Excerpt: ...e as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Code Civ. Proc. § 437c(c). A defendant has met the burden of showing that a cause of action has no merit if that party has shown that one or more elements of the cause of action cannot be established, or that there is a complete defense to that cause of action. Code Civ. Proc. § 437c(p)(2). Once the defendant has met that burden, the burden shifts to plai...

Excerpt: ...t's duty of loyalty, which if proven would be a fiduciary breach. This claim would be subject to a 4‐ year statute of limitations. Plaintiff knew of the dual agency in October 2015 (Moving P&A at 16; FAC para. 58), which is less than four years before the Complaint filed. Since at least one alleged claim is not time‐barred, the demurrer fails to dispose of the causes of action. 2. Second, Third and Fourth Causes of Action. Demurrer is SUSTAIN...

Excerpt: ...Interrogatory No. 12.1 (Set One). Although the motion is not captioned as a motion to compel a further response per Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.300, that is the motion's clear intent, and both parties treat the motion as such, and thus the Court deems the motion as seeking to compel a further response to Plaintiff's Form Interrogatory No. 12.1. The motion is GRANTED. The LLC members' names and contact information is discoverable A civil litigant's ri...

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: ...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: ...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: .... 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: ...t is GRANTED‐IN‐PART, in the amount of $50,979, which appears to be a conservative estimate of the amount owed. Plaintiff's Application satisfies the requirements of §483.010(a), namely, (1) the claim upon which the attachment is based is one upon which an attachment may be issued, (2) Plaintiff has established the probable validity of its claim (see Code of Civ. Proc. § 481.190, “more probable than not…”), (3) the attachment is not s...

Excerpt: ...ct and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Code Civ. Proc. § 437c(c). A defendant has met the burden of showing that a cause of action has no merit if that party has shown that one or more elements of the cause of action cannot be established, or that there is a complete defense to that cause of action. Code Civ. Proc. § 437c(p)(2). Once the defendant has met that burden, the burden shifts to plaintiff to show that a tr...

Excerpt: ...riginally named as a defendant in the Complaint, was dismissed from this action without prejudice after he brought a Motion to Quash based on lack of personal jurisdiction. (See court's August 21, 2018 order.) Plaintiff then sought leave to amend to file a proposed First Amended Complaint to add allegations to support that Grecu is the alter ego of Defendant Interstates Vanlines, LLC (“IVL”). Plaintiff's motion was denied without prejudice. (...

Excerpt: ...Defendant expressly agreed in writing that he would pay the County for the treatment and services in accordance with the regular rates and terms of the Medical Center. UMF #3, 4. The County performed its obligations pursuant to the written agreements. UMF # 2. Defendant failed to pay for the medical treatment and services rendered to him, and the County has been damaged in the amount of 22,041.06. UMF # 5‐11. With respect to the claim for servi...

Excerpt: ...Civ. Proc. § 1008(b). On 10‐10‐18, Plaintiff dismissed its entire case against BJ Interstate. Thereafter, on 4‐5‐ 19, BJ Interstate moved for sanctions against Plaintiff under Code Civ. Proc. § 128.5, asserting the same arguments it now rehashes here. BJ Interstate argued in the prior motion, inter alia, that Plaintiff knew or should have known from the day he filed this case, and certainly from the time Plaintiff filed his First Amende...

Excerpt: ...Defendants contend the motion is moot because they provided signed verifications on September 3rd and 4th. Defendants, however, cite no authority in support of their contention that the motion is moot. There is, however, authority to the contrary. In Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pac. Healthcare Consultants, 148 Cal. App. 4th 390, 408 (2007), the court concluded that untimely service of discovery responses does not deprive the trial cour...

Excerpt: ...y finds this matter involves confidential business plans, valuation and financing strategies, negotiation and collaboration tactics, internal market research, and private corporate structure and financial information. The overriding interest supports sealing the record. The Court expressly finds there is an overriding interest in protecting Defendant's information from public disclosure. A substantial probability exists that the overriding intere...

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: ...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.�...