Excerpt: ...fendant seeks monetary sanctions against Plaintiff for a misuse of the discovery process. DISCUSSION A. Legal Standard 1. Compelling Further Discovery Responses CCP § 2017.010 provides the following: Unless otherwise limited by order of the court in accordance with this title, any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action or to the determination of any m...

Excerpt: ...s purchased a 2011 FORD Fusion (the Vehicle) from the Dealer on or about December 2, 2010. The Vehicle was manufactured by FORD. The purchase of the Vehicle was governed by a written “RETAIL INSTALLMENT SALE CONTRACT – SIMPLE FINANCE CHARGE” (with arbitration provision) (“RISC”). Immediately above the final buyer/co‐buyer signature block that Plaintiffs signed the RISC provides that: YOU AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS CONTRACT. YOU CONFIR...

Excerpt: ..., by an employer against a former employee. According to the allegations of the complaint (“Complaint”), Black Sails is a virtual reality (“VR”) startup which possesses a variety of cutting‐edge VR technology, most of which was created by Wang and Zhao, as coinventor. (Complaint, ¶ 11.) Zhao began her employment with Black Sails in November 9, 2016 and ceased working there in June 2018, when all of the company's employees quit due to i...

Excerpt: ...7/22 Plaintiff was served with the instant Demurrer. Plaintiff's opposition was due 6/30/22. Plaintiff did not file timely opposition. DISCUSSION A. Legal Standard 1. Failure to file timely opposition “Unless otherwise ordered or specifically provided by law, all moving and supporting papers must be served and filed in accordance with CCP § 1005.” (California Rules of Court, rule 3.1300(a).) Opposition to noticed motion must be filed and ser...

Excerpt: ... on procedural grounds. Plaintiff not opposed the motions on the merits. Because all three motions involve a similar procedural issue, the Court will follow Plaintiff's lead and issue a single omnibus order with separate rulings as to each motion as appropriate. Defendant's motions were all filed on 3/21/22. Plaintiff filed a consolidated opposition to these motions on the sole grounds that attorney Eric Hartman claims the he and his clients have...

Excerpt: ... DISCUSSION A. Legal Standard Code of Civil Procedure section 1008 provides the only legal basis for a court to reconsider a prior order. (Code Civ. Proc, § 1008, subd. (e).) Code of Civil Procedure section 1008, subdivision (a) states: When an application for an order has been made to a judge, or to a court, and refused in whole or in part, or granted, or granted conditionally, or on terms, any party affected by the order may, within 10 days af...

Excerpt: ...themselves out to the public as competent and skilled dentists. (SAC, ¶ 5.) Williams was Defendants' patient. (Ibid.) He went to Defendants to determine the best method to get individual implants on both his lower and upper maxillary jaw so he would not have to maintain dentures anymore. (Ibid.) On January 7, 2016, Dr. Trinh performed bone graft surgery, in conjunction with performing a sinus elevation. (SAC, ¶¶ 6, 22.) Without providing Willi...

Excerpt: ...three responses: (1) a statement that the party will comply with the particular demand, (2) a representation that the party lacks the ability to comply, or (3) an objection. CCP §2031.210(a). Under Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.310, subdivision (a), a party may move for an order compelling a further response to a document demand on the ground that (1) an objection is without merit or too general, (2) a statement of compliance with the dem...

Excerpt: ...ed the use of the Account for the acquisition of goods, services, balance transfers or cash advances. (Id.) However, Defendant failed to make periodic payments on the outstanding balance and the Account was ultimately charged‐off. (Id.) Consequently, the entire Account balance of $49,761.90 is presently due and payable in full. (Id., ¶¶ 7‐8.) B. Procedural Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff filed the Complaint on April 23, 2021, asserting cl...

Excerpt: ...e “Vehicle”), which was manufactured and/or distributed by FMC.1 (FAC, ¶ 7.) In connection with the purchase, Hunter received an express written warranty, including a 3‐year/36,000 mile express bumper to bumper warranty, a 5‐ year/60,000 mile powertrain warranty, which covers engine and transmission, and a 8‐ year/80,000 mile emission warranty, which covers the exhaust system and transmission control module (“TCM”). (FAC, ¶ 8.) Du...

Excerpt: ... the same operative facts so the Court will consider them in a single ruling with separate orders as appropriate. DISCUSSION A. Failure to Oppose a Motion Notice of hearing was given. No opposition was filed. A failure to oppose a motion may be deemed a consent to the granting of the motion. CRC Rule 8.54c. B. Legal Standard for Demurrer As relevant to the instant case, “[t]he party against whom a complaint or crosscomplaint has been filed may ...

Excerpt: ... DISCUSSION A. Legal Standard CCP § 2017.010 provides the following: Unless otherwise limited by order of the court in accordance with this title, any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action or to the determination of any motion made in that action, if the matter either is itself admissible in evidence or appears reasonably calculated to lead to the di...

Excerpt: ...Notice Moving Parties ask the Court to take Judicial Notice of documents filed and rulings by this Court and the Sixth District Court of Appeals in support of their motion to have Plaintiffs declared vexatious litigants. Evidence Code section 452(d), provides that the Court may take judicial notice of “[r]ecords of any court of this state.” Section 452(d) permits the trial court to “take judicial notice of the existence of judicial opinions...

Excerpt: ...ifornia (APNs: 086‐25‐020 and 086‐25‐021) on November 24, 2020. The motion is not opposed. DISCUSSION GreenLake's Motion was filed March 28, 2022. Amended notice of Motion providing ARC with the time and date of the hearing was served April 21, 2022. Timely Notice of hearing was given. No opposition was filed. A failure to oppose a motion may be deemed a consent to the granting of the motion. CRC Rule 8.54c. A failure to oppose a motion m...

Excerpt: ...particular dispute has not resolved. DISCUSSION A. Legal Standard Right to Discovery CCP § 2017.010 provides the following: Unless otherwise limited by order of the court in accordance with this title, any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action or to the determination of any motion made in that action, if the matter either is itself admissible in evid...

Excerpt: ...f the alleged sexual harassment, sexual molestation and sexual abuse of Plaintiff while she was a student at Ida Jew Academy, a charter school within defendant Mount Pleasant Elementary School District (“MPESD”). According to the allegations of the Complaint, MPESD contracted with defendant Santa Clara County Office of Education (“SCCOE”) to provide an outdoor education experience for minor students, including Plaintiff, particularly at W...

Excerpt: ...re limited liability company and a subsidiary of China Science and Merchant Investment Management Group Co. Ltd. (“CSC Group”), which is not a party to this case. (Cross‐ Complaint, ¶ 2.) In April 2015, Veronica Wu (“Wu”) was hired by CSC Group. (Cross‐Complaint, ¶ 8.) She was elected a member of the Board of Directors, where she remained until September 2020. (Ibid.) On May 20, 2015, CSC Group established CSC Group International Co...

Excerpt: ... March 6, 1958, Plaintiffs' predecessors in interest, Louis A. Filice and Lee Nora Filice (the “Filices”), grantors, and the State of California (the “State”), as grantee, executed a Grant Deed (recorded April 29, 1958) (the “Grant Deed”), which effectuated three transfers of various interests in real property owned by the Filices (the “Original Filice Land”). (FAC, ¶¶ 26‐27 and Exhibit 4.) The first transfer was of a fee inte...

Excerpt: ...te. According to the allegations of the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), Plaintiff is a Suspected Child Abuse and Neglect (“SCAN”) physician who was hired by the County on July 1, 2011 as a Child Abuse Pediatrician at the Santa Clara Valley Medical Center (“SCVMC”). (FAC, ¶ 8.) As a component of her contractual employment agreement with the County, Plaintiff was required to abide by the Medical Staff Bylaws and the internal policies ...

Excerpt: ... A defendant prevailing on an anti‐SLAPP motion is entitled to recover attorneys' fees. (CCP §425.16(c)(1).) The award of fees to a prevailing defendant is mandatory. Marshall v. Webster (2020) 54 Cal.App.5th 275, 285. Attorney fee awards should be fully compensatory, and include compensation for all hours reasonably spent. Ketchum v. Moses (2001) 24 Cal.4th 1122, 1133. The court may use the "lodestar" method to compute the amount of the fee a...

Excerpt: ...g Santa Clara University (“SCU”) that is owned by the City/non‐party Valley Transportation Authority (“VTA”). According to the allegations of the Complaint, after a year of in‐person meetings and conversation with City officials, members of the VTA, SCU representatives and community leaders, on May 31, 2017, Richard Kramer (“Kramer”), Chairman of the family of companies that includes Plaintiff, sent the City a letter detailing a p...

Excerpt: ...was accompanied by express warranties that Hyundai undertook to preserve or maintain the utility or performance of the Vehicle or to provide compensation if there was a failure in such utility or performance. (Ibid.) The Vehicle was delivered to Natera with serious defects and nonconformities to warranty and developed other serious defects and nonconformities to warranty including, but not limited to, engine, transmission, electrical, and exterio...

Excerpt: ... Code of Civil Procedure Section 128.5 (“Section 128.5”) and Code of Civil Procedure Section 128.7 (“Section 128.7”). The Motions are opposed by Gandhi, Raber and Rimon on procedural and substantive grounds. Because the two motions arise out of the same operative facts and the motions share critical procedural requirements, the Court analyzes the motion together but will make separate rulings as to each motion. DISCUSSION A. Legal Standar...

Excerpt: ...vely, “Cross‐Complainants”). I. Background A. Factual 1. Complaint This is an action for breach of contract. According to the allegations of the complaint (“Complaint”), PAPO is the owner of CTC, a real estate development project located in Palo Alto which includes the premises located at 2108 El Camino Real, Palo Alto (the “Property”). On November 20, 2013, CTC, as landlord, and J&A Family Markets, Inc. (“J&A”), as tenant, ente...

Excerpt: ... limited liability company and a subsidiary of China Science and Merchant Investment Management Group Co. Ltd. (“CSC Group”), which is not a party to this case. (Cross‐Complaint, ¶ 2.) In April 2015, Wu was hired by CSC Group. (Cross‐ Complaint, ¶ 8.) She was elected a member of the Board of Directors, where she remained until September 2020. (Ibid.) On May 20, 2015, CSC Group established CSC Group International Corp. (“CSC Internatio...