Excerpt: ...udice to some of the parties. This motion may be renewed if there are claims that do not settle at the mediation stage, and upon designation and/or discovery of expert witnesses, if the court at that later time can determine that the benefits of trial consolidation can be achieved without significant risk of prejudice. ...

Excerpt: ...laintiff's counsel in his moving papers. To prevail on a motion to set aside a dismissal under CCP §473, plaintiff's counsel was required to submit a “sworn affidavit” attesting to his mistake. Although plaintiff's counsel refers to a declaration in the title of his motion papers, no declaration, that is, no statement signed under penalty of perjury, was filed. Moreover, even if the document submitted had been signed under penalty of perjury...

Excerpt: ...of the subject accident by PARMOD KUMAR dba ROBY TRUCKING. [KUMAR's Undisputed Fact 3]. It is also undisputed for the purposes of this motion that KUMAR dba ROBY TRUCKING carried workers' compensation insurance for his employees, and that the insurer has provided workers' compensation benefits to the survivors of Levy. [KUMAR's Undisputed Facts 4‐6]. While KUMAR operated a trucking business and employed Levy under the fictitious business name o...

Excerpt: ...c bodies.” Cohan v. City of Thousand Oaks (1994) 30 Cal.App.4th 547, 555. Thus, meetings of public agencies should be made open to the public, unless a stated exception applies. Government Code §54953(a) [“All meetings of the legislative body of a local agency shall be open and public, and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting of the legislative body of a local agency, except as otherwise provided in this chapter”]. There is...

Excerpt: ...ned on the basis of foundation and lack of personal knowledge. The court agrees with Plaintiff's late‐filed reply that Defendant's opposition to motion for summary judgment implies that an unknown amount of funds for unknown invoices may be due to Plaintiff. However, this implication is insufficient to establish a basis to grant Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff has not met its “burden of showing that there is no defense to a...

Excerpt: ...n for her failure to produce any new or different matter at an earlier time. (Baldwin v. Home Sav. of Am. (1997) 59 Cal.App.4th 1192, 1199; Garcia v. Hejmadi (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 674, 689‐690.). ...

Excerpt: ...halal v. Fireman's Fund Ins. Companies (1988) 46 Cal. 3d 287. As noted in California Practice Guide, Insurance Litigation at §§15:140 et seq.: Pleading Third Party Claims Against Insurers a. [15:140] No direct action generally: As stated earlier, a person injured by the insured generally has no direct action against the insured's liability insurer to obtain a settlement. See ¶ 15:11 ff. Page 3 of 4 b. [15:141] No joinder in action agai...

Excerpt: ...sh Subpoena to David Grant USAF Med Center filed by Plaintiff Motion to Quash Subpoena to Rohit's Cleaning Service filed by Plaintiff TENTATIVE RULING The court notes that the meet and confer efforts were inadequate. Plaintiff's counsel's emails, which did not begin until April 19, 2018, simply reiterate her objections to the subpoenas and argue that none of the documents sought in the subpoenas is discoverable. This is not the law. Clearly, some...

Excerpt: ...n and Regina Yin are compelled to attend their depositions scheduled on July 23 and July 24. Plaintiffs are awarded reasonable attorneys' fees and costs from Defendants as monetary sanctions in the amount of $1,040, payable within 30 days of the date of service of the order awarding sanctions. The Court does not consider any matters that are not stated in Plaintiffs' notice of motion and raised for the first time in Plaintiffs' reply. (Kinda v. C...

Excerpt: ...ARTNERS, LLC, and PACIFIC SECURITY CONSULTANTS (“PSC”), PSC has a duty to defend and indemnify cross‐complainants in the underlying action filed by RANDALL LEE SHERWOOD and ALBERTA LATORRES. The court's ruling is based on the undisputed evidence that: (1) The services contract between STARWOOD and PSC requires PSC to defend, indemnify, protect, and hold harmless the “Manager” and “Owner” of the shopping center property known as “S...

Excerpt: ...ant Owen “is presumed to know who his customers were at the time a business was conveyed” and therefore the injunction prohibiting solicitation of former customers “provides sufficient notice”. (Amended Preliminary Injunction, p. 11:7‐ 9.) A preliminary injunction is not intended to include the detail and scope that an order would have after a fully contested trial in which the parties would have the opportunity to present and refute ev...

Excerpt: ...other party material to Plaintiff's theory of relief, what the defendants did or did not do to make them liable to Plaintiff, or why the defendants owed Plaintiff a duty to act or refrain from acting. Plaintiff has not met his burden of proving that it is reasonably possible to cure the defects by amendment. (Blatty v. New York Times Co. (1986) 42 Cal.3d 1033, 1041; Goodman v. Kennedy (1976) 18 Cal.3d 335, 349; Cooper v. Equity Gen. Ins. (1990) 2...

Excerpt: ...are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Defendants have submitted uncontroverted evidence that SUARD'S diagnosis and treatment of decedent PATRICK KRAINERT were within the standard of care, including SUARD'S prescribing the drug, Gabapentin, for him without discussing the rare possibility that it could produce suicidal tendencies. (Declaration of Benny Gavi, M.D.). Further, the conduct of SUARD was not a substantial factor in causing the dea...

Excerpt: ...ade secret through improper means, and Defendant's action damaged Plaintiff. (CytoDyn of New Mexico, Inc. v. Amerimmune Pharm., Inc. (2008) 160 Cal.App.4th 288, 297.) Plaintiff alleges that trade secret information was obtained or derived through Defendant Siegrist, who owed a duty to Plaintiff to maintain its secrecy and limit its use. (Complaint, ¶¶ 18, 23, 27.) Not only does Plaintiff allege that Defendant Siegrist acted as an agent or emplo...

Excerpt: ...dice. Defendants have established that Plaintiff's action arises out of the investigation and prosecution of an action for code enforcement violations occurring at real properties owned by Plaintiff, which constitutes protected activity. (Squires v. City of Eureka (2014) 231 Cal.App.4th 577, 589; see, Rusheen v. Cohen (2006) 37 Cal.4th 1048, 1056 [a cause of action arising from a defendant's litigation activity is subject to special motion to str...

Excerpt: ...e period of the decedent's alleged exposure from 1970 to 1973. Plaintiffs' expert, Sean Fitzgerald, indicates that according to certain tests, there was some asbestos in the talc, and that tests indicating no evidence of asbestos in the talc were not conclusive in this regard. Fitzgerald establishes that the decedent's asbestos exposure from Emtal talc was more than a mere possibility, and that this exposure may have been a substantial factor in ...

Excerpt: ...ction 2030.210 governing responses to interrogatories and CCP Sections 2031.210 and 2031.280 governing responses to requests for production. Plaintiff is to provide further responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One, Nos. 3, 7, 11, 15, 19, 23, 27, 31, 35, 39, 43, 46, 50, 54, 58, 61, and 62, in compliance with CCP Section 2030.210; and to provide a further response to Request for Production, Set One, No. 1, in compliance with CCP Sections 2031....

Excerpt: ......

Excerpt: ....D.). Therefore, as a matter of law, HIRAOKA cannot be found negligent in this action. The unopposed motion for summary judgment filed by defendant JANE CHIC, P.A., is granted. Defendant CHIC has submitted undisputed facts that in treating plaintiff, she acted within the standard of care for a physician's assistant in the community. (Declaration of Marla Stayduhar, Exhibit D, Declaration of William Wood, P.A.). Therefore, as a matter of law, CHIC...

Excerpt: ...578, 586, fn. 5). Defendants have not yet filed their motion for summary judgment, and have not indicated how they may meet the “stringent requirements for summary judgment” in the present case. With regard to the viability of defendants' proposed motion for summary judgment, the court notes (1) plaintiff disputes the fact that she agreed to the proposed settlement, and (2) the evidence regarding the alleged settlement agreement will be limit...

Excerpt: ......

Excerpt: ...under 14 who has a substantial interest in the litigation. (Landry v. Berryessa Union Sch. Dist. (1995) 39 Cal.App.4th 691, 696.) However, the burden is on the moving party to establish a substantial interest in the litigation. As it appears that a motion under CCP § 36(b) is mandatory in the same manner as a motion brought under CCP §36(a), it appears that such a motion “may be supported by nothing more than an attorney's declaration bas...

Excerpt: ...ich this Court may construe as an admission that the motion is not meritorious and cause for denial. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1113, subds. (a)‐(b).) And, Defendants have failed to identify any statutory requirement for verification of any of Plaintiffs' causes of action. “In general, complaints need not be verified” and “[v]erification is necessary only when called for by a particular statute.” (Murrieta Valley Unified Sch. Dist. v....