Excerpt: ...easonable probability of success on the merits; and (2) who will suffer greater injury? (Weil & Brown, Civ. Pro. Before Trial, §9:522, 9:527, 9:531,) The burden of proof is on the moving party to show all elements necessary to support the issuance of a preliminary injunction. (Weil & Brown supra at 9:632.1.) In ruling on the motion, the court is to evaluate the potential merits and interim harm factors, and the greater the showing on one, the le...

Excerpt: ...6) deceit. (First Amended Cross The motion by Plaintiff/Cross‐Defendant for judgment on the pleadings is granted with leave to amend as to the causes of action for negligence, interference with prospective economic advantage, and intentional interference with contract The motion is denied as to the causes of action for civil damages under Pen. Code §496(c), conversion and deceit. LAW AND MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DATE: MAY 23, 2022 TIME: 8:30 A...

Excerpt: ...icity load of its residents and businesses, and purchase electricity on their behalf. Plaintiff alleged that Defendant's automatic enrollment procedure, or "opt‐ out policy,” interfered with Plaintiff's existing contracts with PG&E and forced Plaintiff into a contractual relationship with Defendant. The Court found that Defendant's enrollment system was automatic but not mandatory. “Even assuming that Plaintiff's money is used to fund Defen...

Excerpt: ...rner. The $1,581,000 corporate loan on which this action is based was made to Enabledware, which is the entity liable for the loan debt. As part of the Settlement with Tabatabai , Malek has agreed to dismiss the action he filed in Santa Clara Superior Court for the repayment of this loan. The settlement was reached after the family law court, in dividing the community assets of Turner and Tabatabai in their divorce proceedings, assigned Enabledwa...

Excerpt: ...5.16, subdivision (e)" 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 [124 Cal.Rptr.2d 530, 52 P.3d 703].) The First cause of action of the X‐C for cancellation of instrument requests cancellation of the Purchase Agreement alleging the Agreement is void because Plaintiffs forged seller Tom...

Excerpt: ...quest for Hearing within the 90 days after filing this action, as required by Pub. Res. Code §21167.4. Petitioner filed this action on November 4, 2021; the 90 day deadline to file the Request for Hearing expired on February 2, 2022; and Petitioner filed her Request for Hearing (filed “on demand”, after the Clerk initially rejected it as untimely) on February 8, six days after the deadline. Petitioner asserts that discretionary relief is ava...

Excerpt: ...ment, or any other place of business in which barbering, cosmetology, or electrolysis is practiced unless licensed under this chapter. Persons licensed under this chapter shall limit their practice and services rendered to the public to only those areas for which they are licensed. Any violation of this section is subject to an administrative fine and may be subject to a misdemeanor. Plaintiff held a license for 521 E. Lake Ave., Watsonville whic...

Excerpt: ...this action is ordered stayed pending the resolution of Plaintiff's federal court action, Shirazi v Oweis et. al., U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, Case No. 5:21‐cv‐136 EDJ‐VKD. Abatement based on another action pending Plaintiff names only The Regents as a defendant in this action, and names only the individual UC employees in the federal court action. Both parties agree that if the federal court determines on the meri...

Excerpt: ...84,370, pursuant to SCCC §7.128.210. Although Mr. Redenbacher denied Petitioner's appeal, he reduced the civil penalty to $174,370 on the mitigating factor that Petitioner was a first time offender. Petitioner asserts that (1) SCCC §§7.128.050 and 7.128.210 are preempted by state law‐‐ specifically Health & Safety Code §§11358, 11359 and 11360, and Bus. & Prof. Code §26038; and (2) that the civil penalty imposed by the Hearing Officer �...

Excerpt: ...f the party contends that the cause of action has no merit, that there is no affirmative defense to the cause of action, that there is no merit to an affirmative defense as to any cause of action, that there is no merit to a claim for damages, as specified in Section 3294 of the Civil Code, or that one or more defendants either owed or did not owe a duty to the plaintiff or plaintiffs. A motion for summary adjudication shall be granted only if it...

Excerpt: ...tionally and with a conscious disregard for the rights of Moran and the general public”. A conscious disregard of the safety of others may constitute malice within the meaning of section 3294 of the Civil Code. In order to justify an award of punitive damages on this basis, the plaintiff must establish that the defendant was aware of the probable dangerous consequences of his conduct, and that he willfully and deliberately failed to avoid those...

Excerpt: ...in Reply to objection to minimum price bid (RJN no. 5) that: 1. At an early conference Judge Silver indicated he would go with $5.3 million as the Opening Bid. The stated rationale was that if the property is worth more, the market will drive the price up at the auction. Judge Silver also stated that if Winterhalder believed $5.3 million was a fire sale price then he or his consortium could buy it. 5. Winterhalder was dissatisfied. He did three t...

Excerpt: ...e default based on CCP § 473(b) is denied as untimely and because Defendant has not established that judgment was entered as a result of mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect. (CCP § 473(b)) However, the court has inherent, equitable powers apart from any statutory authority to set aside a judgment on the ground of extrinsic fraud or mistake to which the statutory time limits under CCP 473(b) do not apply. (Cal Practice Guide, (T...

Excerpt: ...ation as to one or more causes of action within an action, one or more affirmative defenses, one or more claims for damages, or one or more issues of duty, if the party contends that the cause of action has no merit, that there is no affirmative defense to the cause of action, that there is no merit to an affirmative defense as to any cause of action, that there is no merit to a claim for damages, as specified in Section 3294 of the Civil Code, o...

Excerpt: ...ms subject to forfeiture: The following are subject to forfeiture (f) All moneys, negotiable instruments, securities, or other things of value furnished or intended to be furnished by any person in exchange for a controlled substance, all proceeds traceable to such an exchange, and all moneys, negotiable instruments, or securities used or intended to be used to facilitate any violation of Section 11351,...11355, 11359, 11360,...of this code... Ca...

Excerpt: ...tonomy must be supported by a compelling interest. (Williams v. Superior Court (2017) 3 Cal.5th 531, 557 [220 Cal.Rptr.3d 472, 398 P.3d 69].) Personnel, tenure, and promotion files relating to the employee relate to the private affairs of the employee and are maintained in confidence by the employer. (Board of Trustees v. Superior Court of Santa Clara County (1981) 119 Cal.App.3d 516, 526 [174 Cal.Rptr. 160].) The scope of the inquiry permitted d...

Excerpt: ... law because, for example, the property is tax exempt, nonexistent or outside the jurisdiction, and no factual questions exist regarding the valuation of the property which, upon review by the board of equalization, might be resolved in the taxpayer's favor, thereby making further litigation unnecessary.” (Williams & Fickett v. County of Fresno (2017) 2 Cal.5th 1258, 1275 [218 Cal.Rptr.3d 362, 395 P.3d 247].) Although Plaintiff argues that prio...

Excerpt: ...der all of the evidence set forth in the papers, except the evidence to which objections have been made and sustained by the court, and all inferences reasonably deducible from the evidence, except summary judgment shall not be granted by the court based on inferences reasonably deducible from the evidence if contradicted by other inferences or evidence that raise a triable issue as to any material fact. (p) For purposes of motions for summary ju...

Excerpt: ...sition should be stayed and/or the deposition notice/RFP quashed as protected by the attorney client privilege or work product doctrine: 1. Good cause exists for production of the videos and videographer. Similar to Suezaki v. Superior Court of Santa Clara County (1962) 58 Cal.2d 166 [23 Cal.Rptr. 368, 373 P.2d 432].), Plaintiff has shown a need for the films both in order to protect against surprise, and in order to prepare for examination of th...

Excerpt: ...overriding interest that supports (un)sealing the records, namely the records are critical to show the Federal Court the legal history of this case and to support the County defendants' legal and procedural defenses to the new Federal Action. In addition, a substantial probability exists that the overriding interest will be prejudiced if the record is not sealed: the pleadings, orders, and filings in this Writ case are essential to the County and...

Excerpt: ...thorized by any of the following: (A) Contract. Cal Civ Code § 1717 Contract provision for attorney fees and costs (a) In any action on a contract, where the contract specifically provides that attorney's fees and costs, which are incurred to enforce that contract, shall be awarded either to one of the parties or to the prevailing party, then the party who is determined to be the party prevailing on the contract, whether he or she is the party s...

Excerpt: ...t's ruling on the demurrer to the Second Amended Cross‐Complaint, that “once a demurrer is sustained to an earlier version of a complaint, no further demurrers are allowed on grounds that could have been raised by the demurrer to the earlier pleading”, citing CCP §430.41(b). While the prior motion was denied without prejudice, the Court's Tentative Decision stated: LAW AND MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DATE: APRIL 4, 2022 TIME: 8:30 A.M. 4 Befo...

Excerpt: ... new defendant is the alter‐ego of an original judgment debtor. Wolf Metals Inc. v Rand Pacific Sales, Inc. (2016) 4 Cal. App. 5 th 698,, 703; Wollersheim v Church of Scientology (1999) 69 Cal. App. 4th 1012, 1017. Plaintiff has a failed to meet her burden of proof as to either factor. Opportunity to be heard Plaintiff argues that Dr. Larsh was put on notice at the outset of the proceedings through communications with her counsel, Tom Griffin, ...

Excerpt: ...) As used in this section, the following definitions shall apply: LAW AND MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DATE: March 28, 2022 TIME: 8:30 A.M. 10 (1) “Malice” means conduct which is intended by the defendant to cause injury to the plaintiff or despicable conduct which is carried on by the defendant with a willful and conscious disregard of the rights or safety of others. (2) “Oppression” means despicable conduct that subjects a person to cruel a...

Excerpt: ...oid unnecessary costs or delay. A consolidation of actions does not affect the rights of the parties. The purpose of consolidation is merely to promote trial convenience and economy by avoiding duplication of procedure, particularly in the proof of issues common to both actions. (Wouldridge v. Burns (1968) 265 Cal.App.2d 82, 86 [71 Cal.Rptr. 394].) Here there are common questions of law and fact re: the loan of $450,0000. by Tai Tran to Thinh and...