Excerpt: ...as not expressly raised it appears that Plaintiffs' counsel also represents Williams. An opposition has been filed but it expressly states that it is the Plaintiffs' opposition. There is no indication that the opposition was provided on behalf of Williams. No evidence in opposition has been filed by Williams or on behalf of Williams. As such the Court will continue this matter to allow for personal service on Williams. Today's hearing is continue...

Excerpt: ...ws a party to move to set aside a void order or judgment. Defendant has submitted a declaration that he was never served with the FAC, and had no knowledge of it prior to November 24, 2020. The FAC was filed on August 18, 2020 and includes a proof of service stating that it was served by mail on Defendant Robert Blankenship on August 18, 2020. Based on the a proof of service indicating the FAC was served on August 18, 2020, the Court entered defa...

Excerpt: ...her burden of showing that a cause of action has no merit if the party has shown that one or more elements of the cause of action, even if not separately pleaded, cannot be established, or that there is a complete defense to the cause of action. Once the defendant … has met that burden, the burden shifts to the plaintiff … to show that a triable issue of one or more material facts exists as to the cause of action or a defense thereto….” C...

Excerpt: ...nt and Housing Act (FEHA) as well as whistleblower retaliation, failure to take corrective action and violation of the POBRA related to actions taken by unspecified employees on September 27, 28 and 29, 2019. On April 10, 2020, Defendant responded with a Notice of Insufficiency. The Notice stated it would take no action on the claim for 15 days in order to give Plaintiffs' an opportunity to amend. On May 4, 2020, Plaintiffs submitted an amended c...

Excerpt: ...ecified in the requests admitted. CCP § 2033.280(b). Failure to respond also waives any objections to the discovery propounded. CCP § 2033.280(a). Petitioner's moving papers sufficiently demonstrate that the Claimant has failed to respond to Plaintiff's Request for Admissions within the required time frame. The motion is GRANTED. A proposed order was provided as an exhibit to the motion. The Court cannot remove the proposed order because that w...

Excerpt: ...ear later. CRC 3.740 requires that these collection cases be served within 180 days of the complaint having been served. No efforts to obtain an extension of this time were ever requested. When the trial date arrived, no one appeared. Attorney C. W. Chase attempted to appear but he did not have an association of counsel and no association had been previously filed, thus the Court dismissed the case. CCP § 473 permits a court to set aside a judgm...

Excerpt: ... is timely made and the granting of the motion will not prejudice the opposing party, it is error to refuse permission to amend and where the refusal also results in a party being deprived of the right to assert a meritorious cause of action or a meritorious defense, it is not only error but an abuse of discretion.” Morgan v. Sup.Ct. (1959) 172 Cal.App.2d 527, 530. In general the Court should not concern itself with the validity of the proposed...

Excerpt: ...e facts sufficient to constitute a valid cause of action.” CCP § 430.10(e). A demurrer can also be brought on the grounds that the pleading is “uncertain.” CCP § 430.10(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,...

Excerpt: ...a complaint is in some respects uncertain, because ambiguities can be clarified by modern discovery. Khoury v. Maly's of California, Inc. (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 612, 616. A demurrer for uncertainty should only be granted when the pleading is so incomprehensible that a defendant cannot reasonably respond. Lickiss v. Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (2012) 208 Cal.App.4th 1125, 1135. Plaintiff's complaint alleges a single cause of action for ...

Excerpt: ...idavit or declaration showing that the mistake, surprise, inadvertence or neglect was committed by counsel. 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 prejudice. Elston ...

Excerpt: ...uld include a “sharing” provision that would permit Plaintiff's counsel to keep the documents for ten years and disclose them to attorneys with similar claims. Merits of Motion: Defendants seek a protective order pursuant to CCP §§ 2017.20 and 2019.030. The parties agree that discovery will require Defendants to produce proprietary and confidential information. The parties also agree that a protective order is appropriate to protect that in...

Excerpt: ...intiff, and shall render judgment in the plaintiff's favor for that relief, not exceeding the amount stated in the complaint. Ibid. In hearing the evidence, the Court in its discretion may permit the use of affidavits in lieu of personal testimony. CCP § 585(d). However, the facts stated in the affidavit or affidavits are required to be within the personal knowledge of the affiant and must be set forth with particularity, showing affirmatively t...

Excerpt: ...20 to set a remote deposition on August 19, 2020. On August 12, 2020, GM objected. The objections are: irrelevance, compound, overbroad, unduly burdensome, vague, ambiguous, not particularized, attorney‐client privilege, attorney work product doctrine, trade secret, proprietary information, calls for speculation, outside the scope of discover, oppressive and harassing, financially burdensome and impracticable, documents outside the possession, ...

Excerpt: ...arty may move for an order compelling the production. CCP § 2031.320. Plaintiffs propounded Set Three and Set Four of Requests for Production on May 28, 2020 and June 9, 2020. The initial responses were deficient. After meet and confer efforts, Defendants agreed to provide supplemental responses. The supplemental responses were provided on September 18, 2020 and stated that responsive documents would be produced. They were not. The instant motio...

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: ..., 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: ...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: ...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: ...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: ...t: The notice of motion for a motion to consolidate must be filed in all cases sought to be consolidated (CRC 3.350(a)(1)(B)) but the memorandum and evidence only need to be filed in the lowest case number. The notice of motion was not filed in the subrogation litigation (Case No. 193051). No objection has been raised to this defect. Despite the defect, it appears that all parties in both actions were served with the notice and motion. Without an...

Excerpt: ...ctions Defendants have asserted as to the Declaration of David Jackson. Some of the factual assertions are clearly contradicted by undisputed evidence offered in support of the motion and some of the opinions do indeed appear to be speculation and conjecture. However, adequate foundation is established to qualify this witness to opine concerning the standard of care associated with school administration, including the implementation and use of al...

Excerpt: ...0.41(a)(3). Defendant did not submit a meet and confer declaration in support of the present demurrer. Defense counsel is admonished for failing to comply with the meet and confer requirement. Typically the Court would continue a demurrer if the meet and confer requirement has not been satisfied; however, based on the papers, continuing the matter to meet and confer does not appear likely to result in a resolution and therefore the Court will iss...