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

194 Results

Location: Shasta x
2019.4.9 Motion to Strike 093
Location: Shasta
Judge: Baker, Stephen H
Hearing Date: 2019.4.9
Excerpt: ...o provide a sufficient factual basis for punitive damages. She also provides a general allegation that Defendant Sparks as the Senior Vice President was certainly a managing agent and argues that no further specificity is needed. The title of Senior Vice President alone is insufficient to allege that Sparks was an officer or other responsible individual for corporate policy that would allow punitive damages to be alleged against a corporation. Th...
2019.4.9 Motion for Summary Adjudication 023
Location: Shasta
Judge: Baker, Stephen H
Hearing Date: 2019.4.9
Excerpt: ...t) of CCP § 437c as the basis for this motion. Subdivision (t) provides that a party may move for summary adjudication of a legal issue that does not completely dispose of a cause of action when certain steps are followed. Subdivision (t) states in pertinent part as follows: (1)(A) Before filing a motion pursuant to this subdivision, the parties whose claims or defenses are put at issue by the motion shall submit to the court both of the followi...
2018.7.30 Motion to Contest Application for Good Faith Settlement 952
Location: Shasta
Judge: Baker, Stephen H
Hearing Date: 2018.7.30
Excerpt: ...thority to represent Reed or file a motion on his behalf. On this basis alone, the motion is denied. Counsel should be prepared to address this issue at the hearing of this matter. Out of an abundance of caution, and in order to promote economy and convenience to the parties, the Court issues the following “tentative” tentative ruling indicating how it would rule if Peter Dubrawski properly appeared. Plaintiff, Robert Reed and non‐parties r...
2018.7.30 Demurrer 637
Location: Shasta
Judge: Baker, Stephen H
Hearing Date: 2018.7.30
Excerpt: ...“general demurrers.” A general demurrer lies when the allegations of the complaint show that the action is barred by the statute of limitations. Iverson, Yoakum, Papiano & Hatch v. Berwald (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 990, 995. Merits of Motion: Plaintiff's form complaint for personal injury alleges two causes of action arising from the same incident. The first cause of action is for “Motor Vehicle” which is a type of negligence cause of action....
2018.7.30 Claim of Exemption 813
Location: Shasta
Judge: Baker, Stephen H
Hearing Date: 2018.7.30
Excerpt: ...that can be withheld is 25% of disposable income). 15 USC § 1673(a). Section 1672(b) of Title 15 of the United States Code defines “disposable earnings” as “that part of the earnings of any individual remaining after the deduction from those earnings of any amounts required by law to be withheld.” CCP section 706.011 provides an almost identical definition. Under California law, even more than 75% can be exempt, if the income is sufficie...
2018.7.23 Demurrer 351
Location: Shasta
Judge: Baker, Stephen H
Hearing Date: 2018.7.23
Excerpt: ...ritance fails to state sufficient facts and is uncertain. Specifically, Wells argue both causes of action are based on an oral contract and both fail because they do not provide the necessary terms and are barred by both the statute of frauds and by the applicable statute of limitations. Wells also claim the bad faith denial cause of action is also only recognized in the insurance context and is therefore an inappropriate cause of action. Standar...
2018.7.23 OSC Re Sanctions 701
Location: Shasta
Judge: Baker, Stephen H
Hearing Date: 2018.7.23
Excerpt: ...018 and by Plaintiff on June 28, 2018. Mr. Smith was therefore the attorney of record in this case and remained the attorney for Plaintiff at the time the OSC issued. No response has been provided by either Plaintiff or Mr. Smith. Sanctions are therefore imposed in the amount of $250 against Plaintiff and Mr. Smith. The clerk is directed to prepare a separate Order of Sanctions. ...
2018.7.23 OSC Re Monetary Sanctions 536
Location: Shasta
Judge: Baker, Stephen H
Hearing Date: 2018.7.23
Excerpt: ...ssues an Order to Show Cause re Dismissal pursuant to Gov't Code § 68608(b). The hearing on the OSC re Dismissal is set for Monday, October 1, 2018 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 3. The clerk is instructed to prepare a separate Order to Show Cause re Dismissal. Today's review hearing is continued to Monday, October 1, 2018 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 3. ...
2018.7.23 OSC Re Monetary Sanctions 341
Location: Shasta
Judge: Baker, Stephen H
Hearing Date: 2018.7.23
Excerpt: ...pear that the parties' failure to appear was inadvertent. As such no sanctions will be imposed. The 5 parties are reminded that the Court will continue to schedule review hearings and order the filing of status conference statements until the Federal Action is remanded or dismissed. No appearance is necessary on today's calendar. ...
2018.7.23 Motion to Quash Subpoenas 001
Location: Shasta
Judge: Baker, Stephen H
Hearing Date: 2018.7.23
Excerpt: ...cy rights, and for otherwise violating a June 14, 2018 agreement between plaintiffs' counsel and defense counsel. Counsels' agreement limited the scope of any subpoenas in the case to the parts of the body that plaintiffs have alleged to be injured. The subject subpoenas were issued to Anthem Blue Cross on or about May 25, 2018, as part of a bundle of 33 separate subpoenas issued to plaintiffs' medical and insurance providers. The subpoenas appar...
2018.7.17 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, for Summary Judgment 961
Location: Shasta
Judge: Baker, Stephen H
Hearing Date: 2018.7.17
Excerpt: ...Amended Complaint. Standard of Review: A motion for judgment on the pleadings may be brought when the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. CCP § 438(c)(1)(B)(ii). A motion of this nature is similar to a demurrer and tests the sufficiency of a pleading. Elliott v. City of Pacific Grove (1975) 54 Cal.App.3d 53. The rules governing demurrers therefore apply. Cloud v. Northrop Grumman Corp (1998) 676 Cal.App.4th...
2018.7.16 Demurrer 584
Location: Shasta
Judge: Baker, Stephen H
Hearing Date: 2018.7.16
Excerpt: ...Defendant alleges it fails to state sufficient facts to constitute a claim under the Consumer Legal Remedies Act. Standards of Demurrer: A demurrer should be sustained if the complaint fails to “state facts sufficient to constitute a valid cause of action.” CCP § 430.10(e). A demurrer can be used to challenge defects that appear on the fact of the complaint or from matters that may be subject to judicial notice. Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal...
2018.7.16 Demurrer 887
Location: Shasta
Judge: Baker, Stephen H
Hearing Date: 2018.7.16
Excerpt: ...477. The demurrer to the original complaint is therefore OVERRULED as moot. ...
2018.7.16 Motion for Good Faith Settlement Determination 931
Location: Shasta
Judge: Baker, Stephen H
Hearing Date: 2018.7.16
Excerpt: ...for a hearing on the issue of whether a settlement has been made in good faith. A good faith determination bars any other joint tortfeasors or coobligors from any further claims for indemnity, comparative fault or equitable contribution. CCP § 877.6(c). The settlement must be within the reasonable range of the settling tortfeasors' share of liability taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case. Tech‐Bilt, Inc. v. Woodward...
2018.7.16 Petition for Change of Name and Gender 723
Location: Shasta
Judge: Baker, Stephen H
Hearing Date: 2018.7.16
Excerpt: ...ician, but the physician's assistant. There is no statement by the physician that the contents of the letter are true and correct or that the physician has personal knowledge of the facts. Additionally, even if were to accept the attached letter as a statement by the physician, it still fails to provide the physicians license or certificate number and fails to provide a statement that the physician is licensed for this jurisdiction. Otherwise, th...
2018.7.9 Demurrer 319
Location: Shasta
Judge: Baker, Stephen H
Hearing Date: 2018.7.9
Excerpt: ...action on the last page of their Memorandum of Points and Authorities appears to be in error as a demurrer on that cause of action was neither noticed nor argued. Standards of Demurrer: A demurrer should be sustained if the complaint fails to “state facts sufficient to constitute a valid cause of action.” CCP § 430.10(e). A demurrer can be used to challenge defects that appear on the fact of the complaint or from matters that may be subject ...
2018.7.2 OSC Re Sanctions 002
Location: Shasta
Judge: Baker, Stephen H
Hearing Date: 2018.7.2
Excerpt: .... Lee was named in the original complaint. Despite the two year delay, Lee still has not been served nor has he been dismissed. No response to the Order to Show Cause has been filed. The Court imposes sanctions in the amount of $250 against Plaintiff and her counsel for failure to comply with CRC 3.110(b). The clerk is instructed to prepare a separate Order for Sanctions. The Court will issue an Order to Show Cause re Dismissal of Plaintiff's com...
2018.7.2 Motion to Strike Anit-SLAPP 275
Location: Shasta
Judge: Baker, Stephen H
Hearing Date: 2018.7.2
Excerpt: ...e cross‐ complaint was dismissed on April 13, 2018. On May 15, 2018, Plaintiff filed a motion to compel discovery responses which was originally set to be heard on June 11, 2018. On May 25, 2018, the present special motion to strike was filed setting a hearing date of July 2, 2018. The special motion to strike is brought pursuant to California's anti‐SLAPP statute, codified as Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16. The discovery motion heari...
2018.7.2 Motion to Garnish Wages 601
Location: Shasta
Judge: Baker, Stephen H
Hearing Date: 2018.7.2
Excerpt: ...er spouse before or during the marriage. Family Code § 910. Community property is subject to the enforcement of a money judgment. CCP § 695.020. Judgment Creditor holds a judgment against the Judgment Debtor only but now seeks an order permitting the garnishment of the spouse's wages. CCP § 706.109 expressly authorizes a wage garnishment to proceed against a spouse after a noticed motion is granted. No opposition has been filed despite service...
2018.7.2 Motion to be Relieved as Counsel 305
Location: Shasta
Judge: Baker, Stephen H
Hearing Date: 2018.7.2
Excerpt: ...d as counsel is brought instead of filing a consent under CCP § 284(1). Mr. Cogan has established in general terms that there has been a breakdown in the relationship. The information provided in the declaration is sufficient to establish a need to be relieved provided all procedural requirements have been met. CRC 3.1362(d) specifically requires service of the motion, supporting declaration and proposed order. The proof of service on file refle...
2018.7.2 Motion to Compel Further Responses 363
Location: Shasta
Judge: Baker, Stephen H
Hearing Date: 2018.7.2
Excerpt: ...ed to redactions and provided definitions. The Court finds that the meet and confer efforts were sufficient and made in good faith. Objections: Plaintiff has provided various objections to statements made by the Defendant. The statements do not related to the substance of this motion; specifically, whether the discovery responses are adequate. The statements are irrelevant and were not considered by the Court related to the merits of this motion....
2018.6.25 OSC Re Monetary Sanctions 113
Location: Shasta
Judge: Baker, Stephen H
Hearing Date: 2018.6.25
Excerpt: ...d. Neither party informed the Court of the federal dismissal. Plaintiff did not dismiss this action. For these reasons, the Court required an appearance at the May 14, 2018 review hearing. In the future, counsel are advised to keep the Court apprised of the status of the federal action to avoid wasting judicial resources in issuing an OSC when the 3 federal action has been dismissed. No sanctions will be imposed. The clerk is instructed to admini...
2018.6.25 Motion to Confirm Good Faith Settlement 931
Location: Shasta
Judge: Baker, Stephen H
Hearing Date: 2018.6.25
Excerpt: ... faith pursuant to CCP § 877.6. The motions are nearly identical and will be addressed together in one ruling. Richardson seeks to settle this matter for their policy limit of $1,000,000. Brown seeks to settle this matter for their policy limit of $100,000. CCP § 877.6(a)(1) provides that a party may move by noticed motion for a hearing on the issue of whether a settlement has been made in good faith. A good faith determination bars any other j...
2018.6.25 Motion to Compel Discovery Responses 775
Location: Shasta
Judge: Baker, Stephen H
Hearing Date: 2018.6.25
Excerpt: ...nd 2031.300(b). The Court will order Plaintiff to provide responses to the above discovery without objection. Defendant has also requested sanctions in the amount of 8.5 hours at the rate of $185 for Plaintiff's failure to timely respond. Given that this motion is unopposed and availability of CourtCall, the requested hours are reduced from 8.5 to 3. Sanctions will be awarded in the amount of $555. The motion is GRANTED. Plaintiff shall have 30 d...
2018.6.25 Claim of Exemption 527
Location: Shasta
Judge: Baker, Stephen H
Hearing Date: 2018.6.25
Excerpt: ...le income is automatically exempt (i.e. the maximum that can be withheld is 25% of disposable income). 15 USC § 1673(a). Section 1672(b) of Title 15 of the United States Code defines “disposable earnings” as “that part of the earnings of any individual remaining after the deduction from those earnings of any amounts required by law to be withheld.” CCP section 706.011 provides an almost identical definition. Under California law, even mo...

194 Results

Per page

Pages