Excerpt: ...RANTED. (Evid. Code, § 452, subd. (d).) Defendants' motion for summary judgment, or alternatively, summary adjudication, is DENIED. Based on the plain language of the subject promissory note alone, Plaintiff has demonstrated the existence of an actual, present controversy between the parties regarding how to interpret the meaning of terms contained therein, particularly those set forth in Sections 3(F) and 3(E) which relate to the maximum limit ...

Excerpt: ...hrough its current counsel, who was not counsel of record when the discovery was initially served, essentially does not oppose the motion on its substance, and apparently acknowledges that no responses have been served. Counsel objects to the monetary sanction requested as “discretionary” (which it is not, absent certain required findings), and a “patently unreasonable and excessive.” The Court agrees with the latter contention – the am...

Excerpt: ...erns Defendant's noncompliance with discovery orders filed on September 15, 2017, granting Plaintiff's motions to compel initial responses to its first sets of form interrogatories and request for production of documents. The Court originally ordered Defendant to serve complete verified responses, without objections, within 45 days. Defendant did not comply, and Plaintiff consequently filed a motion to strike Defendant's answer and associated req...

Excerpt: ...he first motion is a motion for summary judgment (“MSJ”) directed at the third cause of action for Fraud and Deceit (Promise Without Intention to Perform) in the Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) of Plaintiff Marsha Armstrong, M.D. (“Armstrong”). The fraud claim is Plaintiff Armstrong's only remaining cause of action as the others were summarily adjudicated in Trepel's favor pursuant to this Court's Order dated June 20, 2016. That same...

Excerpt: ...tively, “Defendants”) arises from the fact Defendants own, manage, or allow to continue, a marijuana business. According to the allegations of the Complaint, Coachella is a marijuana distribution business that has operated at 2142 The Alameda in San Jose, California (“the Property”) since May 2017. The other defendants are all in some way related to the ownership or operation of Coachella. Foxx and Nemcov are owners, operators, or manager...

Excerpt: ...ential Care Facility.2 There was a water tower on the property that supplied well water to the facility. Plaintiff leased space on the water tower to Defendants for the purpose of affixing telecommunications equipment and infrastructure. Plaintiff alleges Defendants unplugged a heating coil on the water tower thereby causing the pipes to freeze. As a result, Plaintiff suffered $3,000,000 in damages and had to shut down the nursing home. Plaintiff...

Excerpt: ...ages. The Cross‐ Complaint was deemed filed as of January 23, 2018 by order of the Court (Hon. Pierce). The only copy of the Cross‐Complaint existing in the Court's file is a copy of the then proposed cross‐complaint attached as exhibit A to the November 27, 2017 declaration of Blue Shield counsel Craig Rutenberg in support of the motion for leave to file a cross‐complaint. The Cross‐Complaint states five causes of action: 1) Breach of ...

Excerpt: ... Both motions are GRANTED. The Court finds the objections asserted are not supported, and that the responses are not responsive and do not comply with the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure §§2031.210‐2031.250. The moving papers establish good cause for production of the requested documents under §2031.310(b). Verified further responses which comply with §§2031.210‐2031.250 must be served by Arriaga (Line 4) and by Arriaga & Associa...

Excerpt: ...n Santa Clara County Superior Court, case number 1‐11‐CV‐193356 (“Underlying Action”). (Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”), ¶6.) Deer Crest owned a condominium project in Utah. (Id.) Pursuant to a July 1, 2005 construction contract between Deer Crest and Silver Creek Development Group, LLC (“Silver Creek”), Silver Creek agreed to perform certain construction of the condominium project. (Id.) Granum Partners executed a written gua...

Excerpt: ...�FAC”), Plaintiff purchased an automobile with financing from Patelco and insurance from FLIA. At the time of purchase, FLIA provided assurances that it would pay for repairs falling within the scope of the insurance. Subsequently, the vehicle needed repairs and Plaintiff contacted FLIA to determine which repair shop would be covered by his insurance. FLIA stated Plaintiff could take the vehicle to a servicer of his choice and it would cover th...

Excerpt: ...at this late date, to add a wholly new cause of action for alleged violation of Labor Code §1197.5 (the California Equal Pay Act). Plaintiff's supporting declaration does not fully and satisfactorily address any of the factors enumerated in California Rules of Court, rule 3.1324(b). Defendants' Request for Judicial Notice is granted. The Court agrees with defendants' arguments that the proposed new cause of action would add significant new factu...

Excerpt: ...ty property – where the Second Amended Complaint is not verified, and plaintiff fails to present any admissible evidence from which the court can determine the probable validity of any real property claim. §405.38 commands “the court shall direct that the party prevailing on any motion under this chapter be awarded the reasonable attorney's fees and costs of making or opposing the motion...”. (Emphasis added.) As the court does not find on...

Excerpt: ... objections are therefore waived. As the court has been provided with no evidence that plaintiff has since served responses to the Requests for Admission which substantially comply with §2033.220, the law directs the court that it shall make the order deeming the requests admitted (§2033.280(c).) The Court also finds that no substantial justification has been provided for the failure to timely serve responses, nor for the substance of the oppos...

Excerpt: ...ank”) to the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) of Plaintiff Guy Cavicchia (“Plaintiff”), current Administrator of the Estate of Decedent Patricia Lynn Hairston. The FAC states three causes of action for Negligence, against Defendant Jeanette Taggart (“Taggart,” the attorney for the former administrator of the estate Tracy Infante), Fidelity and U.S. Bank respectively. The other two demurrers are separately brought by Fidelity and U.S....

Excerpt: ...documents, set one; and 3. Plaintiffs' motion to deem unanswered requests for admission, set one, deemed admitted. It is apparently undisputed, and agreed by counsel, that copies of the discovery requests at issue have been provided to defense counsel, and that this was done on or about April 26, 2018. It is also undisputed that defendant at no time has served responses to this discovery, neither within 30 days of the time the documents were pers...

Excerpt: ... (“BDFTW”) (collectively, “Defendants”). According to the allegations of the verified complaint, Plaintiff is the owner of real property located at 43 Heath Street, Milpitas, CA (“Subject Property”). Plaintiff executed a mortgage relating to the Subject Property, which consisted of a Deed of Trust (“DOT”) and an Adjustable Rate Rider. The lender, Fieldstone, was a table lender for Contrywide Home Loans (“CHL”). CHL is the orig...

Excerpt: ...sitions and replies have been filed in each of the four motions originally noticed for May 22. The court notes that the motion concerning the document requests was filed on April 2, that the notice of motion references both requests for admission and requests for production, and that the separate statement – although entitled a separate statement in support of further responses to requests for admission – addresses only requests for productio...

Excerpt: ...�the Property”), after which they obtained a revolving line of credit from Cathay Bank secured by the Property via a deed of trust (“Cathay Bank DOT”). Subsequently, the Changs obtained a loan secured by the Property via a deed of trust, which was eventually assigned to Defendant (“Defendant's DOT”). A foreclosure sale was conducted pursuant to the Cathay Bank DOT, and Trustway Investments, LLC purchased the Property. Trustway Investmen...

Excerpt: ...adford Baugh (“Defendant Baugh”), Plaintiff's former attorney in a marital dissolution action and the only named defendant remaining in this action as a prior demurrer by Defendant Jeanne Schmidt was sustained without leave to amend and a prior motion to quash service of summons for lack of personal jurisdiction brought by Defendant Thomas Kenefick was granted Requests for Judicial Notice A precondition to judicial notice in either its permis...

Excerpt: ...��) whereby Nano was granted the right to purchase and resell Plaintiff's products. 1 Nano agreed to pay Plaintiff set prices, with 20 percent paid upon placement of the order and the remaining 80 percent within 150 days of shipment or a correct invoice. Nano placed a purchase order with Plaintiff for four machines for a total price of $298,140 and paid 20 percent of the total price up front. The machines were shipped and invoiced correctly, but ...

Excerpt: ...t or stipulation of the parties.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 2.551(a).) “The court may order that a record be filed under seal only if it expressly finds facts that establish: (1) There exists an overriding interest that overcomes the right of public access to the record; (2) The overriding interest supports sealing the record; (3) A substantial probability exists that the overriding interest will be prejudiced if the record is not sealed; (4...