Excerpt: ...sement unit at 284 Mastick Avenue, San Bruno, CA 94066 (Property). (FAC, ¶ 3.) The unit was represented to Plaintiff as a legal one‐bedroom, one‐bathroom apartment, but it was actually not a legally rentable unit because the Property only had a certificate of occupancy as a duplex, and not as four individual units. (Id., ¶¶ 13, 19.) Defendants also allowed “dangerous housing conditions” to persist, including, but not limited to, inadeq...

Excerpt: ...iff's First Amended Complaint (FAC). This case stems from Plaintiff's unlawful detainer action, Case No. 19UDU00203. In that case, the parties entered into a Stipulation to Vacate Premises and to Transfer Unlawful Detainer Action to Civil Calendar (Stipulation). The Stipulation provides that “Plaintiff's claim for monetary damages, including but not limited to back rent, remains at issue in this matter. The parties stipulate and request that th...

Excerpt: ...sy v. Regents of the University of Cal. (2008) 44 Cal.4th 876, 883 (Miklosy).) The Court may “also consider matters that may be judicially noticed . . . .” (Brown v. Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. (2016) 247 Cal.App.4th 275, 279.) The Court does “not, however, assume the truth of contentions, deductions or conclusions of law.” (Guerrero v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. (2014) 230 Cal.App.4th 567, 571.) Finally, a “general demurrer does not ...

Excerpt: ...ixth causes of action. According to Defendants, those causes of action are barred by the California Uniform Trade Secret Act (CUTSA) and the economic loss rule. As explained below, the Court disagrees and therefore overrules the Demurrer in its entirety. A. Facts These facts are taken from the Complaint for Injunctive Relief and Damages (Complaint or Compl.). Blatt and Beigelman are the founders and former officers of Alios Biopharma Inc. (Alios)...

Excerpt: ...e is shown to the adverse party, the liberal rule of allowance prevails.” (Higgins v. Del Faro (1981) 123 Cal.App.3d 558, 564.) Following the reversal of summary judgment by the Court of Appeal, Plaintiff seeks to amend its complaint by: (1) deleting three causes of action rejected by the Court of Appeal; (2) adding a cause of action for judicial foreclosure; and (3) correcting, clarifying, and adding factual allegations to support the other th...

Excerpt: ...nt is not entitled to relief under Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (d) because Defendant cannot establish that the judgment is void without relying on extrinsic evidence— i.e., the truth of matters asserted in Plaintiff A.J.E. Investment Group, LLC's memorandum and declaration offered in support of its motion for summary judgment. (See Def.'s Request for Judicial Notice (RFJN), Exs. 3 and 7.) “In determining whether an order ...

Excerpt: ... § 437c, subd. (p)(1).) If the moving plaintiff satisfies this initial burden, the burden shifts to the defendant to set forth “specific facts” showing that a triable issue of material fact exists as to a cause of action or a defense. (Ibid.) Having reviewed the record, the Court finds that Plaintiff met its initial burden under Code of Civil Procedure section 437c, subdivision (p)(1) of establishing each element of its causes of action for ...

Excerpt: ...4 Cal.4th 876, 883.) The Court may “also consider matters that may be judicially noticed . . . .” (Brown v. Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. (2016) 247 Cal.App.4th 275, 279.) The Court does “not, however, assume the truth of contentions, deductions or conclusions of law.” (Guerrero v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. (2014) 230 Cal.App.4th 567, 571.) Defendant contends her demurrer should be sustained because Plaintiff's Complaint does not allege ...

Excerpt: ...s that the moving party on a demurrer attempt to speak with the party who filed the pleading. Simply exchanging emails is not enough. In this case, the declaration of counsel for Defendant does not clearly indicate whether counsel made any attempt to speak to counsel for Plaintiff. Nonetheless, the Court will consider the merits of the Demurrer in the interests of moving this case forward and in light of its tentative ruling below—which overrul...

Excerpt: ...al. (2008) 44 Cal.4th 876, 883.) The Court may “also consider matters that may be judicially noticed . . . .” (Brown v. Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. (2016) 247 Cal.App.4th 275, 279.) The Court does “not, however, assume the truth of contentions, deductions or conclusions of law.” (Guerrero v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. (2014) 230 Cal.App.4th 567, 571.) Plaintiff Carol and Charles Oushani (Plaintiffs) allege common counts for “money had...

Excerpt: ... moving party on a motion to strike attempt to speak with the party who filed the pleading. Simply exchanging emails is not enough. In this case, the declaration of counsel for Defendant does not clearly indicate whether counsel made any attempt to speak to counsel for Plaintiff. Nonetheless, the Court will consider the merits of the Motion to Strike in the interests of moving this case forward and in light of its tentative ruling below—which d...

Excerpt: ...Partners, LLC dba Half Moon Bay Golf Links (Defendant) claims $3,619.40 in deposition costs, but has only established that it is entitled to $3,537.65, as evidenced by the invoices. (See Streza Decl., ex. B [pp. 007 to 009].) Defendant does not adequately explain the discrepancy between the invoices and the amount claimed in its Memorandum of Costs (Costs Memo). Plaintiffs have withdrawn their objections to the invoiced amount. The Court therefor...

Excerpt: ...ntract, false claims, and unfair competition. On June 14, 2021, VLS filed its own cross‐complaint against the City for breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and claims arising under section 1983 of title 42 of the United States Code. I. BACKGROUND On December 19, 2017, after a competitive bidding process, the City awarded VLS a contract for construction of the Five Cities Lift Station, and modificati...

Excerpt: ... to the cause of action.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (p)(2).) “ ‘[T]he defendant has the initial burden to show that undisputed facts support each element of the affirmative defense . . . .' ” (Anderson v. Metalclad Insulation Corp. (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 284, 289‐290.) If the defendant carries that burden, it “causes a shift, and the opposing party is then subject to a burden of production of [its] own to make a prima facie show...

Excerpt: ...rney fees only when authorized by contract or statute. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 1021 & 1033.5, subd. (a)(10).) TEN6's First Amended Cross‐Complaint (FACC) does not seek attorney fees pursuant to contract. Rather, it seeks fees pursuant to Code Civ. Proc. section 1021.5. The Court previously struck TEN6's request for attorney fees in the original Cross‐Complaint, which also sought fees pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1021.5. (See Jan...

Excerpt: ...right of petition or free speech under the United States Constitution or the California Constitution in connection with a public issue shall be subject to a special motion to strike, unless the court determines that the plaintiff has established that there is a probability that the plaintiff will prevail on the claim.” In ruling on an anti‐SLAPP motion under this section, the Court engages in a two ‐step process. “First, the court decides...

Excerpt: ...s (TEN6) First Amended Complaint (FAC) (Demurrer) is OVERRULED. In the Demurrer, Genesys only challenges TEN6's third cause of action for violation of the Unfair Competition Law (UCL), Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200, et seq. Citing this Court's previous order sustaining its demurrer to the UCL cause of action and Linear Technology Corp. v. Applied Materials (2007) 152 Cal.App.4th 115 (Linear), Genesys contends TEN6 failed to cure the defects in its ...

Excerpt: ...Cal.4th 876, 883.) The Court may “also consider matters that may be judicially noticed . . . .” (Brown v. Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co. (2016) 247 Cal.App.4th 275, 279.) The Court does “not, however, assume the truth of contentions, deductions or conclusions of law.” (Guerrero v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co. (2014) 230 Cal.App.4th 567, 571.) A demurrer does not lie to only part of a cause action. (See Daniels v. Select Portfolio Servicing, ...

Excerpt: ...ion. (Soloway Decl., ¶7.) The FAC was served on January 18, 2022. (Id., ¶8.) The parties later disagreed about what the proper date for service was, with Defendants contending that February 22, 2022 was the proper date based on an extension of time to file due to electronic service. (Id., ¶¶13, 14 & Exs. 10, 11.) Defendants attempted to file their demurrer and special motion to strike on February 22, 2022, but the filing was rejected the foll...

Excerpt: ... account stated and open book account. It alleges the following facts: (1) third‐party Comenity Bank issued a credit account to Defendant Marjorie Anunciacion; (2) Defendant used, or authorized the use of, the credit account to make purchases and/or transactions; (3) Defendant received periodic billing statements for the credit account; (4) Defendant defaulted in making the required payments; and (5) Plaintiff was assigned and transferred all r...

Excerpt: ...e neglect under Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (b). According to Defendant, he was not aware of these proceedings because he did not receive a copy of the Complaint. (Corrected Chin Decl., ¶ 5) In light of statements set forth in Defendant's declaration, the Court finds that his motion should be granted pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 473.5. That section provides that “When service of a summons has not resulted in...

Excerpt: ...ded to Plaintiff under the Act. (See Civ Code, § 1794, subd. (d).) As a result, Plaintiff has filed this Motion, seeking an award of attorney fees and costs in the amount of $228,872.34 based on the lodestar amount and a 1.5 multiplier. Defendant does not dispute that Plaintiff is entitled to recover fees and costs but counters that the lodestar amount is inflated and that the Court should award a negative 0.2 multiplier. The Court agrees that s...

Excerpt: ...e neglect under Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (b). According to Defendant, he was not aware of these proceedings because he did not receive a copy of the Complaint. (Corrected Chin Decl., ¶ 5) In light of statements set forth in Defendant's declaration, the Court finds that his motion should be granted pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 473.5. That section provides that “When service of a summons has not resulted in...

Excerpt: ...nd denied as to RFP Nos. 7, 12, 13, 17, and 18. As a threshold matter, Defendant has waived her objections to the RFPs. Plaintiff's RFPs, Set One were served on July 29, 2021 with responses due on October 1, 2021. (Achermann Decl., ¶ 3.) Defendant did not, however, serve her responses on October 1, 2021, and no extension of time to respond was sought by Defendant. (Id., ¶ 4.) Instead, Defendant served her responses on November 5, 2021, 35 days ...

Excerpt: ... the Court takes judicial notice of the pleadings and docket in that case, which both parties have referenced in their papers. (See Larson v. UHS of Rancho Springs, Inc. (2014) 230 Cal.App.4th 336, 343 [when ruling on a demurrer, a court may take judicial notice of the plaintiffs' prior pleadings and positions in the same action as well as those from prior lawsuits].) The parties appear to agree that the statute of limitations governing Plaintiff...