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: ...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: ...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: ...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: ... (“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: ...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: ...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: ...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: ...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: ...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: ...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: ...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: ...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...