Excerpt: ...d the omission, but expressly directed Defendant BSI, “In the future, Defendant must comply with the meet and confer requirement prior to filing a motion to strike. (See Code of Civ. Proc. 435.5.)” (Minute Order, April 11, 2018 (last paragraph). Instead of meeting and conferring in person or by telephone, Defendant BSI merely sent a letter. The supporting declaration does not indicate any attempt to meet in person or by phone, as specified by...

Excerpt: ...the order to arbitration or until such earlier time as the court specifies. (C.C.P. sec. 1281.4.) The court previously ordered that the parties submit Plaintiff's non‐PAGA claims to arbitration after Defendant Binary Capital Management, LLC (“Binary”) moved to compel arbitration. (See Baker Decl., Exhs. 2, 3.) Plaintiff then proceeded to pay AAA's arbitration filing fee. (Baker Decl., paras. 5, 6, and Exhs. 5, 6.) Binary apparently became i...

Excerpt: ...is interrogatory, limited to prior incidents (dating back three years before Plaintiff's alleged incident) in the women's department of the Macy's in question. “PREMISES” is defined in the interrogatories to mean the entire Macy's store, which is overbroad given that the alleged incident occurred in the women's department, which itself is sizeable. Defendant's relevance argument lacks merit. Evid. Code § 210 (broadly defining relevant eviden...

Excerpt: ...ndants concede they have no breach of fiduciary duty claim against Plaintiff and do not intend to assert one, appears outside the scope of permissible discovery as to this responding party. Code Civ. Proc. § 2017.010. Plaintiff's request for monetary sanctions is DENIED. 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 o...

Excerpt: ...) Defendant's Motion to Compel Documents Responsive to Defendant's requests for production of documents (set one and two), is GRANTED. Plaintiff is to produce all responsive documents, to the extent any exist, as to these requests. Alternatively, as Defendant proposed, Plaintiff may instead provide a signed verification that the documents provided by CrossDefendant Nordeman are the only documents that exist responsive to Defendant's requests. (3)...

Excerpt: ...ers, Inv. v. Municipal Court (1978) 21 Cal.3d 724. Therefore, on the court's own motion, the complaint is stricken with 30 days' leave to file an amended pleading if plaintiff retains an attorney. The demurrer is moot. 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 re...

Excerpt: ...version for the Court's signature. Defendant correctly notes that cases should normally be prosecuted under the parties' true names. Code Civ. Proc. § 367. However, this rule is not absolute. Courts have authority to permit the use of pseudonyms in various circumstances, such as where doing so is necessary to protect against harassment, injury, embarrassment, and social stigmatization. See, e.g., Does I thru XXIII v. Advanced Textile Corp. (9th ...

Excerpt: ...tion of plaintiff's total recovery nor defendant's proportionate share of that liability. 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: ... the subject property. Thus, the two year statute of limitations under Code of Civil Procedure section 339(1) does not apply to Defendant. Although section 339(1) “generally” applies to claim for professional negligence (Thomson v. Canyon (2011) 198 Cal. App. 4th 594, 606), the limitations periods of sections 337.1 and 337.15 are specific to claim for design defects in the construction of real property. Sections 337.1 and 337.15 apply to a cl...

Excerpt: ...ntially completed on September 19, 2007. (5th Am. Complaint ¶ 51.) Therefore, the deadline was September 18, 2017. Plaintiff named the AC&H for the first time in the Third Amended Complaint, which was filed October 24, 2017, one month after the 10‐year deadline. Plaintiff contends that AC&H was timely named in June 22, 2017, when Plaintiff substituted AC&H for Doe 16. The argument lacks merit. “Even if a plaintiff meets the other requirement...

Excerpt: ...August 31, 2018 at 9:00 a.m. in the Law and Motion Department so that the parties may meet and confer. Defendant is required to file, no later than 7 days prior to the new hearing date, a code‐compliant declaration stating either (1) the parties have met and conferred in person or by telephone and (a) the parties have resolved the objections raised in the motion, which shall be taken off calendar or (b) the parties did not reach an agreement re...

Excerpt: ...t the scope of these requests to information pertaining to conduct similar to the allegations in Plaintiff's Complaint. Plaintiff also agreed to limit the timeframe from January 1, 2010 to the present. (Decl. Loh ¶ 7, Exhibit 3.)  GRANTED as to Request for Production (Set One), Request No. 18 and Request for Production (Set Two), Request No. 57. Defendant iPASS, INC. is ordered to serve full and complete, verified responses to the foregoing d...

Excerpt: ...LEAVE TO AMEND. Plaintiff has not established that he is entitled to recover punitive damages. (See Gov. Code § 818 [“Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a public entity is not liable for damages awarded under Section 3294 of the Civil Code or other damages imposed primarily for the sake of example and by way of punishing the defendant.”.) The motion to strike the relief sought in paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of the Relief Sought & Compensa...

Excerpt: ...for “Wrongful Trustee Sale,” the claim lacks merit for multiple reasons, first because Eagle Vista played no part in the trustee's sale. Plaintiff contends the banking entities that foreclosed upon and sold Plaintiff's home, whom Plaintiff has dismissed from the case with prejudice, lacked the authority to foreclose and failed to comply with various statutory requirements pertaining to a non‐judicial foreclosure sale. This argument/cause of...

Excerpt: ...les of Court, Rule 2.112, including by separately listing each cause of action, its nature, and the defendant to whom it is directed. The demurrer based on failure to comply with the claims presentation requirement in the Government Claims Act (Gov. Code §§ 900, et seq.), is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND for Plaintiff to allege facts to support such compliance. Although Plaintiff generally alleges he complied with the claims presentation requir...

Excerpt: ...ubstantive allegation is that Old South performed services for which it received payment from Crosscomplainants. The allegations, if proven, could support a jury's finding that Old South was a party to the implied‐in‐fact contract with Cross‐complainants. Demurrer to the fourth cause of action (unfair business practice) is overruled. A corporate plaintiff may not bring a representative suit under the Unfair Competition Law. (Linear Technolo...

Excerpt: ...mplaint (TAC). On 2‐8‐18, when Defendants filed the motion, the operative Complaint was Plaintiff Ryce's First Amended Complaint (FAC), filed 3‐17‐17. Thereafter, on 3‐18‐18, Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint (SAC), and then on 6‐13‐18, filed a Third Amended Complaint (TAC), which currently serves as the operative pleading. Defendants have filed a Demurrer to the TAC, which is set for a hearing on 8‐21‐18. The TAC sup...

Excerpt: ...bd. (a).) Further, NICOLOSI does not specify in the Notice of Motion or Points and Authorities that the motion is based on any judicially noticeable matter. (Id. section. 437, subd. (b.)) Even if the Court were to consider the matters set forth in the moving Declaration of Franck, the Court would find that the Roe amendment is not necessarily improper. Although L & J possibly knew the name “Axalta” when filing the cross‐complaint, the oppos...

Excerpt: ...vice of the verified responses, or any supplemental verified response, or on or before any specific later date to which the parties agree in writing, or the propounding party waives any right to compel further response. (C.C.P. sec. 2030.300(c).) The court lacks jurisdiction to order further response where a motion to compel is not timely filed. (Vidal Sassoon, Inc. v. Sup. Ct. (1983) 147 Cal.App.3d 681, 685.) There is no dispute that Plaintiff s...

Excerpt: ...ation was made before, when and to what judge, what order or decisions were made, and what new or different facts, circumstances, or law are claimed to be shown.” (See Code of Civ. Proc. § 1008(a).) Further, notwithstanding this procedural defect, Plaintiff has not presented any new or different facts, circumstances or law to warrant reconsideration of the Order. Defendant's request for judicial notice is GRANTED. If the tentative ruling is un...

Excerpt: ...urt previously ruled on Defendant's motion to tax costs, the judgment had not been satisfied as of the time Plaintiff claimed costs. Plaintiff filed the present motion on June 26, 2018. There is no evidence before the court that Defendant satisfied the judgment before Plaintiff filed the present motion. Therefore, the motion is timely. Plaintiff's motion sets forth a prima facie showing of hours incurred for enforcement of judgment, as well as ea...

Excerpt: ...such as oversight, inadvertence, neglect, mistake or other cause, are insufficient grounds to deny the motion unless accompanied by bad faith.” (Silver Organizations Ltd. v. Frank (1990) 217 Cal. App. 3d 94, 99 [permitting crosscomplaint on “eve of trial”].) The provision for allowing of compulsory cross‐complaints “shall be liberally construed to avoid forfeiture of causes of action.” (CCP § 426.50.) A “strong showing of bad faith...

Excerpt: ...e time for service is increased by “two court days.” (Code of Civ. Proc. § 437c, subd. (a)(2).) The 75th calendar day before the July 6, 2018 hearing date was April 22, 2018, a Sunday. Adding “two court days” extends the service deadline to Thursday, April 19, 2018. Defendant served this motion on Friday, April 20, 2018, one day too late. “The statutory language regarding minimum notice is mandatory, not directive.” (Urshan v. Musici...

Excerpt: ...onic service. 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: ...o less restrictive means to protect 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. ...