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

538 Results

Location: Sonoma x
2020.03.11 Special Motion to Strike 335
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2020.03.11
Excerpt: ... Kay Rudolph (“Plaintiff”) filed her complaint against Defendants alleging a first cause of action for Breach of Contract, a second cause of action for Unfair Employment Practices, and a third cause of action for Hostile Work Environment (“the Complaint”). The Complaint alleges that from June 2005 until August 2018, Plaintiff was the Vice President of Academic Affairs and Assistant Superintendent at Santa Rosa Junior College. (Complaint ...
2020.03.11 Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement 921
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Broderick, Patrick M
Hearing Date: 2020.03.11
Excerpt: ...” The written version of the settlement, a written copy of which Defendant provides in the moving papers, is signed November 28, 2017 and likewise expressly states that the Court is to “maintain jurisdiction in order to enforce the terms of this Agreement.” Settlement section 4.16. When a party seeks to enforce a stipulated settlement entered in writing or orally before the court, the court “may enter judgment pursuant to the terms of the...
2020.03.11 Motion to Compel Further Responses 477
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2020.03.11
Excerpt: ...igently maintained the cross-walk or the crosswalk flashing lights and thus created an unreasonably dangerous condition.(FAC ¶10.) Other attributes contributing to the alleged dangerous condition are the volume and rate of speed of traffic and the limited visibility due to the sun and/or shadows. (FAC ¶12.) On August 8, 2018, Plaintiff served Defendant City with Request for Production of Documents, Set No. One. (Romero Decl. ¶6.) This set of r...
2020.03.11 Motion for Summary Judgment, to Quash Deposition Subpoena 271
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Broderick, Patrick M
Hearing Date: 2020.03.11
Excerpt: ... or there is a complete defense to every cause of action. Code of Civil Procedure section 437c; Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 850. A defendant shows that an element cannot be established only if its undisputed facts negate plaintiff's allegations as a matter of law and would make it impossible for plaintiff to show a prima facie case. Brantley v. Pisaro (1996) 42 Cal.App.4th 1591, 1597. Once the moving party has met its...
2020.03.11 Motion for Summary Judgment 498
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Dollard, Jennifer V.
Hearing Date: 2020.03.11
Excerpt: ...leges she suffered injuries because the Feeneys failed to “ensure guests left their premises safely.” Specifically, per the complaint, the Feeneys failed to prevent plaintiff from being injured in a fight in their driveway and to organize transportation for plaintiff from their home after the party. Plaintiff also alleges the Feeneys served alcohol and drugs to their guests. The Feeneys move for summary judgment on the ground that plaintiff c...
2020.03.11 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings 296
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Nadler, Gary
Hearing Date: 2020.03.11
Excerpt: ...ire. In his Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that Defendant “represented that it was knowledgeable of the conditions threatening Plaintiff's home and expressed a willingness to undertake certain duties and responsibilities to protect Plaintiff's home by establishing adequate policy limits." (Complaint at ¶18). Plaintiff further alleges that Defendant represented that it would calculate the rebuilding cost of Plaintiff's home and to obtain the actu...
2020.03.11 Motion for Discretionary Relief from Entry of Default 801
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Dollard, Jennifer V.
Hearing Date: 2020.03.11
Excerpt: ...ant Superintendent, the school district acknowledges receiving the summons and complaint but believed plaintiff's appeal of its decision was “closed” and that the matter had been concluded. Therefore, the complaint was simply filed in the file related to plaintiff's case and was not forwarded to the district's counsel or claims administrator. (See Mizera Decl., ¶¶ 14-16.) Accordingly, defendant's motion is granted and it shall file a respon...
2020.03.11 Motion for Attorney Fees 254
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2020.03.11
Excerpt: ...e action was filed on April 10, 2019, The parties settled this matter on November 4, 2019, and agreed that plaintiff's attorney fees would be decided by noticed motion. Attorney Fees Defendant FCA opposes the motion. FCA first argues that the plaintiff's counsel's billing records do not apportion fees. Plaintiff's complaint alleged causes of action for (1) violation of the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (against FCA and Lithia); (2) Negligent...
2020.03.11 Demurrer, Motion to Strike 253
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Nadler, Gary
Hearing Date: 2020.03.11
Excerpt: ... FAIR Plan); professional negligence (against Krieg); negligent misrepresentation (against all Defendants); reformation of contract (against FIE and a separate cause of action against FAIR Plan); promissory estoppel (against all Defendants); breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing (against FAIR Plan); and conspiracy (against all Defendants). Krieg and FIE bring this demurrer to the seventh cause of action for “breach of co...
2020.03.11 Demurrer 880
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Broderick, Patrick M
Hearing Date: 2020.03.11
Excerpt: ...wed for loan modification, inducing them to act in reliance on this representation, to Plaintiffs' detriment. AmeriHome argues that Plaintiffs fail to plead this with requisite particularity and Plaintiffs fail to plead the elements of misrepresentation. The elements for negligent misrepresentation are similar to fraud, but without the same level of intent and knowledge: 1) misrepresentation; 2) of a material fact; 3) no reasonable ground for bel...
2020.03.11 Motion to Seal Certificates of Merit and Application to Proceed in Fictitious Name 823
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Dollard, Jennifer V.
Hearing Date: 2020.03.11
Excerpt: ...nfidential as they must be reviewed in camera and the contents of the certificates can only be revealed to a prevailing defendant at the conclusion of litigation as specified in subdivision (p) of CCP §340.1. California Rule of Court 2.585 governs confidential in camera reviews and states: (a) Minutes of proceedings If a confidential in-camera proceeding is held in which a party is excluded from being represented, the clerk must include in the m...
2020.03.04 Demurrer, Motion to Strike 129
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Hardcastle, Allan D
Hearing Date: 2020.03.04
Excerpt: ...eight horn attached to the truck for an extended period of time within approximately 5 feet of [P]laintiff.” (FAC at ¶12.) Plaintiff alleges that “Defendant's conduct, including but not limited to, intentionally blowing a freight horn within 5 feet of [P]laintiff while [P]laintiff was talking to him was intentional and malicious and done for the purpose of causing [P]laintiff to suffer humiliation, mental anguish, and emotional and physical ...
2020.03.04 Application for Writ of Possession 613
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2020.03.04
Excerpt: ...intiff's right to a writ of possession depends on applicable substantive law. To obtain the writ, plaintiff must show that he or she: has the right to immediate possession of tangible personal property; and the property is being wrongfully withheld by defendant. (See CCP § 512.010; Englert v. IVAC Corp. (1979) 92 Cal. App. 3d 178, 184.) The principal procedural requirements are to show that the claim of right to possession “is probably valid...
2020.03.04 Demurrer 561
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Hardcastle, Allan D
Hearing Date: 2020.03.04
Excerpt: ... who represented Defendant subsequent to Plaintiff. The Court sustained that demurrer, in its entirety and without leave to amend. Thus, the only claim that remains at issue in this action is Plaintiff's claim to establish the value and validity of the lien. Specifically, Plaintiff alleges that he had an enforceable contingency fee attorney-client agreement with Defendant which required Defendant to pay Plaintiff 33 1/3% of the net recover of com...
2020.03.04 Motion to Compel Deposition 125
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Boyd, Robert S
Hearing Date: 2020.03.04
Excerpt: ... and request for production although the deadline passed several months ago and Plaintiff has waived objections at this moment. However, the Court notes the context of this discovery dispute, including Plaintiff's move and apparent health issues as well as change in attorney, which resulted in the continuance of this motion, and the opposition statement from Plaintiff's new attorney promising service of responses in March 2020. The Court accordin...
2020.03.04 Demurrer, Motion to Strike 913
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2020.03.04
Excerpt: ...AGA violations is SUSTAINED without leave to amend. The demurrer to the sixth cause of action for failure to pay business expenses is OVERRRULED. Motion to Strike Defendant contends that the entire FAC should be stricken and disregarded because Ravina failed to timely file the FAC after the Court sustained Ygrene's demurrer. Defendant cites California Rule of Court (“CRC”) 3.1320, which requires a noticed motion to strike an untimely pleading...
2020.03.04 Motion for Attorney Fees 926
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2020.03.04
Excerpt: ....00. Plaintiff's attorneys request a “lodestar” enhancement of 1.5 in the amount of $27,046.25, for a total attorney fee award of $81,138.75. Plaintiff also requests reimbursement of costs and expenses in the amount of $6,412.06. Attorney fees, costs, and expenses are GRANTED in the total amount of $61,060.36, as provided below. The complaint alleges that plaintiff purchased a vehicle from defendant FCA US LLC (“FCA”) for which FCA issued...
2020.03.04 Motion for Summary Judgment 17
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Hardcastle, Allan D
Hearing Date: 2020.03.04
Excerpt: ...erty. Plaintiffs concede that Irma willingly and knowingly transferred a joint tenancy interest to Defendant solely as a means to help Defendant financially and to get a modification on the mortgage. Plaintiffs contend that at all times, it was the Irma's intent that as soon as Defendant was financially stable, Defendant would voluntarily deed her share of the title back to Irma, who would then deed the entire property to the trust. Plaintiffs al...
2020.03.04 Motion to Set Aside Dismissal 116
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Dollard, Jennifer V.
Hearing Date: 2020.03.04
Excerpt: ...e absence of any request for relief under those grounds…[W]hen faced with a motion for relief under section 473, the trial court does not have to consider the availability of relief under the mandatory provision unless such relief is requested in an appropriate manner.” (Luri v. Greenwald (2003) 107 Cal.App.4th 1119, 1126.) “A basic principle of motion practice is that the moving party must specify for the court and the opposing party the g...
2020.02.26 Motion to Strike 358
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Dollard, Jennifer V.
Hearing Date: 2020.02.26
Excerpt: ...e function of a cross- complaint in the (now) consolidated civil action. Indeed, Objector's opposition seems to treat this single document, filed before consolidation of these actions, as both an Objection and cross-complaint. The First Amended Will Contest also seeks to find Petitioner Launay “guilty” of elder abuse, or undue influence, a function only retained by a criminal court. It also seeks some unspecified affirmative relief for violat...
2020.02.26 Motion to Strike (Anti-SLAPP) 179
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2020.02.26
Excerpt: ... Amendment right to petition and free speech and Cross-Complainants Details of Sonoma (“DOS”) and David Lucas (“Lucas”)(together “Cross- Complainants”) have little or no probability of prevailing on the merits. Cross-Complainants oppose the motion. For the reasons stated below, the motion is GRANTED. Objections Cross-Defendants objection to paragraph 19 of the Declaration of David Lucas, “Details of Sonoma, Inc. has acted in its cha...
2020.02.26 Motion to Compel Post-Judgment Requests for Production of Docs 623
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2020.02.26
Excerpt: ...ment special interrogatories (“SIs”) and for monetary sanctions. The Motion is GRANTED, except that as a pro per, Judgment Creditor may only recover the $90 in costs incurred as sanctions. A judgment creditor is entitled to serve written interrogatories to obtain information to aid in enforcement of a money judgment. Cal. Code Civ. Proc. (“CCP”) §§ 708.010(a), 708.020(a). A judgment creditor may also serve inspection demands on a judgme...
2020.02.26 Motion for Attorney's Fees and Litigation Costs 985
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2020.02.26
Excerpt: ...ourt, submitting it to the opposing party for review five days prior to submitting it to the court. Timeliness Real Party in Interest Cornell Farms, LLC (“Real Party” or “RPI”) contends that the motion is untimely based on the 180-day deadline to move for attorney's fees starting when the court filed its Statement of Decision on April 29, 2015 and therefore expiring on Oct. 27, 2015. The court addressed this in Volker's motion for leave t...
2020.02.26 Demurrers, Motion to Strike 476
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Broderick, Patrick M
Hearing Date: 2020.02.26
Excerpt: ...r than the enhanced remedies for elder abuse, solely based on the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 425.13. Plaintiff may resolve this issue by seeking to comply with Code of Civil Procedure section 425.13. Requests for judicial notice is denied as to the purported correspondence from the demurrer facilitator but granted as to the documents on file in the Court's record. Demurrer Second Cause of Action: Elder Abuse Welfare and Insti...
2020.02.26 Demurrer 626
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Dollard, Jennifer V.
Hearing Date: 2020.02.26
Excerpt: ...for reconsideration and that the instant demurrer should be sustained for the same reasons as the last. In the opposition, petitioner Rowley “acknowledges that the Court's reasoning in its order sustaining the [previous] demurrer appears to apply to the amended [petition]. Rowley believes, with all due respect, that the Court's reasoning was mistaken…” (Rowley's Opposition, p. 1, lines 8-10.) The Court remains unpersuaded by Rowley's positi...

538 Results

Per page

Pages