Excerpt: ... motion earlier. However, under Rule 2.21, any response to an in limine motion may be filed as late as the first appearance in the Department of the Presiding Judge “for trial assignment.” Rule 2.21 implies that in limine motions are brought to the trial judge, not the Law & Motion Department. Plaintiff's argument that an early ruling would eliminate the need of conducting discovery (Reply at 2:26‐28) lacks merit. A plea of nolo contendre �...

Excerpt: ...hey repeatedly refer to the moving Defendants collectively, despite the fact that Defendants are alleged to have different roles in causing the incident in question. Any differences in the analysis with respect to each Defendant is noted below. Gross Negligence The moving Defendants contend, first, that Plaintiff's causes of action for gross negligence must fail “as there is insufficient evidence as a matter of law to establish any triable issu...

Excerpt: ...on. If Plaintiff does not comply, then the Court will strike the motion instead. (Code of Civ. Proc. Sect. 128.7 (“unsigned paper shall be stricken unless omission of the signature is corrected promptly after being called to the attention of the attorney or party”).) If Plaintiff cures the omission, then the Court will rule as set forth below. 2. Regarding Defendant's citation to People v. Investco Mgmt. & Dev. the Court reminds Defendants' c...

Excerpt: ... CONTINUED to January 17, 2020 at 9 a.m. in the Law & Motion Department to allow Plaintiff time to conduct jurisdictional discovery. Defendants' alternative Motion to Dismiss on grounds of inconvenient forum (forum non conveniens) is DENIED, for the reasons stated below. Personal jurisdiction is determined by evidence, not allegations Without belaboring the issue, the Court notes that when a Defendant challenges the Court's personal jurisdiction ...

Excerpt: ...) the claim upon which the attachment is based is one upon which an attachment may be issued, (2) Petitioner has established the probable validity of her claim (see Code Civ. Proc. § 481.190, “more probable than not…”), (3) the attachment is not sought for a purpose other than the recovery on the claim upon which the attachment is based, and (4) the amount to be secured is greater than zero. Code Civ. Proc. § 483.090(a). Based on the alle...

Excerpt: ...tive ruling, Plaintiffs served a “partial joint response” to Defendants' requests for production. In conjunction with that response, Plaintiffs produced approximately 600 pages of documents. Subsequent to the filing of this motion, Plaintiffs produced approximately 1900 electronic files. In this motion, Defendants emphasize that Plaintiff's production was deficient. According to Defendants, “[Plaintiffs] have disobeyed [the court's July 23]...

Excerpt: ...b)‐16(d) is GRANTED. These costs are barred by the oral settlement agreement between the parties entered into on April 24, 2018. The transcript of the April 24, 2018 hearing shows that Defendant's counsel, Matthew James, stated on the record: …And just so I'm absolutely in an abundance of caution, that the parties are agreeing to incur their own attorney's fees and costs relating to this litigation except as provided for by Mr. Macias [Plaint...

Excerpt: ... no merit. CCP §437c(p)(2). The complaint asserts causes of action for products' liability based on defective design, defective manufacturing and failure to warn, negligence based on design and manufacturing defects and failure to warn, loss of consortium and negligent infliction of emotional distress. The undisputed material facts and supporting evidence establish the following: Defendant was not involved with the installation of its product. U...

Excerpt: ...nt. The parties to this case are all currently involved in another pending case—an earlier‐filed action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, captioned Genesys Telecommunications Laboratories, Inc. v. Talkdesk, Inc. et. al., Case No. 1:19‐CV‐00695‐TWPDML. In the Indiana case, parties Talkdesk, Morales, Strahan, Hertel, and Manno, who are all Plaintiffs in this case and Defendants in the Indiana case, ...

Excerpt: ...aining broadly‐worded arbitration clauses. 8‐16‐19 Maley Decl., Ex. 2 at § 11, Ex. 6. Morales does not appear to dispute that the arbitration clause in one or both of the agreements would apply to her asserted claims against Genesys. However, she contends the agreements are unconscionable and/or voidable under Labor Code § 925, and thus should not be enforced. Because unconscionability is a contract defense, the party asserting the defens...

Excerpt: .... I. Issue One – First Cause of Action (Declaratory Relief) The Stadler‐Freeman deed reserved a right of way that is 50‐feet wide, designated for “road purposes and for public utilities.” The reservation does not indicate any specific dimensions for road purposes or for utilities. Certain defendants received easements over the 50‐foot right of way, but Defendants' deeds do not specify any width of their respective easements. Therefore...

Excerpt: ...aint (SAC) is GRANTED. Code Civ. Proc. §§ 435‐437; Civ. Code § 3294. As a general rule, punitive damages are disfavored and are awarded “with the greatest caution” and only in the “clearest of cases.” Beck v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (1976) 54 Cal.App.3d 347. Mere negligence, even gross negligence, is not sufficient. Ebaugh v. Rabkin (1972) 22 Cal.App.3d 891, 894. The law requires that a plaintiff seeking punitive damages prove...

Excerpt: ...other state agencies. Those agencies are not a party to this action. As a result, Defendants must seek the documents through a third‐party subpoena pursuant to People ex rel. Lockyer v. Superior Court, 122 Cal. App. 4th 1060, 1078–80 (2004). Defendants have provided no argument or discussion relating to Lockyer. Defendants contend that, in accordance with CCP § 2031.230, the People are required to indicate whether a diligent inquiry has been...

Excerpt: ...ute of limitations defense bars this Cause of Action as a matter of law. Additionally, triable issues of material fact exist pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc. Section 437c as to the substantial nature of alleged stream diversions, including with regard to SSUMF numbers 2, 4, 6, 9, 15, and 16. Plaintiffs' dispute of these facts are supported by the depositions of Deleon, Leicester, Lt. Ober and Randi Adair and the declaration of Crystal Chau. As to t...

Excerpt: ...pposition brief, filed 9‐30‐19. Defense counsel is reminded to comply with the service requirements set forth in Code Civ. Proc. § 1005(b)‐(c) (Opp. briefs must be served by means of next‐day delivery). Plaintiff seeks leave to file a FAC adding a new Defendant (Fidelity National Title Co., or FNTC) and several new causes of action, all based on the alleged non‐disclosure of an additional easement encumbering the property (the “1954 ...

Excerpt: ...t the privacy interest. Absent sealing, the private information would be publicly available. 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 immediately, and no formal order pursuant to Rule 3.1312 or any other notice is required as the tentative ruling affords sufficient notice to the parties. ...

Excerpt: ...nt Christian Giguiere's (“Defendant”) motion to set aside sister state judgment is UNOPPOSED and GRANTED. On March 28, 2019, Judgment was entered against Defendant in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Kings, as Defendant had executed an Affidavit of Confession of Judgment. The Confession of Judgment was signed by one person, Christian Robert Giguiere, on behalf of “Christian Robert Giguiere” and “Christian Giguiere.�...

Excerpt: ...r, have not filed an opposition to Defendant's motion. Accordingly, based on Defendant's moving papers, the motion is granted. If Plaintiffs' papers in support of their request to continue the hearing is to be believed, Defendant has sales representatives based in California, and sells more of the subject airplane to buyers in California than to any other state. These facts, however, were not included in Plaintiffs' declaration in support of the ...

Excerpt: ...cessary to prove his one‐line allegation that “at all relevant times, LOSK and HDC were alter egos of each other.” (Complaint ¶7.) Under California law, to invoke the alter ego doctrine, a plaintiff must show (1) that there is such a unity of interest and ownership that the separate personalities no longer exist, and (2) if a separate corporate existence is acknowledged, an “inequitable result” will follow. Automotriz v. Resnick (1957)...

Excerpt: ...ncurred a negative balance of $7,583.78 as of 12‐ 27‐16, and breached the agreement by failing to pay the amount owed. The burden shifted to Defendant to come forward with evidence creating a triable issue of fact as to the asserted claims, which Defendant has not done. The motion is unopposed, and none of Plaintiff's asserted material facts is disputed. Plaintiff must seek costs and attorney's fees via a post‐Judgment Memorandum of Costs a...

Excerpt: ...l causes of action alleged against the moving party. As set forth below, the motion does not dispose of all of Plaintiff's claims. B. Objections to Evidence. The Court exercises its discretion to not rule on Safeco's objections. None of the evidence to which Safeco objects was material to disposition of the motion. (Code of Civ. Proc. Sect. 437c, subd. (q) (court need rule “only on those objections to evidence that it deems material to its disp...

Excerpt: ...e years of seizure of the property as required by Health & Safety Code §11488.4(i)(3). As a result of the order deeming facts to be admitted, interested party admitted that Case No. 16‐NF‐ 014461‐A is the underlying and related criminal case within the meaning of Health & Safety Code §11488.4(i)(3). Petitioner offers no evidence of a conviction in that case. While petitioner provides evidence of a conviction in a different case, that conv...

Excerpt: ... sufficient evidence to determine that the settlement is within the range of the settling defendant's proportionate share of liability. There is no evidence as to an approximation of Cross‐complainant TOT's total recovery nor Ruby Plumbing's proportionate share of that liability. If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court. Thereafter, counsel for Ruby Plumbing and Electrical Supply, Inc. shall prepare a writt...

Excerpt: ...ablished the existence of an arbitration agreement, and there is no basis to deny enforcement of the agreement under CCP §1281.2. Plaintiffs do not dispute that their claims for breach of fiduciary duty and dissolution of the A Family Affair Elder Care LLC are subject to arbitration under the LLC's operating agreement. They contend, however, that the claims for partition of the Vera and Canyon properties are “non‐arbitrable” and that, as a...

Excerpt: ...d responses have been served, no POS nor any evidence regarding the date or method of service was provided. In addition, the copies of the responses attached to the declaration of Benjamin Graves do not include a verification as to Sets Two and Three. Unverified responses are the equivalent of no response at all. Appleton v. Superior Court (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 632. The request for sanctions is also GRANTED pursuant to CCP §2033.280(c). Plaintif...