Search by Keyword:
Start Date:
End Date:
Tip: Wrap text in quotation marks when searching for phrases (e.g. "motion to dismiss").

221 Results

Location: Santa Cruz x
2020.09.22 Motion for Summary Adjudication 727
Location: Santa Cruz
Judge: Connolly, Rebecca Dept 4
Hearing Date: 2020.09.22
Excerpt: ......
2020.09.21 Motion to Seal Court Records 526
Location: Santa Cruz
Judge: All Departments
Hearing Date: 2020.09.21
Excerpt: ......
2020.09.21 Motion for Summary Judgment, Adjudication 347
Location: Santa Cruz
Judge: All Departments
Hearing Date: 2020.09.21
Excerpt: ......
2020.09.21 Demurrer 640
Location: Santa Cruz
Judge: All Departments
Hearing Date: 2020.09.21
Excerpt: ......
2020.09.18 Motion for Reconsideration or for New Trial 312
Location: Santa Cruz
Judge: All Departments
Hearing Date: 2020.09.18
Excerpt: ...blishes new law on the issue of tiering. However, Save Berkeley's Neighborhoods merely summarizes existing law under Pub. Resources Code §§21094 and 21166 on when an agency may tier the environmental review of a later project from the program EIR, and when a change in the original project requires a subsequent or supplemental EIR. It relies on long established case law for its analysis of the issue. See, Sierra Club v. County of Sonoma (1992) 6...
2020.09.17 Demurrer 832
Location: Santa Cruz
Judge: All Departments
Hearing Date: 2020.09.17
Excerpt: ...allege create a duty on the part of BRP to protect Plaintiffs' property from the illegal improvements and encroachments by neighboring BRP members. Defendants have not contested this authority; and Plaintiffs have therefore stated a cause of action. The dispute between the parties as to the operable bylaws does not render the FAC uncertain, as Defendant asserts that the FAC clearly relies on the By ‐ Laws recorded in 1950, based on their own Re...
2020.09.15 Motion to Strike Punitive Damage Claim 194
Location: Santa Cruz
Judge: Volkmann, Timothy Dept 5
Hearing Date: 2020.09.15
Excerpt: ...conscious disregard of the probable dangerous consequences.” The court concluded that “[O]ne who willfully consumes alcoholic beverages to the point of intoxication, knowing that he thereafter must operate a motor vehicle, thereby combining sharply impaired physical and mental faculties with a vehicle capable of great force and speed, reasonably may be held to exhibit a LAW AND MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DATE: September 15 , 2020 TIME: 8:30 A.M...
2020.09.15 Motion for Summary Judgment, Adjudication 791
Location: Santa Cruz
Judge: Connolly, Rebecca Dept 4
Hearing Date: 2020.09.15
Excerpt: ...redit card. By accepting and using the credit card Defendant agreed to the terms and conditions detailed in the Customer Agreement and Disclosure Statement. Plaintiff activated the card and made payments on the subject account. UMF 1, 2, 3. Plaintiff's declaration ¶¶ 6,7,8,9,12; Exhibits A, B and C. 2. Plaintiff kept an account of the debts and credits on the subject account and sent monthly statements to Defendant at the address he provided, w...
2020.09.14 Motion for Summary Judgment 778
Location: Santa Cruz
Judge: All Departments
Hearing Date: 2020.09.14
Excerpt: ... material facts exists as to the cause of action or a defense thereto. The plaintiff shall not rely upon the allegations or denials of its pleadings to show that a triable issue of material fact exists but, instead, shall set forth the specific facts showing that a triable issue of material fact exists as to the cause of action or a defense thereto. In a declaratory relief action, the defendant's burden is to establish the plaintiff is not entitl...
2020.09.11 Motion to Compel Further Responses 250
Location: Santa Cruz
Judge: Volkmann, Timothy Dept 5
Hearing Date: 2020.09.11
Excerpt: ...sues on these motions, including sanctions. The Parties are to file a joint statement five court days before the hearing in the format set forth in CRC rule 3.1345(c) as to any remaining issues, including sanctions. One of the points to be addressed in the joint statement (if the issue cannot be resolved between the Parties) is Defendants' offer to produce their personal phones for digital imaging provided that suitable controls such as limited s...
2020.09.10 Demurrer 253
Location: Santa Cruz
Judge: Volkmann, Timothy Dept 5
Hearing Date: 2020.09.10
Excerpt: ...d the bar of the two year statute of limitations for breach of an oral agreement, on 2/19/20 Plaintiffs filed the FAC alleging Defendant breached a written contract on 2/21/16. Where a party files an amended complaint and seeks to avoid the defects of a prior complaint either by omitting the facts that rendered the complaint defective or by pleading facts inconsistent with the allegations of prior pleadings, in these circumstances, the policy aga...
2020.09.09 Motion for Attorneys' Fees 599
Location: Santa Cruz
Judge: All Departments
Hearing Date: 2020.09.09
Excerpt: ...iled in defeating Plaintiff's attempt to obtain rescission and damages, this was not a collection action for failure to pay the Note when due. The contractual fee provision therefore does not apply. ...
2020.08.27 Motion to Enforce Settlement 053
Location: Santa Cruz
Judge: All Departments
Hearing Date: 2020.08.27
Excerpt: ...by extending an existing woodpile. This paragraph provides that Defendants have the right to maintain and landscape a certain portion of the 40 ft right of way in front of their house , as long as it does not interfere with or impede the convenient use of the right of way; and that certain landscaping, including fences, is prohibited “with the exception of the area currently occupied by the ‘concrete fence' and ‘concrete footing for fence',...
2020.08.21 Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement 532
Location: Santa Cruz
Judge: All Departments
Hearing Date: 2020.08.21
Excerpt: ...me the presumption, the motion for final approval of class action settlement, award of class representative payment, class counsel fees and costs, administration fees, and PAGA payment is granted, conditioned on Class Counsel filing prior to or at the hearing a further declaration attaching a copy of any agreement that has been entered into with respect to the payment of attorney's fees. (Cal Rules of Court, Rule 3.769(b)). With respect to the cy...
2020.08.20 Petition for Writ of Administrative Mandamus 897
Location: Santa Cruz
Judge: All Departments
Hearing Date: 2020.08.20
Excerpt: ...Law (2019) 361 F. Supp.3d 956,973) As to finality of the interim suspension decision or order, the interim suspension was not a final administrative decision or order. Petitioner still may have been found to not be responsible for the underlying issue that led to the interim suspension during the process of the permanent suspension. (AR 025). Even if the interim suspension were a final administrative decision or order, the interim suspension proc...
2020.08.19 Motion to Tax Costs 153
Location: Santa Cruz
Judge: All Departments
Hearing Date: 2020.08.19
Excerpt: ...ds as follows: 1. The filing fees on the Answer to the Gill complaint and on the motion for summary judgment are attributable to the Gill Plaintiffs. The motion to tax is denied as to these costs. 2. 50% of the deposition of Stephen Whitmire dealt with Mr. Whitmire's personal injuries, was not relevant to the defense of the Gill action, and is attributed to the Whitmire Plaintiffs. The remaining 50% of the Whitmire deposition was equally relevant...
2020.08.19 Motion for Summary Judgment 383
Location: Santa Cruz
Judge: All Departments
Hearing Date: 2020.08.19
Excerpt: ...Brady to be named as an additional insured on all policies of liability insurance.(UMF's 34, 36, Hutchison Dec. Ex. B.) Virginia Surety (“Virginia”) issued insurance policies to Lee's. In those policies, Virginia agreed that who is an insured included as additional insureds the persons or organizations with respect to liability arising out of Lee's work or for property damage caused in whole or in part by Lee's acts or omissions. (see the ins...
2020.08.14 Motion for Summary Judgment, Adjudication 771
Location: Santa Cruz
Judge: All Departments
Hearing Date: 2020.08.14
Excerpt: ...nt has met that burden, the burden shifts to the plaintiff or crosscomplainant to show that a triable issue of one or more material facts exists as to the cause of action or a defense thereto. (Cal Code Civ Proc § 437c(p)(2)) Cross‐complainants have failed to show that a triable issue of one or more material facts exists. As to UMF's 7,9, & 11, the references to the Newman declaration do not create triable issues of material fact. (There is a ...
2020.08.13 Motion to Continue Special Motion to Strike, to Compel Further Responses 376
Location: Santa Cruz
Judge: All Departments
Hearing Date: 2020.08.13
Excerpt: ... that is protected by the anti‐SLAPP statute. (see Opposition fn. 1) If the court finds that such a showing has been made, it must then determine whether the plaintiff has demonstrated a probability of prevailing on the claim. (Navellier v. Sletten (2002) 29 Cal.4th 82, 88 .) Only a cause of action that lacks “even minimal merit” constitutes a SLAPP. (Overstock.com, Inc. v. Gradient Analytics, Inc. (2007) 151 Cal.App.4th 688, 700) Regarding...
2020.08.13 Demurrer 650
Location: Santa Cruz
Judge: All Departments
Hearing Date: 2020.08.13
Excerpt: ...(1997) 53 Cal. App. 4th 801. The one action rule is therefore not a bar to Plaintiff's action. Moreover, on February 14, 2020 Plaintiff and her daughters filed a consolidation of the actions filed by Plaintiff and by Ms. Hernandez, and are now proceeding to litigate their claims in a single action. The demurrer to the entire complaint based on the one action rule and misjoinder is overruled. Fraudulent/illegal marketing (5th c/a) Plaintiff has al...
2020.08.12 Motion to Set Aside Default Judgment 312
Location: Santa Cruz
Judge: All Departments
Hearing Date: 2020.08.12
Excerpt: ...ered against him or her in the action, he or she may serve and file a notice of motion to set aside the default or default judgment and for leave to defend the action. The notice of motion shall be served and filed within a reasonable time, but in no event exceeding the earlier of: (i) two years after entry of a default judgment against him or her; or (ii) 180 days after service on him or her of a written notice that the default or default judgme...
2020.08.10 Motion to Enforce Settlement 053
Location: Santa Cruz
Judge: All Departments
Hearing Date: 2020.08.10
Excerpt: ...4.5 ft. gap between the parties' respective properties. Defendants are ordered to remove the new fence and the addition to the wood pile that extends it further into the 40 ft right of way than the “Wood Pile” that existed at the time of the Settlement Agreement; to pay Plaintiffs $2000 in damages for the removal of the three holly trees; and to pay Plaintiffs their attorney's fees and costs in the amount of $11,933, pursuant to the attorneys...
2020.08.04 Motion for Summary Judgment, Adjudication 251
Location: Santa Cruz
Judge: All Departments
Hearing Date: 2020.08.04
Excerpt: ...in the court's discretion constitute a sufficient ground for denying the motion. Cal Rules of Court, Rule 3.1350 Motion for summary judgment or summary adjudication: (d) Separate statement in support of motion (1) The Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts in support of a motion must separately identify: (A) Each cause of action, claim for damages, issue of duty, or affirmative defense that is the subject of the motion. Here, Defendant's...
2020.07.30 Petition for Writ of Mandate 673
Location: Santa Cruz
Judge: All Departments
Hearing Date: 2020.07.30
Excerpt: ... and fence on their easement; (2) require Petitioners to either remove the gate and fence or apply for a Coastal Development Permit (CDP); and (3) impose civil penalties if Plaintiffs refuse to remove the gate and fence to allow public access to Twin Lakes State Beach. Petitioners seek a writ of mandate directing the County and the Coastal Commission to (1) withdraw demands for the retraction of their LAW AND MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DATE: July 3...
2020.07.30 Demurrer 208
Location: Santa Cruz
Judge: All Departments
Hearing Date: 2020.07.30
Excerpt: ...ur large joint venture projects. Plaintiffs allege that Defendants misrepresented that the “reasonably possible additional costs” of these projects were at most $47 million for 2018; and that Defendants made additional misleading statements as to its “economic outlook in general”, its “exceptional management of risks”, and other expressions of corporate optimism. Plaintiffs further allege that Defendants failed to disclose that it had...

221 Results

Per page

Pages