Excerpt: ...r Relief seeking punitive damages are HEREBY STRICKEN. “In California there is no separate cause of action for punitive damages.” (McLaughlin v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. (1994) 23 Cal.App.4th 1132, 1164.) Plaintiff therefore cannot allege exemplary damages as a separate cause of action, but rather must seek such damages in connection with an underlying cause of action. Thus, Plaintiff is given leave to amend to allege, if possible, such d...

Excerpt: ...ndant ED 1005 BM, LLC purchased this property, which property is next door to the property at issue in this case located at 621 California Dr., Burlingame. Part of 621 California may be in a picture included in the complaint in the Hatch v. Kantz action. During the course of the litigation, Judge Fineman, at one point, talked to some people who worked at the garage adjacent to Ms. Hatch's home. In addition, during the case, she had communications...

Excerpt: ...cifically argue that that negligence per se is not a recognized cause of action in California. However, in Sierra‐Bay Fed. Land Bank Assn. v. Superior Court (1991) 227 Cal.App.3d 318, 336, the court held that a plaintiff must prove the following four elements in order to establish negligence per se: (1) defendant violated a statute, ordinance or regulation of a public entity, (2) the violation proximately caused his injury, (3) the injury resul...

Excerpt: ...bjection to Preliminary Injunction Bond, PARTIES ARE TO APPEAR WITH PLAINTIFFS TO BE PREPARED TO ADDRESS: (1) It does not appear that a publicly redacted copy of Plaintiffs' ex parte application was filed at the time that the unredacted copy of Plaintiffs' ex parte application was lodged conditionally under seal. (See Cal. Rules of Court (“CRC”) Rule 2.551(b)(5).) If no publicly redacted copy was filed, Plaintiffs should address how the court...

Excerpt: ... was not served on Plaintiff, and because Defendants' supporting declarations did not include exhibits which were purported to be attached to both. Plaintiff, however, has indicated that he was able to obtain the opposition papers from the Court's website, and Plaintiff has submitted a reply brief. Accordingly, Plaintiff has not demonstrated prejudice from the alleged lack of service of Defendants' opposition. As a result, the Court has considere...

Excerpt: ...e Defendants and Cross‐Complainants' motion to compel cross‐defendant Maha Naber to appear for deposition is GRANTED. Cross‐ def Naber shall appear for deposition with 15 days of service of notice of the court's order. The deposition shall be conducted remotely through Zoom or a comparable platform. CCP §2025.450 provides that if, after service of a deposition notice, a party fails to appear without having served a valid objection under CC...

Excerpt: ...ic service address for counsel being served. The Court cannot determine from the moving papers and the Proof of Service, filed 6‐30‐20, whether Plaintiff confirmed that the email address at which it served the motion on Defendant's counsel was the appropriate email address. If Plaintiff can demonstrate that it confirmed the email address when it served the motion, then the Court rules on Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment or alternativel...

Excerpt: ...a cause of action as to either the first or second cause of action alleged. Plaintiff has dismissed the third cause of action. A demurrer is treated as admitting all material facts properly pleaded, but not contentions, deductions, or conclusions of fact or law. San Diego Hospital Assn. v. Superior Court (1994) 30 Cal.App.4th 8, 12. A defendant may object to a complaint through documents upon which a court may properly take judicial notice. Code ...

Excerpt: ...urrently pending), Case No. 19CIV04335, entitled BAPC, LLC v. Todd Vance (case dismissed on 9‐5‐19), and Case No. FAM0120769, entitled Todd Vance and Donna Vance (dissolution action). As set forth in the pleadings in the above‐referenced cases, Bradshaw previously represented Vance as his attorney in Vance's dissolution action, Case No. FAM0120769. Bradshaw later sued Vance to collect allegedly unpaid legal fees in Case No. 19CIV04210. Brad...

Excerpt: ...��Beverly Act) is SUSTAINED without leave to amend. Generally, the Song‐Beverly Consumer Warranty Act applies to buyers of consumer goods, which are defined as “any new product or part thereof that is used, bought, or leased for use primarily for personal, family, or household purposes, except for clothing and consumables. (Civ. Code § 1971, subd. (a). The only “used” goods within the definition are assistive devices sold at retail. (Id....

Excerpt: ...its May 8, 2020 COVID 19 Emergency Order Regarding Tentative Rulings, Briefing, and Hearings on Pending Matters in the Civil Law and Motion Department. That order contemplates a briefing schedule different than the statutory deadlines. Defendants, however, filed their reply brief pursuant to the statutory deadlines and the Court did not realize that Defendants had filed a reply when it issued its first tentative. The Hon. Nancy L. Fineman apologi...

Excerpt: ...e pleadings lies where the Complaint, or the cause of action at issue, “does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against that defendant.” Code Civ. Proc. § 438(c). As with a demurrer, a motion for judgment on the pleadings must be denied if the allegations state any valid cause of action; it is not necessary that the cause of action be the one intended by plaintiff. Quelimane Co., Inc. v. Stewart Title Guar. Co. (1998)...

Excerpt: ...CHA KUANG, GUO MIN LI, ANTHAN WEICHAUN HE, HUA BIN HE, AND LIZI HU TENTATIVE RULING: The motion to enforce Settlement Agreement, filed by Defendants MAStar Professional Corp., Acumentum Penny Lane, Woodland EPA, Jenny Huang, Mingcha Kuang, Guo Min LI, Anthan Weichuan He, Lizi Hue, Hua Bin He, Yung‐Jen Hsu, and Charles Koo (“Defendants”) and Crosscomplainants Acumentum Penny Lane, Mingcha Kuang, Guo Min Li, Anthan Weichaun He, Hua Bin He, an...

Excerpt: ...TED for the reasons set forth below. Judgment shall be entered in the form set forth in the Arbitrator's Award, issued December 27, 2019. Service and Filing of Petition As an initial matter, Respondent claims that the Petition should be dismissed because Petitioners did not attach a copy of the parties' arbitration agreement to the Petition, and because Petitioners did not serve First Hawaiian Bank with a notice of the Petition. Both claims are u...

Excerpt: ...old and delivered, money lent, and money paid. (See Complaint ¶ CC‐1(b).) Since those claims are unaddressed, summary judgment is not possible. The motion for summary adjudication of issues is GRANTED as to the 1st cause of action for breach of contract and the 2nd cause of action as to common counts open book account and account stated. A. Procedural Rulings Defendant's Objections 1 through 6 as to Common Counts and 1 through 12 as to Breach ...

Excerpt: ...ot malicious or wanton in her use and maintenance of her property at 392 Greenbriar Road, Half Moon Bay, California; 2. Under the theory of trespass, Defendant John Lorts was not malicious or wanton in his use and maintenance of his property at 392 Greenbriar Road, Half Moon Bay, California; 3. Under the theory of nuisance, Defendant Colleen Lorts was not malicious or wanton in her use and maintenance of her property at 392 Greenbriar Road, Half ...

Excerpt: ...o judgment as a matter of law. A privileged statement is not defamatory, as a statement must be non‐privileged in order to be proven defamatory. Lemke v. Sutter Roseville Medical Center (2017) 8 Cal.App.5th 1292, 1298. As Defendants have argued, “Application of the privilege involves a two‐step analysis. The defendant has the initial burden of showing the allegedly defamatory statement was made on a privileged occasion, whereupon the burden...

Excerpt: ...ode §15657.01). (See Application ¶6b.) Plaintiff does not allege a cause of action for financial elder abuse, and the Application is not supported by any evidence of elder abuse. The first and second causes of action are for open book account and account stated, but the Application offers no evidence supporting either of these common counts, other than a copy of one invoice. The invoice contains suggestions that Plaintiff performed and the rate...

Excerpt: ...assment and Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress Pursuant to CCP § 527.6 §§§ (a)(1), (B) (1)(2)(3, & (L) and with its Judgment discharge ability Preempted Pursuant to USC 11 § 523(a)(4)” is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND based on uncertainty and failure to allege facts sufficient to support a cause of action. A demurrer for uncertainty may be sustained where the complaint is so bad that defendant cannot reasonably determine what iss...

Excerpt: ...XHIBITS ATTACHED TO THE DECLARATIONS OF BENJAMIN SCHWAN (“SCHWAN DECL.”) AND JONATHAN C. SANDERS (“SANDERS MSJ DECL.”) IN SUPPORT OF THE MSJ. TENTATIVE RULING: ACCREDITED DEBT RELIEF's motion to seal portions of its moving papers in support of Motion for Summary Judgment is granted as to the Memorandum of Points and Authorities, Separate Statement of Undisputed Facts, Exhibits A through H and J through O of the Declaration of Schwan, and ...

Excerpt: ...art. Plaintiff's request for attorney's fees is also GRANTED, in part. Defendant does not oppose Plaintiff's request to enter judgment pursuant to CCP § 664.6. Consequently, judgment shall be entered setting forth the terms of the parties' settlement agreement. Plaintiff also requests that the Court enforce the parties' agreement under § 664.6. In this case, the parties' agreement awards the Gill Vista, 24770 Soto Road, and 998 Governors Bay Dr...

Excerpt: ...PORATION'S REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (SET ONE) WITHIN 7 DAYS OF THE ORDER. TENTATIVE RULING: Defendants' motion to compel further responses is DENIED as to Request No. 23. For this request, Defendants seek Plaintiffs' source code for the games at issue. Plaintiffs' source code constitutes a trade secret. (See CACI No. 4402.) Plaintiffs' evidence shows that the source code is secret and that Plaintiffs have made reasonable efforts to kee...

Excerpt: ...�PART and OVERRULED‐INPART, as set forth below. As an initial matter, the Court notes that the FAC and Defendants' Demurrer papers lack clarity in some respects, possible creating unnecessary work. The FAC names multiple Plaintiffs and Defendants. Each asserted cause of action identifies the Defendants against whom the claim is asserted, but does not identify the Plaintiffs asserting the claim, which suggests that all named Plaintiffs are asser...

Excerpt: ...ional infliction of emotional distress are: “(1) extreme and outrageous conduct by the defendant with the intention of causing, or reckless disregard of the probability of causing, emotional distress; (2) the plaintiff's suffering severe or extreme emotional distress; and (3) actual and proximate causation of the emotional distress by the defendant's outrageous conduct....” (Christensen v. Superior Court (1991) 54 Cal.3d 868, 903.) Plaintiff ...

Excerpt: ...Authorities in Support of Plaintiffs' Opposition to the Motion for Preliminary Injunction (“MPA”) is DENIED. The proposed sealing is overbroad. Lines 18‐19 on page 11 of the MPA quote a section of PUBG's Motion for a Preliminary Injunction, and Plaintiffs seek to seal this portion of the MPA based on PUBG's Motion to Seal the related portion of its Motion for a Preliminary Injunction. The Court denied PUBG's Motion to Seal portions of its M...

Excerpt: ...he Motion of Defendants Equinox Holdings, Inc. and James Lopresti (collectively “Defendants”) for Summary Judgment or alternatively, Summary Adjudication, to the Complaint of Plaintiff Robert Pierre Alexander (“Plaintiff”), is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Failure to comply with the separate statement may in the court's discretion constitute a sufficient ground for denying a motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication. (C.C.P. § 437c...

Excerpt: ...ED BY THE JUDGE FINEMAN, ON JANUARY 28, 2020; AND THE JUDGMENT THAT WAS ENTERED AGAINST ROBIN AND SEAN LOVE, DATED FEBRUARY 7, 13 2020 TENTATIVE RULING: Defendants Robin Love's and Sean Love's (“Defendants”) Motion to Set Aside Dismissal, Orders, and Judgment is GRANTED‐IN‐PART. As an initial matter, the motion to set aside the December 11, 2019 dismissal and the January 8, 2020 order granting the motion for evidentiary sanctions is to be...

Excerpt: ...pposition to be filed “not less than 14 days preceding the noticed or continued date of hearing, unless the court for good cause orders otherwise.” Notably, Defendant submitted a reply on August 28 and has not objected to Plaintiff's opposition on the grounds that it was not timely filed or that it has been prejudiced by the delay. As a result, the Court, in its discretion, has considered Plaintiff's opposition. Premises Liability In order to...

Excerpt: ...rder requires that Plaintiff meet and confer with Defendants and attempt to resolve the present dispute informally, and if unsuccessful, to then participate in a mediation with Defendants prior to filing a motion in Court to enforce the Agreement. Thus, the parties contractually agreed, and the Court ordered, that the § 9 ADR procedure constitutes a prerequisite to either party seeking Court intervention to enforce the Agreement. See 7‐6‐20 ...

Excerpt: ...VIL PROCEDURE. TENTATIVE RULING: This motion is continued to October 28, 2020 at 1:30 in Department 4 so that the parties can respond to the following questions. Opening briefs of no more than ten (10) pages shall be filed and served by October 14, 2020 and responsive briefs shall be filed and served by October 21, 2020. Courtesy copies of the briefs shall be delivered to Department 4. 1. Has there ever been a SLAPP motion granted when a party ha...

Excerpt: ...E SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION IN ITS ENTIRETY, THE EIGHTH CAUSE OF ACTION IN ITS ENTIRETY, THE NINTH CAUSE OF ACTION IN ITS ENTIRETY, THE TENTH CAUSE OF ACTION IN ITS ENTIRETY, AND/0R THE ELEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION IN ITS ENTIRETY. TENTATIVE RULING: Defendants' Motion to Strike from the Complaint the causes of action predicated on Defendants' alleged conspiracy is DENIED. Civil Code section 1714.10 requires a prior court order before filing an action a...

Excerpt: ...SUSTAINED. These causes of action are predicated on Defendants' alleged fraudulent or negligent misrepresentations and omissions. Each element of fraud and negligent misrepresentation must be specifically alleged. Cadlo v. Owens‐Illinois, Inc. (2004) 125 Cal. App. 4th 513, 519. General and conclusory allegations are not sufficient. Lazar v. Superior Court (1996) 12 Cal.4th 631, 645. A plaintiff must plead facts which show how, when, where, to w...

Excerpt: ...kenzie & Associates, Inc. dba Truex Metier (“Plaintiff”) is ruled on as follows: (1) Defendant's Memorandum of Points and Authorities fails to comply with California Rules of Court Rule 3.1113(b). Rule 3.1113(b) requires a memorandum to contain a statement of facts, a concise statement of the law, evidence and arguments relied on, and a discussion of the statutes, cases, and textbooks cited in support of the position advanced. Here, Defendant...

Excerpt: ...laintiff”) is ruled on as follows: (1) Demurrer to the First Cause of Action for Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage based on failure to allege facts sufficient to support this claim and uncertainty, is OVERRULED. Plaintiff alleges both negligent and/or intentional interference in this claim. (See FAC ¶ 33.) Plaintiff alleges facts sufficient to support a claim for intentional interference with prospective economic advantage. The ...

Excerpt: ...es both the demurrer and motion to strike in this tentative. For purposes of ruling on a demurrer, the complaint is read liberally as a whole rather in isolation with a view to substantial justice and all allegations are to be accepted as true. Code of Civil Procedure § 452; Del E. Webb Corp. v. Structural Materials Co. (1981) 123 Cal.App.3d 593, 604. The same is true for a motion to strike. Courtesy Ambulance Service v. Superior Court (1992) 8 ...

Excerpt: ...defendants in this case. Plaintiff ALLSTATE paid its insured $57,350. The insurer of defendant Nemmer Roofing, Watford Specialty Insurance, paid Plaintiff's insured $108,359. Defendant Nemmer Roofing has filed a cross‐complaint against settling defendant AN/BE and Watford has filed a separate action against AN/BE. Plaintiff ALLSTATE's Complaint seeks $57,350, which is the maximum judgment possible against AN/BE. Plaintiff and AN/BE have settlem...

Excerpt: ...n June 5, 2020 with an identical copy of the exhibits, Plaintiff in response to the separate statement states that it is impossible for Plaintiff to confirm the relevance or accuracy of certain statements because the exhibit was not attached. See e.g. Response to UMF Nos. 3, 4, 5. Plaintiff may not have realized that the same exhibits were attached to a previously served motion. Usually, the Court will continue the motion to allow a full response...

Excerpt: ...rst through Fifth Causes of Action is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. On the face of the Complaint, these claims appear barred by the three‐year statute of limitations under Code of Civil Procedure section 338(d). The statute commences to run only after one has knowledge of facts sufficient to make a reasonably prudent person suspicious of fraud, thus putting him on inquiry. (Hobart v. Hobart Estate Co. (1945) 26 Cal.2d 412, 437.) “A plaintiff...

Excerpt: ...refore, the Court issues this tentative. The unopposed motion for summary judgment filed by Defendant CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY is granted. The undisputed material facts and supporting evidence establishes a prima facie showing that Defendant CHICAGO TITLE did not breach any duty that it owed to Plaintiff. Plaintiff has not demonstrated that a triable issue of material fact exists. Escrow instructions govern the rights and liabilities of th...

Excerpt: ...staurants, Inc. (1989) 215 Cal.App.3d 353, 356). Plaintiff has waived her right to seal the records in this case. A party waives their right to obtain an order to seal documents where the documents are already part of the public record. (See Savaglio v. Wal‐Mart Stores, Inc. (2007) 149 CA4th 588, 600; Weil & Brown, Cal. Prac. Guide Civ. Pro. Before Trial § 9:417.5 (TRG 2020).) The records in this case were all filed prior to the motion to seal...

Excerpt: ...isposition of this motion. After the parties submitted supplemental briefing, the Court continued this matter so that it could rule on Plaintiff's pending motion for consolidation. The Court granted Plaintiff's unopposed motion to consolidate Case Nos. CIV525758 and 19CIV00123 on July 27, 2020. The Court, having considered the parties' original and supplemental briefs, as well as the pleadings on file in this matter, rules on Plaintiff's motion a...

Excerpt: ... Court notes that Defendants filed this motion in April 2020, and directed it to the Second Amended Complaint (SAC). Thereafter, on 7‐6‐20, Plaintiff filed a Third Amended Complaint (TAC), which made no change(s) to the parties or to the asserted causes of action, but made minor changes to the Prayer for relief. Plaintiff then filed an Opposition to this Motion for Summary Judgment. The moving and opposing papers refer only to the SAC. All pa...

Excerpt: ...0 Request for Dismissal, and the dismissal entered the same date. For the reasons stated below, as to the Seventh Cause of Action for “harassment,” the motion is DENIED. As an initial matter, the Court notes that Defendants filed this motion in April 2020, and directed it to the Second Amended Complaint (SAC). Thereafter, on 7‐6‐20, Plaintiff filed a Third Amended Complaint (TAC), which made no change(s) to the parties or to the asserted ...

Excerpt: ...ed the moving, opposition, and reply papers and now issues the following ruling. Cross‐ Defendant's Special Motion to Strike (“SLAPP”) the Cross‐Complaint is DENIED. CrossDefendant has not established the first prong of the SLAPP analysis that the acts underlying any of the six causes of action in the Cross‐Complaint arise out of protected activity described by Code of Civil Procedure § 425.16(e). Further, even if Cross‐Defendant had...

Excerpt: ...same last name. The Court means no disrespect to them. Defendants assert that as the hirer of a contractor that they are not liable for personal injuries sustained by Plaintiff, the contractor's employee, based on Privette v. Sup. Ct. (1993) 5 Cal.4th 689. However, “when a hirer of an independent contractor, by negligently furnishing unsafe equipment to the contractor, affirmatively contributes to the injury of an employee of the contractor, th...

Excerpt: ...heduled date, and no prejudice has been established. Plaintiff's motion for attorneys' fees is GRANTED pursuant to Civil Code § 1717 and Code of Civil Procedure § 1032. Plaintiff followed the proper procedure in filing a memorandum of costs with the attorneys' fees and contemporaneously filing this motion. Plaintiff's complaint was one for a non‐judicial foreclosure. Plaintiff agrees that there is no right based on the complaint to obtain the...

Excerpt: ...ent from the location identified in Plaintiff's Government Claim is OVERRULED. Plaintiff's Government Claim identified the location as an intersection of Sand Hill Road and Sand Hill Circle.” The FAC states that the incident occurred at specific GPS coordinates. (FAC para. GN‐1, MV‐1.) The numerical coordinates differ from the words “Sand Hill Road and Sand Hill Circle,” but nothing in the Complaint implies that the coordinates describe...

Excerpt: ...omplaint alleges eight causes of action; she has dismissed the fourth and fifth causes of action. Stanford brings only a motion for summary judgment. Stanford argues that Plaintiff cannot establish an essential element of all her claims, which is a proper basis for summary judgment. Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 853; see Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (p)(2). Defendant has the initial burden and once the defendant meet...

Excerpt: ...7c(a)(2), a motion for summary adjudication must be “served on all other parties to the action at least 75 days before the time appointed for hearing. . . . If the notice is served by facsimile transmission, express mail, or another method of delivery providing for overnight delivery, the required 75‐day period of notice shall be increased by two court days.” Plaintiff served this motion via email on June 1. The hearing, which was set for A...

Excerpt: ... of the court or orally before the court, for settlement of the case, or part thereof, the court, upon motion, may enter judgment pursuant to the terms of the settlement. If requested by the parties, the court may retain jurisdiction over the parties to enforce the settlement until performance in full of the terms of the settlement. Code Civ. Proc., § 664.6 In this case, the parties had an arbitration agreement, but when disputes arose agreed to...