Excerpt: ... to the Motion. 7 Meet and Confer. The parties both provide support for meet and confer efforts, which included a meet and confer letter sent by Plaintiff on July 28, 2020. On August 4, 2020, Defendant agreed to provide an amended response to Special Interrogatory No. 3. The amended response was served on August 18, 2020. On September 14, 2020, Plaintiffs sent another meet and confer letter expressing their dissatisfaction with the amended respon...

Excerpt: ...able are restricted to only those costs that are both reasonable in amount and reasonably necessary to the conduct of the litigation. CCP § 1033.5(c)(2)(3). The Court has the power to disallow costs, even those allowable as a matter of right, if they are not reasonably necessary or in a reasonable amount. Perkos Enterprise, Inc. v. RRNS Enterprises (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th 238, 245. Here, Plaintiff seeks to tax the $1,420 in costs listed under “Ot...

Excerpt: ...s a result of the further meet and confer efforts the only remaining issues are Form Interrogatories, 2.3, 2.4, 11.1 and 12.4. Joint Statement: At the last hearing on this motion, the Court ordered the parties to file a joint statement 5 days prior to this continued hearing detailing the remaining issues, if any, remaining in dispute after further meet and confer efforts. The parties have not done that. Instead, the moving party filed a “Joint ...

Excerpt: ...RANTED. Merits of the Motion. The party moving for summary judgment bears the initial burden to make a prima facie showing that there are no triable issues of material fact. Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal. 4th 826, 850. There is a genuine issue of material fact only if the evidence would allow a reasonable trier of fact to find the underlying fact in favor of the party opposing the motion in accordance with the applicable standar...

Excerpt: ....10(f). A demurrer can be used to challenge defects that appear on the face of the complaint or from matters that may be subject to judicial notice. Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal. 3d 311, 318. The court “treat[s] the demurrer as admitting all material facts properly pleaded, but not contentions, deductions or conclusions of fact or law.” Hood v. Hacienda La Puente Unified School District (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 435, 438. No matter how unlikely,...

Excerpt: ..., there was no opposition to the merits or objection to timeliness of the service. However, on September 3, 2019, the County moved to set aside that order. A hearing was set for this set aside motion, before Judge Ryan, on September 23, 2019. The criminal defendant appeared in Court on September 9, 2020 at which time Judge Ryan ordered the bond reinstated and exonerated. Judge Ryan also vacated the County's motion to set aside the order. The Coun...

Excerpt: ...f is correct. In its decision, the court used January 15, 2019 at the cutoff date for liquidated damages because that was the date the Court determined from the evidence that the Defendant “…was precluded from doing further work on the project…” Upon further review, it appears that date may actually be January 21, 2019 as Plaintiff argues. If this is accurate, actual liquidated damages would be $9,000 (45 days @ $200) instead of $7,800 (3...

Excerpt: ... as inadmissible under People v. Sanchez (2016) 63 Cal.4th 665. Dr. Luce establishes that his opinion is based on his personal experience as a physician, as well as his review of the medical records in this case. While it is true that he does not appear to have directly spoken to anyone involved in the Plaintiff's treatment, he does have knowledge of the course of treatment based upon his review of the medical records. Additionally, Plaintiff's o...

Excerpt: ...ause of action alleged against her (negligent misrepresentation) on the undisputed fact that she owned no duty to Plaintiffs and there was no misrepresentation that caused them harm. Objections: Objection 1: Sustained, lacks foundation and personal knowledge. Objections 2‐10: Sustained, hearsay, lacks foundation and personal knowledge. Objection 11: Overruled. Objection 12: Overruled. Objection 13: Overruled. Objection 14: Overruled. Objection ...

Excerpt: ...le trier of fact to find the underlying fact in favor of the party opposing the motion in accordance with the applicable standard of proof. Id. at 845. The Court's sole function on a motion for summary judgment is issue‐finding, not issuedetermination. The judge must simply determine from the evidence submitted whether there is a “triable issue as to any material fact.” CCP § 437c(c). If the moving party does not meet the burden the motion...

Excerpt: ... declaration. Defendant's motion sets forth some meet and confer efforts, although the parties clearly were not working together in the spirit of resolving the issues. Nor is there a declaration regarding Defense counsel's efforts to contact Plaintiff to address the nonappearance as required under CCP §2025.450(b)(2). In Clement v. Alegre (2009) 177 Cal. App. 4th 1277, the California Court of Appeal for the First District, when faced with a simi...

Excerpt: ... that a “motion for summary judgment shall be granted if all the papers submitted show that there is no triable issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” On September 3 14, 2020, after the filing of the Motion for Summary Judgment (filed on July 15, 2020), Plaintiff dismissed a number of the causes of action involving defendant Daniel Lockwood. The remaining causes of action against...

Excerpt: ... of judicial notice. “Although the existence of a document may be judicially noticeable, the truth of statements contained in the document and its proper interpretation are not subject to judicial notice if those matters are reasonably in dispute.” Unruh‐Haxton v. Regents of University of California (2008) 162 Cal. App. 4th 343, 364 (internal citations omitted). See also California Evidence Code section 450. While the Court will grant the r...

Excerpt: ...o remediate the dangerous condition of the property for over three years. The first citations issued in March of 2017. Since that date, the condition of the property has grown progressively more dangerous. Dozens of calls for service have been associated with the property, including at least one fire. Despite the passage of a reasonable time, Defendant is unwilling or unable to bring the property into compliance with all the applicable code secti...

Excerpt: ... of judicial notice. “Although the existence of a document may be judicially noticeable, the truth of statements contained in the document and its proper interpretation are not subject to judicial notice if those matters are reasonably in dispute.” Unruh‐Haxton v. Regents of University of California (2008) 162 Cal. App. 4th 343, 364 (internal citations omitted). See also California Evidence Code section 450. While the Court will grant the r...

Excerpt: ... that a “motion for summary judgment shall be granted if all the papers submitted show that there is no triable issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” On September 3 14, 2020, after the filing of the Motion for Summary Judgment (filed on July 15, 2020), Plaintiff dismissed a number of the causes of action involving defendant Daniel Lockwood. The remaining causes of action against...

Excerpt: ...ant. 5 Motion to Strike Standard: A motion to strike can be used to attack the entire pleading, or any part thereof, including single words or phrases. Stearns Ranchos v. Atchison Topeka & Santa Fe Railway (1981) 19 Cal.App.3d 24. It is proper for the Court to strike any irrelevant, false or improper matter. CCP § 436(a). The Court can also strike any part of a pleading that is not drawn or filed in conformity with California law. CCP § 436(b)....

Excerpt: ...ent person” would do in the same situation. Ambrose v. Michelin North America, Inc. (2005) 134 Cal.App.4th 1350, 1354. The discretion granted by section 473(b) is liberally construed. The public policy preference for trial on the merits favors resolving doubts in favor of the moving party and relief should be granted except in cases of clear insufficiency of the “excuse” or unjustified delay in bringing the motion to the other party's preju...

Excerpt: ...use may include “[a] party's excused inability to obtain essential testimony, documents, or other material evidence despite diligent efforts.” CRC Rule 3.1332(c)(6). In determining whether to grant or deny a motion to continue, the Court considers a number of factors, as outlined in CRC 3.1332(d). Here, trial is not set until January, some four months from the motion date. No party has previously requested a continuance. The correspondence fi...

Excerpt: ...he Request is unverified and unsupported by a declaration. Therefore there is no evidence before the Court upon which to grant the request. Additionally, the Court finds that the Request, even if it had been supported by evidence, fails to provide grounds for a continuance under CCP §437c(h) and CRC 3.1332. The Court will therefore proceed and issue a ruling on the merits. Summary Judgment Standard: CCP § 437c states a motion for summary judgme...

Excerpt: ...ions 452, 452, and 453. That request is GRANTED. Merits of the Motion. As a preliminary matter, the motion was timely filed and served. Under CCP § 438(c)(1)(B)(2), a party may bring a motion for judgment on the pleadings on grounds that the complaint fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against the moving defendants. The grounds for the motion must appear on the face of the challenged pleading(s) or be based on facts ...

Excerpt: ...endant Palo 2 Cedro Community Guild. (hereinafter “Defendant”) did not provide full and complete responses. Defendant has filed an Opposition to the Motion. Meet and Confer. The parties both provide support for meet and confer efforts, which culminated in a meet and confer letter sent by Plaintiff on the evening of August 5, 2020 requesting a response by August 7, 2020. Within that very narrow window, Defendant provided a response and left op...

Excerpt: ...1, 12.4, 12.6, and 12.7. He also seeks further responses to the Request for Production, Nos. 1, 6, 11, 16, 17, 20, 22 and 26. Plaintiff Spurgeon, through counsel, has agreed to produce further responses to interrogatory Nos. 2.5, 2.6, 6.2, 6.3, 6.7, 8.1, 11.2, and 12.6. Spurgeon has also agreed to provide a supplemental response to Request for Production No. 26. The evidence before the Court is that the agreed upon further responses have not been...

Excerpt: ... 21, 2015 and August 14, 2020, and/or the Rest Break Subclass between July 27, 2019 and August 14, 2020. They assert causes of action for failure to provide rest and meal periods, failure to reimburse expenses, failure to properly accrue and carry‐over sick leave and for penalties pursuant to various Labor Code 2 violations related to the alleged violations. The proposed settlement provides for a maximum Gross Settlement Amount (GSA) of up to $...

Excerpt: ...f Shasta at the Department of Child Support Services. The Court does not believe Judge Wood's spouse or step‐daughter has any involvement in the investigation, management, prosecution or defense of this case but does disclose the employment relationship between County of Shasta and the Court's first degree relative as required by California Code of Judicial Ethics, Canon 3E(2). Tentative Ruling on Plaintiff's Motion to Reopen Discovery: Plainti...