Excerpt: ...” is interpreted broadly to favor an award of attorney's fees to a partially successful defendant. Where a defendant obtains some benefits of a partially successful SLAPP motion, the defendant's fee recovery is normally reduced proportionately, but not denied entirely. Mann v. Quality Old Time Service, Inc. (2006) 139 Cal.App.4th 328, 340; ComputerXpress, Inc. v. Jackson (2001) 93 Cal.App.4th 993, 1017. However, a fee award is not required when...

Excerpt: ...ree that FCA is not a signatory to the arbitration agreement – which appears in a sales contract between Plaintiff and the nonparty seller, Putnam Automotive Inc. (Putnam). (Hanson Decl., ex. A.) As a result, FCA bears the burden of establishing standing to enforce that agreement. (Jones v. Jacobson (2011) 195 Cal.App.4th 15.) FCA has not met this burden. First, the express terms of the sales contract do not establish an agreement to arbitrate ...

Excerpt: ... Complaint (Motion) is GRANTED. In the Motion, Defendant seeks summary adjudication of the second through fifth causes of action in Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (PAC) based on the 26th affirmative defense in its Answer to the PAC. That defense alleges that Defendant has a vested right to use the property for its sewer line under Civil Code section 1009, subdivision (d). As explained below, the Court finds that Defendant has met its burden of est...

Excerpt: ...inthis case. The Court takes judicial notice of the public records of the State Bar of California. In re White (2004) 121 Cal.App.4th 1453, 1469 fn. 14. A. Factual Background On March 15, 2019, the Court granted Defendants' motion to compel arbitration. Thereafter the parties were unable to agree upon an arbitrator. Defendants' former attorney filed a Rule 9.20 Notice of Interim Suspension on August 29, 2019. D's RJN, Exh. A. Defendant Carolina B...

Excerpt: ...t forth below. Defendants Ihab Hanna D.D.S. and Hanna D.D.S., Inc. move to quash a subpoena that Plaintiff Dr. Jumani has served on Bank of America, which seeks a broad range of banking records relating to Defendant Dr. Ihab Hanna, dating from Sept. 1, 2018 to the present. The subpoena seeks banking records relating to all four named Defendants. This motion to quash is filed by just two of the four Defendants—Dr. Hanna and his corporation, Hann...

Excerpt: ...s tentatively ruled upon as follows. This Court grants preliminary approval of the Settlement as set forth in the Joint Stipulation and Settlement Agreement attached as Exhibit 2 to the Declaration of Douglas Han. The Court finds the terms to be within the range of reasonableness of a settlement that ultimately could be granted approval by this Court at the final fairness hearing. Although the settlement is on the low side, Plaintiff's counsel is...

Excerpt: ...021; (3) Exhibit N and the first page of Exhibit M to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss filed February 23, 2021; (4) Exhibit N and the first page of Exhibit M attached to Defendant's Amended Answer and Amended Motion to Dismiss filed March 10, 2021; and (5) Exhibit B to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint. Court records are presumed to be open unless confidentiality is required by law. (Cal. Rules of Court (CRC), Rule 2.550(c).) For a record to be fi...

Excerpt: ...rte Application and Ex Parte Application for an Order Shortening Time to Hear Plaintiff's Motion to Enforce Settlement Agremeent.  Page 3, Line 26: dollar amount specified therein. 2. March 11, 2020 Declaration of Matthew Squires in Support of Plaintiff's Ex Parte Application for an Order Shortening Time to Hear Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement  Page 2, Line 9: Wehmeyer Custom Homes recorded a mechanics' lien on my property for dollar...

Excerpt: ...produce all responsive photographs and videos within 15 days from the date of service of notice of this order. Defendant's request for sanctions against Plaintiff and/or her counsel, Gail Lamchick, is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Plaintiff and/or her counsel is ORDERED to pay Defendant $1,260.00 in sanctions. Plaintiff has demonstrated good cause for the production of the requested documents, as the documents are directly relevant to Plain...

Excerpt: ...n for relief from default pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §473.5 is DENIED. Defendant's declaration does not establish that his lack of notice was not caused by avoidance of service or inexcusable neglect. Defendant concedes that the summons and complaint were left at his place of employment with a co‐worker. While he argues the coworker was not actually or apparently in charge of the office, this argument is irrelevant. In Ellard v. Conwa...

Excerpt: ...t confirms its order granting summary judgment. The Court believes that reconsideration is appropriate based on Plaintiffs' counsel's representation that he was confused by the Court's tentative ruling for the January 26, 2021 summary judgment hearing and the relevance of the cases that the Court cited in the tentative, specifically, Sweetwater Union High School Dist. v. Gilbane Bldg. Co. (2019) 6 Cal.5th 931, 948‐949; Perry v. Bakewell Hawthor...

Excerpt: ...nctions,” filed 3‐12‐21, is GRANTED‐IN‐ PART and DENIED‐INPART, as set forth below. The motion to compel further responses to the post‐ Judgment Requests for Production (RFPs) is GRANTED, but will become moot if Plaintiff pays the $2,832.07 in costs within 10 days of this Order. This Order should be read together with the related Order of this same date, granting Defendant's motion to compel further responses to post‐Judgment Inte...

Excerpt: ...mission (RFAs) admitted, and the Court's 3‐12‐21 Minute Order granting the motion to deem RFAs admitted. The Complaint here seeks subrogation for Worker's Compensation benefits allegedly paid to Plaintiff's employee, who was injured in an automobile collision, allegedly caused by Defendant's negligence. See 3‐6‐19 Complaint. On 3‐12‐21, the Court granted Defendant's unopposed motion to deem RFAs admitted, resulting in judicial admissi...

Excerpt: ...mended Complaint (“FAC”) for failure to state a cause of action is OVERRULED. The FAC alleges that on August 22, 2018, Plaintiff was visiting friends, one of which was a paying tenant at the hotel, when he was intentionally struck by the car of Doe Defendants 6‐10 outside of the front entrance of a Holiday Inn Express. Defendant Radha Patel dba Holiday Inn Express is “engaged in the business of operating” the hotel, while the other Defe...

Excerpt: ...Trackman v. Kenney (2010) 187 Cal.App.4th 175, 180.) The default judgment was entered on 4/30/2015, but Defendant did not file this Motion until 12/21/20. Second, Defendant has failed to demonstrate extrinsic fraud. The misidentification of the person accepting substitute service as Defendant's daughter does not defeat service. (See Trackman, supra, 187 Cal.App.4th at pp. 183‐184.) Defendant does not dispute that the address was her home addres...

Excerpt: ...��577551, are GRANTED pursuant to Evidence Code section 452, subdivision (d). Judicial notice is taken of the documents' filing/recording, contents, and legal effect, but not the truth of any statements therein. Defendant demurs on the ground that Plaintiff's Complaint is barred by res judicata. In support, Defendant points to the judgment entered in Makiyama v. Ito, SF Case No. CGC‐19‐577551. But an appeal was taken from that judgment on Feb...

Excerpt: ...aint on or before June 10, 2021. Defendant Cabezali's demurrer to the first cause of action is MOOT, as it is undisputed that he is not sued under the first cause of action – only the second cause of action. The second cause of action is for fraudulent inducement to entered into the settlement agreement and release contract. This is not pleaded as a tort claim for fraud itself. This is a contract claim, for which the remedy is rescission on the...

Excerpt: ...t Two, is GRANTED‐IN‐PART and DENIED‐IN‐PART. The interrogatories are relevant, but Plaintiffs agreed during the Jan. 26‐27 IDC to answer the first 40 special interrogatories. Plaintiffs did not file a motion to protective order as to the remainder. As to Special Interrogatories Nos. 29‐40, the motion is DENIED. Plaintiffs already agreed at the 1‐26‐21 IDC to provide further responses to Nos. 29‐40. See 1‐26‐21 IDC Order (Co...

Excerpt: ...ause of Accounting is SUSTAINED with leave to amend as to Defendant Hanna DDS, Inc. “An action for accounting is not available where the plaintiff alleges the right to recover a sum certain or a sum that can be made certain by calculation.” (Teselle v. McLoughlin (2009) 173 Cal.App.4th 156, 179.) The Complaint alleges that Defendant Defendant Ihab M. Hana, D.D.S. authorized the processing of insurance claims through Defendant Hana DDS, Inc.'s...

Excerpt: ...ompel Compliance. This discovery dispute arises from a New York personal injury action titled Louis Christophides and Cara Christophides v. Subaru Distributors Corp., New York State Supreme Court, Orange County, Case No. 004941/2018. The subpoenas seek discovery of the contents of the Facebook and Instagram accounts of the Plaintiffs in the New York action. On April 30, 2020, the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Orange County, issued an or...

Excerpt: ...the evidence, and that Plaintiff's claims are governed by the agreement. The arbitration provision at issue, which was contained in the parties' Employee Proprietary Information and Inventions Assignment Agreement, provides as follows: Any dispute, controversy or claim arising out of or relating to either: (a) this Agreement, its enforcement, arbitrability or interpretation, or because of an alleged breach, default, or misrepresentation in connec...

Excerpt: ...gal Contract is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND based on failure to allege facts sufficient to support this claim and uncertainty. Plaintiffs assert that Defendant failed to comply with Business and Professions Code section 7159 and thus the contract is void. (Complaint ¶ 21.) It is unclear what claim Plaintiffs are attempting to allege though, as they fail to offer any authority to support that a claim for “Illegal Contract” exists. Further, ...

Excerpt: ...tated below. First, all six asserted claims are uncertain because they do not identify, with sufficient clarity, the specific plaintiff(s) asserting each claim and the specific defendant(s) against whom each claim is asserted. Code Civ. Proc. Sect. 430.10(f); CRC 2.112 (each cause of action shall identify the plaintiff(s) asserting it and the defendant(s) against whom it is asserted). This should be made explicit. CRC 2.112. Further, given that t...

Excerpt: ...guing that the documents sought in these Requests are directly relevant to this litigation, and none of Defendant's objections have merit. Thus, where a demanding party deems that an objection to a response is without merit, the demanding party may move for an order compelling further response to the demand. (Code of Civ. Proc. § 2031.310(a)(3).) Thus, the Court treats this Motion as a Motion to Compel Further Responses to Request for Production...

Excerpt: ...uires service on an a competent member of the household, followed by a mailing to the defendant at the same address. The Proof of Service, filed September 8, 2014, shows that the summons and cross‐complaint were left with Stacey Pierce at Cross‐ defendant's residence, and the papers were mailed to Cross‐defendant at that address on August 28, 2014. Service was complete 10 days after mailing. (Code of Civ. Proc. Sect. 415.20, subd. (a).) Tha...