Excerpt: ...for Wrongful Foreclosure and Fifth Cause of Action for Violations of RESPA pursuant to Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. § 430.10(e). The Demurrer is OVERRULED with respect to Plaintiff's remaining causes of action. Any amended pleading is to be filed within 20 days of this order. First COA for Wrongful Foreclosure: The elements of a wrongful foreclosure cause of action are: “ ‘(1) [T]he trustee or mortgagee caused an illegal, fraudulent, or willfully...

Excerpt: ...s”) to Strike Portions of the First Amended Cross‐ Complaint (“FACC”) of CrossComplainants Tarun Gaur, Tringapps, Inc., Jinigram, LLC, Dial2Buy.com, LLC, and Ravi Kumar (“Cross‐ Complainants”), is ruled on as follows: (1) The Motion to Strike the portions of Paragraphs 1 and 2 in the Prayer for Relief on page 36, lines 21 and 24 that read “and that Gaur be restored all consideration” is GRANTED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND. CrossCompl...

Excerpt: ...ed by a means guaranteeing no later than next‐day delivery. See Code Civ. Proc. Sect. 1005(c). The Complaint properly states a cause of action for unlawful detainer (UD). Code Civ. Proc. Sect. 430.10(e). The Complaint alleges that after the initial lease term expired and a month‐to‐month tenancy was created, Plaintiffs served Defendants with a 60‐day Notice of Termination of Tenancy (Complaint, Ex. B), which stated that Plaintiffs intende...

Excerpt: ...itz LLC. The pleading alleges that Plaintiffs are members of Fox Investments, LLC. It does not allege, however, whether any Plaintiff is one of the “certain partners” of Fox Investments (Complaint para. 8) who purchased DeRitz LLC. The Complaint does not identify any member of DeRitz LLC. Further, the Complaint fails to state a cause of action for an accounting. “An action for an accounting may be brought to compel the defendant to account ...

Excerpt: ...vely “Cross‐Defendants”) to the First Amended Cross‐Complaint (“FACC”) of Cross‐Complainants Tarun Gaur (“Gaur”), Tringapps, Inc., Jinigram, LLC, Dial2Buy.com, LLC, and Ravi Kumar (collectively “CrossComplainants”), is ruled on as follows: (1) Demurrer to the Fourth Cause of Action for Declaratory Relief based on failure to state facts sufficient to support this claim, is OVERRULED. Cross‐Defendants fail to show that all o...

Excerpt: ...nor any facts suggesting Defendant engaged in “despicable conduct,” as is required by Section 3294. Specifically, Plaintiff alleges he dined at Defendant's restaurant, informed Defendant he had a peanut allergy, inquired whether the food he had ordered contained peanuts, and was told it did not. (Complaint, p. 5). Plaintiff alleges he became ill after consuming the food, which it turns out contained peanut ingredients. Id. For the reasons sta...

Excerpt: ...or Summary Judgment or in the alternative, Summary Adjudication, is ruled on as follows: Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED since they have failed to establish that there are no triable issues of material fact as to an essential element for each cause of action. Summary Adjudication is DENIED as to the First, Second, Fourth, Sixth and Seventh Causes of Action and GRANTED as to the Third and Fifth Causes of Action for the reasons se...

Excerpt: ... mail and electronic mail, respectively, to Consumer First Legal at 416 Hillview Drive in Milpitas, CA and to [email protected]. The email address is identified in the parties' stipulation as the address where Defendant may be notified of default. However, no appearance has been entered on behalf of Defendant in this action, and there is no indication in the record that the physical or email address to which the papers were served belong to Defend...

Excerpt: ...ek to invalidate the settlement agreement. “'Ordinarily where the rights involved in litigation arise upon a contract, courts refuse to adjudicate the rights of some of the parties to the contract if the others are not before it.'” Deltakeeper v. Oakdale Irrigation Dist., 94 Cal. App. 4th 1092, 1106 (2001) (quoting Nat'l Licorice Co. v. N.L.R.B., 309 U.S. 350, 363 (1940)). “Such a judgment or decree would be futile if rendered, since the co...

Excerpt: ...and the forum state to justify imposition of personal jurisdiction. Elkman v. National States Ins. Co. (2009) 173 CA4th 1305, 1313. In this case, Plaintiffs contend the Court has specific personal jurisdiction over Defendants Hart and HME Legal because Defendants (1) accepted payment out of funds administered in California; (2) intentionally offered their services to Plaintiffs in California; and (3) proposed California dispute resolution in a te...

Excerpt: ... Darrow (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant providing that any action arising out of the agreement be brought in Florida. (See Barnes Decl., Exh. A, ¶ 18.f.) A mandatory forum selection clause is valid and enforceable absent a showing that enforcement of such a clause would be unreasonable. (CQL Original Products, Inc. v. National Hockey League Players' Assn. (1995) 39 Cal.App.4th 1347, 1353–1354.) The plaintiff bears the burden of demonstrating t...

Excerpt: ...tiff paid $15,000 against a surety bond it issued to Defendant. Plaintiff contends it is entitled to reimbursement of the $15,000 payment on the grounds that it made payment out of the surety bond in good faith, that Defendant waived his right to contest the payment when he failed to specifically instruct Plaintiff not to make payment, and that Plaintiff has a statutory right to reimbursement under Civil Code section 2847. However, the pleadings ...