Excerpt: ...AINED IN PART WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. As a threshold matter, the Court exercises its discretion to consider the Demurrer even though Defendant filed it more than a year after being served with the Summons and Complaint. Plaintiff has not opposed the Demurrer, and therefore has not demonstrated that it will be prejudiced. (Jackson v. Doe (2011) 192 Cal. App. 4th 742, 750.) Defendant's Demurrer to the Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth Causes of Action based ...

Excerpt: ...icle negligence arising from a collision on the 280 Freeway in San Mateo County. It alleges Defendant “was engaged in a race on the freeway with his motor vehicle with another unknown individual …. [and] caused his motor vehicle to strike Plaintiff's vehicle with such force that it caused Plaintiff's vehicle to fly off the highway and to rollover multiple times.” The Complaint refers to Defendant's actions as “despicable conduct, intentio...

Excerpt: ... Plaintiffs have demonstrated the records they seek to seal contain proprietary or confidential information. The records consist of testimony and documents furnished to the San Mateo County Assessment Appeals Board in conjunction with an application for changed assessment. Complaint, ¶ 10. Plaintiffs cite to Rev. and Tax. Code § 451, which provides that “All information requested by the assessor or furnished in the property statement shall be...

Excerpt: ... Alexander Mayer (“Mayer”) (collectively “Plaintiffs”), is ruled on as set forth below. The demurrer to the second, third, fourth, ninth, and tenth causes of action is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND as to Defendant Pepe Pimentel (“Pimentel”). Plaintiffs have not alleged facts to support these causes of action. There is no alleged misrepresentation by Pimentel to support the Second Cause of Action for Intentional Misrepresentation and T...

Excerpt: ...by Defendant Clark Pest Control Services, Inc. (CPCS) in 2016. Plaintiff alleges that, following a company event at a San Mateo County golf course on January 20, 2018, her supervisor, Chris Burkett, “made a racist comment to Plaintiff” using a racial slur. Complaint, ¶ 8. Plaintiff complained to her employer about the comment. Defendant conducted an investigation and found Plaintiff's claim unsubstantiated. Id., ¶ 9. Upon learning the resul...

Excerpt: ... California, Inc., Aetna Health Management, Inc. and Aetna Life Insurance Company (collectively, Aetna) is CONTINUED to March 18, 2021 at 2:00 p.m. in Department 22. Defendants have lodged Exhibit Nos. 1‐7 under seal pursuant to California Rules of Court (CRC), Rule 2.254(c). (See Notice of Lodging filed September 24, 2020.) Rule 2.254(c) states that “[e]xcept as provided in rules 2.250‐ 2.259 and 2.500‐2.506, an electronically filed docu...

Excerpt: ...ity cause of action, but DENIED as to the remaining claims. Id. As to Conco, Plaintiffs allege claims for negligence, premises liability, and loss of consortium. 9‐ 26‐19 Complaint. The parties appear to agree that the loss of consortium claim is predicated upon and dependent on the negligence and premises liability claims. Having reviewed the parties' briefing and supporting evidence, the Court concludes that triable issues of fact preclude ...

Excerpt: ...mpt from disclosure under Gov. Code § 6254(k), part of the California Public Records Act (CPRA), which provides that the Act does not require disclosure of “Records, the disclosure of which is exempted or prohibited pursuant to federal or state law, including, but not limited to, provisions of the Evidence Code relating to privilege.” In Citizens Oversight, Inc. v. Vu (2019) 35 Cal.App.5th 612, 618– 620, the Fourth District Court of Appeal...

Excerpt: ...ies the tentative issued on February 18 as follows: The motion is GRANTED and the notice is approved. The remainder of the tentative is adopted. The Court declines Plaintiff's counsel's request for attorneys' fees of 38% In exercising its discretion after reviewing the record and weighing the factors, the Court continues to believe that one‐third is an appropriate per centage. TENTATIVE OF FEBRUARY 18, 2021 Plaintiffs' motion for approval of a ...

Excerpt: ...on with Defendant Waterville, Inc. (“Waterville”). The parties dispute whether Defendant had authority to administer the arbitration. As a threshold matter, the Court has authority to determine issues of arbitrability. Courts defer “questions of arbitrability” to the arbitrator only where the parties have “clearly and unmistakably” agreed that the arbitrator decide those issues. Rent‐A‐Center, West, Inc. v. Jackson (2010) 561 US 6...

Excerpt: ...t, the parties are to contest the tentative and appear at the hearing to explain. Defendants' demurrer is SUSTAINED with leave to amend. In this case, six plaintiffs sue Defendant for violation of Business & Professions Code § 17529.5(a)(1),(2). None of the emails are attached to the SAC. The Court further notes that while the SAC identifies the number of emails each Plaintiff received, there is no further information about the specific emails t...

Excerpt: ...for Wrongful Foreclosure and Fifth Cause of Action for Violations of RESPA pursuant to Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. § 430.10(e). The Demurrer is OVERRULED with respect to Plaintiff's remaining causes of action. Any amended pleading is to be filed within 20 days of this order. First COA for Wrongful Foreclosure: The elements of a wrongful foreclosure cause of action are: “ ‘(1) [T]he trustee or mortgagee caused an illegal, fraudulent, or willfully...

Excerpt: ...h Plaintiff, the existence of which is established by the Complaint and judicially noticeable facts. Contrary to Defendant's contention, the contract does not need to be in writing since it falls under the exception set forth in Commercial Code section 2201(3)(a). Paragraphs 42 and 43 of the Complaint establishes the remaining elements of this claim. See CACI No. 2201. Defendant also contends this cause of action is barred by res judicata based o...

Excerpt: ...g to Defendants, “when dealing with injuries of the magnitude at issue in this case, the effect of sympathy and passion in the jury's deliberations on the subject of liability may well result in a miscarriage of justice.” MPA, p.8. Defendants assert that “Should the facts and evidence support a conclusion that Defendants are not liable for decedent's and Plaintiffs' injuries, presentation of evidence and argument regarding the tragic result...

Excerpt: ...ervention (FAC) is DENIED. Motions to strike are generally regarded with disfavor.1 (See Real v. Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies, Inc. (C.D. Cal., Feb. 8, 2016) 2016 WL 3220811, *2). Use of a motion to strike should be “cautious and sparing” to avoid a “procedural ‘line item veto.' ” (PH II, Inc. v. Superior Court (Ibershof) (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1680, 1683.) A motion to strike may seek to strike any “irrelevant, false or imprope...

Excerpt: ...t Equinox Equinox's motion for summary adjudication of Plaintiff Robert Pierre Alexander's first through fourth causes of action is DENIED. Equinox's motion for summary adjudication of Plaintiff's claim for punitive damages is GRANTED. 1. Plaintiff's first cause of action for retaliation in violation of Labor Code sections 1102.5, 6310, and 6311 Equinox contends that summary adjudication of Plaintiff's first cause of action for retaliation in vio...

Excerpt: ...ssity and the reasons for the discovery; (2) the diligence or lack of diligence of the party seeking the discovery or the hearing of a discovery motion, and the reasons that the discovery was not completed or that the discovery motion was not heard earlier; (3) any likelihood that permitting the discovery or hearing the discovery motion will prevent the case from going to trial on the date set, or otherwise interfere with the trial calendar, or r...

Excerpt: ...aintiffs J.B.B. et. al. (see 2‐10‐21 Opposition brief) pursuant to Code Civ. Proc. Sect. 128.5(g) is also DENIED. This Court, after reviewing the record and weighing the factors, exercises its discretion and denies both requests for sanctions. J.B.B. et. al. argues Defendants Fair et. al. should be sanctioned for Mr. Fair making false statements in his 12‐3‐20 declaration. J.B.B.'s request for sanctions is based on two sentences in Paragr...

Excerpt: ...s”) to Strike Portions of the First Amended Cross‐ Complaint (“FACC”) of CrossComplainants Tarun Gaur, Tringapps, Inc., Jinigram, LLC, Dial2Buy.com, LLC, and Ravi Kumar (“Cross‐ Complainants”), is ruled on as follows: (1) The Motion to Strike the portions of Paragraphs 1 and 2 in the Prayer for Relief on page 36, lines 21 and 24 that read “and that Gaur be restored all consideration” is GRANTED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND. CrossCompl...

Excerpt: ...ed by a means guaranteeing no later than next‐day delivery. See Code Civ. Proc. Sect. 1005(c). The Complaint properly states a cause of action for unlawful detainer (UD). Code Civ. Proc. Sect. 430.10(e). The Complaint alleges that after the initial lease term expired and a month‐to‐month tenancy was created, Plaintiffs served Defendants with a 60‐day Notice of Termination of Tenancy (Complaint, Ex. B), which stated that Plaintiffs intende...

Excerpt: ...itz LLC. The pleading alleges that Plaintiffs are members of Fox Investments, LLC. It does not allege, however, whether any Plaintiff is one of the “certain partners” of Fox Investments (Complaint para. 8) who purchased DeRitz LLC. The Complaint does not identify any member of DeRitz LLC. Further, the Complaint fails to state a cause of action for an accounting. “An action for an accounting may be brought to compel the defendant to account ...

Excerpt: ...vely “Cross‐Defendants”) to the First Amended Cross‐Complaint (“FACC”) of Cross‐Complainants Tarun Gaur (“Gaur”), Tringapps, Inc., Jinigram, LLC, Dial2Buy.com, LLC, and Ravi Kumar (collectively “CrossComplainants”), is ruled on as follows: (1) Demurrer to the Fourth Cause of Action for Declaratory Relief based on failure to state facts sufficient to support this claim, is OVERRULED. Cross‐Defendants fail to show that all o...

Excerpt: ...SAN MATEO INSURANCE COMMISSIONER OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, Applicant, v. CALIFORNIA INSURANCE COMPANY, a California corporation, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 19‐CIV‐06531 Assigned For All Purposes to Hon. Danny Y. Chou ORDER DENYING RESPONDENT'S SPECIAL ANTI‐SLAPP MOTION TO STRIKE On November 4, 2019, this Court appointed Applicant the Insurance Commissioner of California (Commissioner) the Conservator of Respondent C...

Excerpt: ...in November 2020, the LLC's counsel substituted out of the case, leaving the LLC without counsel. Plaintiffs then filed this motion, seeking to strike the LLC's previously filed answer, on the groundsthat an LLC, like a corporation, cannot represent itself in litigation. (See, generally, Merco Constr. Engineers, Inc. v. Municipal Court (1978) 21 Cal. 3d 724, 727.) Although Plaintiffs are correct that the LLC cannot represent itself in this action...

Excerpt: ...ances,” however, a plaintiff may sue under fictitious names, such as “Jane Doe.” (See Doe v. Lincoln Unified Sch. Dist. (2010) 188 Cal.App.4th 758, 766‐67.) The Court finds that the circumstances of this action are sufficiently exceptional to justify allowing Petitioner to proceed under a fictitious name. In this action Petitioner seeks a ruling that the evidence did not support a finding that Petitioner engaged in child abuse. Although P...