 -7 -23 Demurrer to Plaintiffs' 9 -21 -23 First Amended Complaint (FAC) is SU STA INED-IN -PART without leave to amend and OVERRULED -INPART. Defendants' 11 -7 -23 Request for Judicial Notice (RJN) is GRANTED as follows: As to the document(s) filed in prior court p...

Excerpt: ...tain discovery … by means of a … mental examination of (1) a party to the action, … in any action in which the mental [] condition … of that party or other person is in controversy in the action. (Code Civ. Proc. Sect. 2032.020(a).) Here, Plaintiff has placed his ment al condition in controversy. Plaintiff claims to suffer from “depression, anxiety, hopelessness, decreased energy and sleep disturbance” as a result of the incident in S...

Excerpt: ...ition for Writ of Mandate of Plainti
¯/Petitioner City of Millbrae (“Millbrae”) is ruled on as follows: In making this ruling, the Court has also reviewed the response Þled on behalf of Interested Party Yes In My Back Yard. Demurrer to the Fourth Cause of Action for Injunctive Relief is SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND. As the Court previously found in denying Millbrae's request for a preliminary injunction, Millbrae's lawsuit is a validati...

Excerpt: ...plainant Bernice Turner's operative First Amended Cross-Complaint (“FACC”) alleges three causes of action against Cross-Defendants, including Cross-Defendant Mortgage Lender Services, Inc. (“MLS”): (1) negligent misrepresentation, (2) negligence, and (3) unfair business practices. MLS demurs to all three causes of action on grounds of failure to state a claim. A demurrer tests the legal su
¯iciency of the pleadings, raising issues of law...

Excerpt: ...nce Þnding that the declaration o Marc D. Bender provides a oundation or his expertise o opining on the reasonableness o ees, his criticisms are relevant and there is su
¯icient oundation or his opinions. The act that he does not have personal knowledge is irrelevant to his opinions. The court considers his declaration in the context o its own knowledge o the acts o this case. Deendants contend that the attorneys' ees provision d...

Excerpt: ...Agreements serving as the basis of the judgment are void and unenforceable” on those bases. (Motion at p. 8 (emphasis added); see also Reply at p. 1, fn. 1.) Nevertheless, the only issue before the Court is whether the Judgment entered by the Honorable Robert Foiles on March 19, 2021, is void on its face. Noting this limitation on the Court's authority is important because the Motion asks the Court to go beyond simply voiding the Judgment and t...

Excerpt: ...P §§435, 436, 581(f)(2).) Defendants' Request for Judicial Notice (RJN) is GRANTED. (Evid. Code Sect. 452(d).) Defendants' unopposed Motion to Strike Plainti
¯s' TAC is GRANTED. (CCP §§435 & 436; Leader v. Health Industries of America, Inc. (2001) 89 Cal.App.4th 603, 613.) As set forth in Defendants' moving papers, the Court's 8-31-23 Order sustaining Defendants' demurrer to Plainti
¯s' Second Amended Complaint (SAC) set a deadline for Plai...

Excerpt: ...tion Act (the “FAA”) covers at least some of the claims asserted in the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) and that a party may properly move to compel arbitration of claims asserted in an existing lawsuit. Rather, the dispute here is limited to whether and the extent to which the Ending Forced Arbitration of Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment Act of 2021 (the “EFAA”) permits Bruschi to elect to proceed in court on his claims. The EFAA...

Excerpt: ... (“Envirobuilt”). Gray now moves pursuant to CCP §§386.5 and 386.6 to deposit the sum of the bond with the Court, to be discharged from further liability for the sum, to be dismissed from the action, and for its fees and costs. Gray's motion is hereby GRANTED with modiÞcations to the requested costs and attorneys' fees set forth herein. “Where the only relief sought against one of the defendants is the payment of a stated amount of money...

Excerpt: ...member Deborah Q. Ruddock by Deendants and Crosscomplainants Thomas J. Gearing and Daniel K. Gearing (collectively, the “Gearings”) on August 31, 2023. For the reasons set orth below, the motion to quash is granted. A. Deposition Not Warranted Code o Civil Procedure section 1987.1 permits a party to move or an order quashing a subpoena and authorizes the Court to enter appropriate protective orders. (Code o Civ. Proc., § 1987.1 subds. (...

Excerpt: ...h legal duty; and (3) the breach of such duty was the proximate or legal cause of plainti
¯s resulting injury. (Ladd v. County of San Mateo (1996) 12 Cal.4th 913, 917.) Defendant moves for summary judgment on the ground that no duty of care existed to Plainti
¯. The Complaint alleges that Defendant had a special relationship with Defendant James Edward Nell Jr. (“Jimmy”) as his son, and as a result owed a duty to control his son against an...

Excerpt: ...ard at Floribunda. Defendant Justin McSharry is alleged to be the President of the board, while plainti
¯ appears to be a candidate for board election. Plainti
¯ Timothy Conway alleges that McSharry defamed him in an email letter that was sent to the Floribunda Community. The email, attached to the Complaint as Exhibit A , describes a history of nuisance and harassment by plainti
¯ and another resident of his condo unit, including harassing an...

Excerpt: ...Floribunda. Plainti
¯ Timothy Conway appears to be a candidate for board election. Plainti
¯ alleges that defendant Nirav Shah participated in disseminating an email letter which allegedly defamed Plainti
¯, and also provided the allegedly defamatory statements at issue to the writer of the letter. The email, attached to the Complaint as Exhibit A, describes a history of nuisance and harassment by plainti
¯ and another resident of his condo u...

Excerpt: ...al. Rules of Court, rule 3.1320(g); Code Civ. Proc., § 472b.) Initially, the Court notes that plainti
¯ has provided an incorrect address for the hearing. Department 28 is not located in Redwood City as the notice states, but instead is at the Central Courthouse, Courtroom I, 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 Demur...

Excerpt: ...epresenting him in this action—he is representing himself. Pursuant to the law, it is improper for a non-attorney to represent another in litigation. (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 6125 [“No person shall practice law in California unless the person is an active licensee of the State Bar.”]; Birbrower, Montalbano, Condon & Frank v. Superior Court (1998) 17 Cal.4th 119, 128-130 [interpreting section 6125 regarding the practice of law in California]; ...

Excerpt: ...issuing a comprehensive tentative ruling held a hearing on plainti
¯s/petitioners' motion for attorneys' fees pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1021.5, which the court granted in part. The court deleted some fees, reduced the hourly fees for some work, and allocated certain fees between the parties. After the hearing, the parties were to meet and confer on these issues and plainti
¯s were to submit to the court a proposed order showin...

Excerpt: ...d September 28, 2023. Plainti
¯ was on the stand for about a day. On November 17, 2023, the court issued a Tentative Decision and Proposed Statement of Decision Þnding in favor of defendant and against plainti
¯ on her a
¯irmative claims and denying defendant restitution based on unjust enrichment on his a
¯irmative claim. The court did not believe that oral argument was necessary and no party requested oral argument. On November 30, 2023, t...

Excerpt: ...onetary Sanctions is GRANTED. Deendant Tesla Energy Operations, Inc. shall designate and produce a person or persons most qualiÞed to testiy as to the twenty-our categories listed in Plainti
¯s Brad Jones' and Maria Jones' Notice o Entity Deposition No. 3 or deposition and produce the documents requested therein no later than February 23, 2024, or a later date mutually agreed upon by the parties in writing. Deendant Tesla Energy Operation...

Excerpt: ...in 2020. Defendant VintaBio, Inc. (“Defendant” or “VintaBio”) now moves to compel arbitration pursuant to section 10 of the agreement, “Dispute Resolution.” (Li Decl. Ex. A, section 10.) Plainti
¯ opposes, arguing that the arbitration provision is unconscionable and should not be enforced. The arbitration provision states, in relevant part, that “[i]n the event the parties hereto are unable to settle a dispute between them regardin...

Excerpt: ... Sect. 452(d).) The Court declines to rule on Plainti
¯s' 1-29-24 Objection to Evidence on grounds that it is immaterial to disposition of the motion. (Code Civ. Proc. Sect. 437c(q).) LEGAL STANDARD. A motion for summary judgment or adjudication shall be granted if the papers submitted show there is no triable issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. (Code Civ. Proc. Sect. 437c(c).) A pl...

Excerpt: ...mplaint review and analysis document, which is the subject of this motion, on or about June 14, 2014. Devyatov Decl., paragraph 13. That document was discussed between Draegen and Defendant Groeneweg at a June 28, 2019 web conference, wherein Groeneweg obtained a copy of the document. Ibid., at paragraph 14. Draegen argues that the document is protected by attorney-client privilege. Attorney- client privilege is governed by Cal. Evidence Code Sec...

Excerpt: ...t appear on the face of the pleading under attack, or from matters outside the pleading that are judicially noticeable. (Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318.) (2) Defendants Demurrer to the Complaint is OVERRULED based on failure to allege facts su
¯icient to support an unlawful detainer action. A demurrer may be brought on the ground that “[t]he pleading does not state facts su
¯icient to constitute a cause of action.” (Code Civ. Pr...

Excerpt: ... states, on the caption page, that the Feb. 2 hearing on this Motion to Strike will take place in Dept. 21 at 9 a.m., whereas the body of the Notice (the next page) states that the Feb. 2 hearing will take place in Dept. 24 at 2 p.m. Thus, the Notice provides incorrect information. The hearing is 2.2.24 @ 9:00 a.m. in D24. Defendants' 1.26.24 “Opposition to the Declaration of Christine Tour Sarkissian,” in which Defendants ask the Court to st...

Excerpt: ... (“CPQ”) and Cross-complainant David Espie's Motion to Compel Cross- defendant The Chugh Firm, PC's (hereafter “Chugh”) Further Responses to Requests for Admission, Set Two, and for Monetary Sanctions is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Cross-defendant Chugh shall serve code-compliant further responses to requests nos. 2021, 28–30, 37, 59–82, 84– 87, and 90–99 no later than February 16, 2024. Upon receipt of responses to reques...

Excerpt: ...el, noting that Plainti
¯'s objections and arguments were meritless, appeared to have been made in bad faith, and were unreasonable. The Court ordered Plainti
¯ to supplement his responses to certain special interrogatories, and also ordered that Plainti
¯ pay $2,000 in monetary sanctions to Defendant within twenty days of its Order. (Order Re: Motion to Compel, signed September 14, 2023.) Defendant now moves for evidentiary and monetary sanct...

Excerpt: ...pentry construction work. Plainti
¯ alleges that he was on top of a sca
¯old built by Defendant Bay Area High Reach, Inc. (“High Reach”) when it collapsed, including two guardrails, and Plainti
¯ fell from a height to the ground, resulting in severe injuries. Defendant FM now moves for summary judgment under CCP § 437c, or in the alternative, summary adjudication, against Plainti
¯. Plainti
¯ and Defendant High Reach both oppose the mot...

Excerpt: ... partition action may recover expenses incurred for the “common beneÞt” of the parties and property. (Code of Civ. Proc. § 874.010.) In partition actions, “common beneÞt” is deÞned as “the proper distribution of the respective shares and interests” in the property “by the ultimate judgment of the court.” (Orien v. Lutz (2017) 16 Cal.App.5th 957, 967–68.) B. Attorney's Fees The Court allows recover of attorney's fees in the a...

Excerpt: ...nt alleges that on February 22, 2023, Plainti
¯ entered into an agreement with Defendants for burial Services for Decedent. Complaint, paragraph 8, Exh. 2. Thereafter, the Complaint alleges that three of Decedent's adult children signed a declaration for cremation authorization, and an agreement for memorial services scheduled for March 2, 2023. Complaint, paragraph 9-10, Exh. 3. It also alleges at paragraph 17 that Defendants failed to fulÞll ...