Excerpt: ...he face of the FAC or matters subject to judicial notice…” (Court's May 22, 2019 Minute Order.) In that Minute Order, the Court pointed out that Defendant had not asked the Court to take judicial notice of Plaintiff's Government Tort Claim; Defendant's Notice of Rejection; or the fact that the rejection was in writing or in compliance with Government Code section 913. (Ibid.) The Court noted that without these documents, the “purported stat...

Excerpt: ...-PI-001(3)) and premises liability (PLD-PI-001(4)). This matter is on calendar for the demurrer by Defendants pursuant to Cal. Code Civ. Proc. (“CCP”) § 430.10(e) to the entire Complaint generally, and to the intentional tort and premises liability causes of action in particular, on the basis that they fail to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The Demurrer is SUSTAINED WITH leave to amend. The Complaint alleges that on ...

Excerpt: ...y made clear that the Court was not going to impose them and yet Defendant failed to appear to challenge the ruling as to that issue, which she could have done. Defendant fails to explain why she did not, or could not, have done so. In any case, even if the Court were to reconsider the ruling, it would not alter the ruling in any way and finds that the ruling was correct. The Court had discretion not to impose such sanctions and the Court finds t...

Excerpt: ...on the pleadings, Plaintiff has failed to cure the defects which this Court noted. The only changes Plaintiff made to this cause of action are at ¶¶`16- 18 and consist of minimal additional, and largely conclusory, allegations of a special relationship; use of specific terminology such as “the Biakanja factors”; and further, though largely repetitive, allegations of delay and Defendant's use of inaccurate information violating the duty of c...

Excerpt: ...with a “Gross Settlement Fund” of $135,000 to pay $45,000 in attorneys' fees, a maximum of $6,000 in costs, a $5,000 award to the named Plaintiff as class representative, payment to the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency of $1,875 as civil penalties, administration costs of $8,000, and the remainder, $69,125, as the net settlement fund to be paid to the class members with shares based on the number of weeks that each member wor...

Excerpt: ...0 00030044005100470003[David only intended to settle the action with named defendants and intended to pursue the case against his sister and co-plaintiff, Priscilla. David contends there is “good cause” not to dismiss the case based on his attorney's declaration of fault, which states in part “[u]nfortunately, through my error, I prepared or caused to be prepared and submitted an ‘Unconditional Notice of Settlement of Entire Case” form ...

Excerpt: ... a court ruling issued in Sonoma County Superior Court case SCV-255664 is granted. Plaintiff's unopposed request for judicial notice is granted. The court notes that it only takes judicial notice of the fact the documents were filed or particular orders were made. The court does not take judicial notice of the truth of the matters asserted in the documents. (Sosinsky v. Grant (1992) 6 Cal.App.4th 1548, 1565.) This is a legal malpractice action al...

Excerpt: ...ent pursuant to Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. (“CCP”) § 437c on the grounds that there is no triable issue of material fact and Plaintiff is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. The unopposed Motion is GRANTED. The elements of Plaintiff's cause of action for breach of contract are “(1) the existence of the contract, (2) plaintiff's performance or excuse for nonperformance, (3) defendant's breach, and (4) the resulting damages to the plaintif...

Excerpt: ...v. Proc. (“CCP”) 473(a)(1). Plaintiff shall file and serve the [Proposed] Fourth Amended Complaint (Russo Decl. Ex. A) within five (5) days of entry of the order granting this Motion. Plaintiff's discovery motion is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The Notice of Motion states that it seeks to compel further responses to Plaintiff's first set of form interrogatories. The Separate Statement filed pursuant to Cal. R. Ct. 3.1345 makes clear th...

Excerpt: ...ies' relationship existed solely through Piner, a California Corporation, and therefore, the “partnership” statutes are irrelevant. Additionally, Parikh contends that under Corporations Code section 16202, a partnership cannot exist when a corporation is formed. Further, Parikh's demurrer to the fourth cause of action for “Judicial Expulsion of Parikh and Doe Defendants as Members of Piner's Board of Directors” under Corporations Code sec...

Excerpt: ...Gift Trust (MRV). Defendant contends that he is seeking damages in excess of the judgment herein. Defendant has filed a lawsuit against MRV and its principals for indemnity, arguing that the judgment obtained by Lonich was due to MRV's improper acts in agency. MRV responds, contending that the parties are not the same in both litigations. MRV notes that while it is a named Defendant in the Sacramento Litigation, it is the assignee of the judgment...

Excerpt: ...rald Aronow (“Aronow”). A cross-complaint was then directed at Wimmer/Emergent by Ryan F. Thomas (an individual) and Johnston/Thomas PC (a professional corporation). Wimmer/Emergent seeks judicial notice. The Court denies judicial notice as to 1 and 2. The Court grants judicial notice as to 3 and 4. The Court grants judicial notice of Thomas' No. 1. Aronow's request for judicial notice is granted as to request No. 4, and denied as to the bala...

Excerpt: ...fically directed at the “[n]et proceeds claimed by defendant Lynda May Maye in the amount of $233,848.94, from the sale of real property located at 113 Douglas Fir Circle, Cloverdale CA 95425, in the control of Stephen Olson, Partition Referee, arising out of Maye v. Rangel, Sonoma County Superior Court Action No.: SCV-260596.” The original application, which sought an attachment “in the amount of $200,000 or according to proof” was denie...

Excerpt: ...on for battery (as to plaintiffs Latchmi Lala and Asha Prasad); 2) to the second cause of action for assault (as to plaintiffs Latchmi Lala and Asha Prasad); 3) to the third cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress; 4) to the sixth cause of action for negligence; 5) to the seventh cause of action for premises liability; and 6) to the entire complaint (as to Latchmi Lala and Asha Prasad). Lucas Wharf also moves to strike ce...

Excerpt: ...rte application for default interlocutory judgment for partition or for an order shortening time for the prove-up hearing and the Court granted an order shortening time for the prove-up hearing, scheduling it for November 22, 2017. The minutes of the November 22 prove-up hearing reflect that Maye's request for an interlocutory default judgment of partition was granted, and on November 28, 2017 an interlocutory default judgment of partition was en...

Excerpt: ...lly interfering with [Plaintiff's] ability to maintain its provisional manufacturing license and transitioning its temporary distribution and provisional manufacturing licenses to final;” (3) requiring Defendant “to submit the required Owner Information Form and Request for Live Scan (or in the alternative to resign as a director and shareholder of Plaintiff) so that Plaintiff <005200510003004f004c00 0003000b0017000c0003[requiring Defendant �...

Excerpt: ...iver (“Receiver”). This matter is now on calendar for the Receiver's motion pursuant to Cal. R. Ct. (“CRC”) 3.1184 for an order: 1) approving his Final Report and Accounting, which reflects fees in the amount of $1,582.00; 2) discharging him; 3) terminating the receivership; and 4) abandoning books and records. CRC 3.1184(a) provides that a receiver must present by noticed motion or stipulation of all parties: 1) a final account and repor...

Excerpt: ...fic facts showing good cause justifying the discovery sought...”].) The parties appeared at the hearing and informed the Court that a stipulation and order had been submitted requesting a continuance of the hearing to June 5, 2019. The Court indicated that the order continuing the hearing would be signed once received. The Order continuing the hearing to June 5, 2019 was signed on May 22, 2019. On the Court's own motion, the hearing was subsequ...

Excerpt: ...dant Expert Plastering, Inc. (“Expert”) is the stucco subcontractor. Defendant CTS Cement Manufacturing Corporation (“CTS”) produced the stucco cement used by Expert. Expert moves for summary judgment or adjudication of all plaintiff's claims on the ground they are time-barred. Plaintiff and CTS have both filed opposition to Expert's motion. Construction on plaintiff's home was completed on August 24, 2005. It is undisputed that bubbling ...

Excerpt: ...l each of the Defendants to respond to his post-judgment requests for production of documents (“RPODs”) and post-judgment 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. C...

Excerpt: ...esult of Plaintiff's “mistake, inadvertence, surprise and excusable neglect” and SMART “was not and is not prejudiced by this failure.” SMART opposes the Petition and points out that in the Court's May 22, 2019 Order Sustaining SMART'S Demurrer, Without Leave to Amend, the Court entered judgment for SMART and dismissed the entire action as to SMART, with prejudice. Thus, SMART contends that the Petition is moot. Thereafter, SMART addresse...

Excerpt: ...security (CCP 391.1 and 391 .3(a)); in the amount of $25,000 for each unresolved lawsuit before any further action in those cases can go forward.” Based on part on that Ruling, the hearing on Defendants' demurrer in this action is CONTINUED to June 26, 2019 at 3:00 P.M. in Department 19. If Plaintiff has not posted the required bond by that date, the case will be dismissed. (See, Singh v. Lipworth (2005) 132 Cal.App.4th 40, 44 [“A vexatious l...

Excerpt: ...damages. In the form complaint, plaintiffs allege the following causes of action: (1) breach of contract; and (2) common counts. Defendant demurs to both causes of action. He argues plaintiffs have failed to state a cause of action and that the claims are uncertain because the form complaint is not correctly filled out. He also asserts that the promissory note and letter of intent, which are attached to the complaint, have been superseded by an a...

Excerpt: ...ffs to its first set of special interrogatories, form interrogatories, and requests for production, without objections, and for monetary sanctions. That motion was granted pursuant to an uncontested tentative ruling, and per order entered on May 2, 2019 (the “Order Compelling Discovery”) Plaintiffs were ordered to serve full and complete verified responses, without objections, to each of the sets of discovery by May 1, 2019. The request for s...

Excerpt: ...ert plaintiff's objections are waived and monetary sanctions should be ordered. Relying on Food 4 Less Supermarkets, Inc. v. Superior Court (1995) 40 Cal.App.4th 651, plaintiff contends that his objections need not be verified therefore he did not waive his right to object. In Food 4 Less, the court framed the issue, and reasoned as follows: What then is the appropriate procedure if a party tenders a hybrid response containing objections and fact...

Excerpt: ... of business in Chattanooga, Tennessee. Defendants are in the business of providing animal processing services throughout North and South America and Chavez alleges they employed him as a sanitation worker in California. According to Vincit's website, it is a “single source provider” with a “network of eight member companies that delivers maximum efficiency through vertical integration.” QSI is listed as one of Vincit's eight member compa...

Excerpt: ... violation of GC § 12940(h) (retaliation); 3) violation of GC § 12940(k) (failure to prevent harassment); 4) negligent infliction of emotional distress; 5) breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; 6) constructive discharge; 7) violation of California Wage Orders and Labor Code- overtime; and 8) violation of California Wage Orders and Labor Code- meal and rest breaks. This matter is on calendar for the demurrer by Defendant...

Excerpt: ...real property that falls outside of the protections in the statue of frauds. Further, Defendants argue that the allegations fail to support any of the exceptions to the statute of frauds. Further, Defendants contend that that the fraud cause of action fails because the allegations fail to support an actionable promise, any harm, or any reasonable reliance. Defendants also argue that Plaintiff is engaged in sham pleading, noting that the original ...

Excerpt: ... need be no actual “fraud” or “mistake.” Marriage of Park (1980) 27 Cal.3d 337, 342. For example, the court in County of San Diego v Gorham (2010) 186 Cal.App.4th 1215, at 1229-1230, ruled that the trial court was required to use its equitable power to set aside a default judgment based on a false proof of service. Defendant provides evidence showing that she received no actual notice, despite the facially valid proof of service for the s...

Excerpt: ...t that Defendant's motion references an “Exhibit 1” but no exhibits were attached. Finally, the Court stated that all statutory deadlines for an opposition and reply will be applicable. Defendant served the motion by personal service on May 20, 2019 but has not filed any additional documents and has not filed a copy of the referenced Exhibit 1. Plaintiff filed an opposition on June 6, 2019. In her motion, Defendant requests that the Court vac...

Excerpt: ...ppeared at the trial in this debt collection action and the court dismissed the case with prejudice for lack of prosecution. Plaintiff now moves for discretionary relief vacating the dismissal on the ground of excusable mistake based on the court's purported “administrative error.” According to plaintiff's counsel Jason Tang's declaration, counsel never received notice of the trial date from the court. Plaintiff's counsel states he only disco...

Excerpt: ...ents were shipped and delivered but Defendants have not paid as agreed. Default was entered against both Defendants on October 29, 2018, but no default judgment has been entered yet. This matter is on calendar for the motions by Defendants: 1) to set aside the defaults pursuant to Cal. Code Civ. Proc. (“CCP”) § 473(b) on the basis of attorney fault; and 2) to compel arbitration and stay pursuant to CCP § 1281 et seq. or, in the alternative,...

Excerpt: ...property on August 25, 2016; a Notice of <00140019001e0003004400 00550052005300480055[ty was sold at a trustee's sale on February 24, 2017. <004f0044005a0049005800 00480055000300440046[tion against Plaintiff on March 16, 2017 and that case was resolved in a stipulated judgment and Plaintiff vacated the property. Plaintiff filed the underlying action against Oxbow and Defendants on March 24, 2017 but Oxbow has since been dismissed. The First Amend...

Excerpt: ...iff is ordered to file and serve a supplemental declaration on or before Monday, September 30, 2019 informing the Court of the status of Defendants' compliance. Defendants are permitted, but not required, to file supplemental declarations on or before Wednesday, October 9, 2019. I. Procedural History Plaintiff filed the complaint in this action to enforce an administrative abatement order, to abate a public nuisance, and to enforce and permanentl...

Excerpt: ... sale. The FAC contains causes of action for: 1) wrongful foreclosure (monetary damages); 2) violation of Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code (“B&PC”) § 17200 et seq.; 3) breach of contract (promissory estoppel); and 4) negligent infliction of emotional distress. This matter is on calendar for the demurrer by Defendant to the FAC and each of the causes of action pursuant to Cal. Code Civ. Proc. (“CCP”) § 430.10(e) on the grounds that it fails to sta...

Excerpt: ... $100,079. The court awards Petitioner the full $14,877.50 claimed for this motion and seeking costs, with no enhancement, resulting in a total fee award of $114,956.50. Petitioner also seeks costs of $2,051.51 and the court awards this amount. Should any party request appearances, in addition to the points raised in this tentative ruling, the court will also wish to explore the issue of whether Petitioner may seek apportionment of the fees again...

Excerpt: ...filed the currently operative first amended cross-complaint (“FACC”) against Edgar for: 1) breach of contract; 2) breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing; 3) breach of the duty of loyalty; 4) intentional misrepresentation; 5) negligent misrepresentation; and 6) interference with contractual and/or prospective economic relations. This matter is on calendar for: 1) the demurrer by Edgar to the second, third, fourth, fifth, and six...

Excerpt: ...gs, intentional infliction of emotional distress. Per plaintiffs, “[d]efendants orally uttered to others, or caused to be published words which tended directly to injure Heyman and Patterson with respect to their office, profession, trade or business.” (SAC, ¶187.) Specifically, plaintiffs allege the following conduct by defendants in the intentional infliction of emotional distress cause of action: On information and belief, plaintiff alleg...

Excerpt: ... L&V provided that, “Client acknowledges that Stephen Power has agreed to pay for legal services performed by L&V and authorized L&V to invoice and collect from Mr. Power. Client acknowledges that Client shall be responsible for any fees and costs not paid by Mr. Power or his designee.” (Exh. A to Second Amended Complaint.) L&V filed suit against Stephen Power (Patricia's cousin-in-law) in Solano County Superior Court to recover unpaid attorn...

Excerpt: ...��reply to opposition to supplemental declaration…” On the same day, Plaintiff filed an Objection to the reply, correctly pointing out that the Court did not grant Defendant leave to file any further briefs. In fact, the Court notes that it was Defendant's late <0057004c00510058004800 00030049004c00550056[t place. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Objection to the supplemental reply is SUSTAINED. Nonetheless, the Court will consider the merits of Defe...

Excerpt: ... stricken and the amount set forth in the Complaint, $5,935.41, put in its place. With costs in the amount of $297.00, default judgment was therefore entered in the amount of $6,232.41. This matter is now on calendar for an “order correcting the record nunc pro tunc” pursuant to Cal. Code Civ. Proc. (“CCP”) § 473(d) on the grounds that “the record on which the judgment is based includes a clerical error.” The Motion is DENIED. The ba...

Excerpt: ...ceeding if either (A) A provision of law confers an unconditional right to intervene. (B) The person seeking intervention claims an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action and that person is so situated that the disposition of the action may impair or impede that person's ability to protect that interest, unless that person's interest is adequately represented by one or more of the existing parti...

Excerpt: ...dants' exercise of their right to free speech and it is not probable that Plaintiffs will prevail. The Motion is GRANTED. I. Standard for Anti-SLAPP Motion. CCP § 425.16(b)(1) provides that a cause of action against a person “arising from any act of that person in furtherance of the person's right of petition or free speech under the United States Constitution or the California Constitution in connection with a public issue” shall be subject...

Excerpt: ...d real property claim and opposing the motion with arguments consistent therewith, had merely failed to provide any evidence supporting his claims. Plaintiff has remedied that defect in this motion. Code of Civil Procedure section 405.8, in the title governing lis pendens, expressly allows a party also to obtain an injunction, attachment or other relief. It states “[n]othing in this title precludes any party from seeking an attachment, injuncti...

Excerpt: ...gue that it was part of one larger agreement which includes other documents which include the arbitration provision on which Defendants now rely. Defendants' papers include several different agreements. These include the JV Agreement which Petitioner includes with its complaint as well as a T1 Club Corporate Member Agreement (Club Agreement), both included together in Defendants' papers as Attachment 1. They also include the covenants not to sue/...

Excerpt: ...of Civil Procedure section 430.10 and on the grounds the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute the respective causes of action. Specifically, Defendants contend that the disputed causes of action are “duplicative and superfluous” and the demurrer is necessary “in order to avoid having to conduct discovery on duplicative and superfluous cause of action.” Plaintiffs oppose the demurrer and contend that the complaint allege...

Excerpt: ...ment. Ravina objects on the ground that the release in the settlement agreement is overly broad because it releases civil and statutory penalties “that have been or could have been asserted by Plaintiff, Plaintiff's Counsel or any Class Member arising out of or relating to the Action.” Per Ravina, plaintiff in this action must have at least alleged claims supporting civil and statutory penalties if she is going to include a release of them as...

Excerpt: ...es not dispute this but simply argues Form Interrogatory 15.1 is “premature” because the parties are in the “midst” of discovery. She further asserts her responses are substantive since they relate to plaintiffs' core claims regarding habitability of the rental home. Plaintiffs have a right to conduct discovery to investigate the defenses asserted in response to the Complaint and to prepare their case for trial. (Emerson Electric Co. v. S...

Excerpt: ... the expectation and mutual understanding with Plaintiff that Plaintiff would retain and substitute new counsel, and Plaintiff's counsel thereafter failed to calendar and track the action. Plaintiff did not obtain new counsel and counsel lost touch with Plaintiff. Plaintiff and counsel have re-established contact and Plaintiff's counsel has agreed to seek relief from the dismissal and proceed with the case. The Motion is GRANTED. CCP § 473(b) pr...

Excerpt: ...because the FACC is uncertain, vague and ambiguous. Additionally, Plaintiff moves to strike Defendant's prayer for punitive damages and attorneys' fees and contends that the FACC fails to state sufficient facts to justify these damages. Plaintiff also moves to strike various allegations in the FACC based largely on evidentiary objections. Plaintiff's demurrer to Defendant's First Amended Cross-Complaint (“FACC”) is SUSTAINED, in part, with le...