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

2604 Results

Location: Sonoma x
2019.2.27 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings 619
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Dollard, Jennifer V.
Hearing Date: 2019.2.27
Excerpt: ...l infliction of emotional distress (against defendant Drew); and 3) negligent infliction of emotional distress (against defendant CSAA). This matter is on calendar for the demurrer by CSAA and Drew pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) sections 430.10(d) and 430.10(e) on the basis that they have been misjoined and that Plaintiff has failed to set forth facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. That Demurrer is SUSTAINED without ...
2019.2.27 Motion to Compel Deposition, for Production of Docs, for Monetary Sanctions 756
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Hardcastle, Allan D
Hearing Date: 2019.2.27
Excerpt: ...e any documents; and failed to provide any dates for the commencement of the <000f0003004c0051000300 005c000f00030033004f[aintiff acknowledges that since the filing of the motion, the parties have agreed to a deposition date of February 25, 2019, which is only two days before this scheduled hearing. Thus, Plaintiff requests that the hearing remain on calendar and despite the agreement on a deposition date, Plaintiff continues to request an order ...
2019.2.27 Application to be Admitted Pro Hac Vice 055
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2019.2.27
Excerpt: ...ith the court a verified application together with proof of service by mail in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure section 1013a of a copy of the application and of the notice of hearing of the application on all parties who have appeared in the cause and on the State Bar of California at its San Francisco office. The notice of hearing must be given at the time prescribed in Code of Civil Procedure section 1005 unless the court has prescribed...
2019.2.27 Demurrer 692
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2019.2.27
Excerpt: ...l infliction of emotional distress (against defendant Drew); and 3) negligent infliction of emotional distress (against defendant CSAA). This matter is on calendar for the demurrer by CSAA and Drew pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) sections 430.10(d) and 430.10(e) on the basis that they have been misjoined and that Plaintiff has failed to set forth facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. That Demurrer is SUSTAINED without ...
2019.2.27 Motion for Leave to File Complaint 119
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2019.2.27
Excerpt: ...igence; 2) breach of contract; 3) breach of implied warranties; 4) – 5) breach of express warranty; and 6) – 7) claim on contractor's license bond (against the sureties). The Complaint alleges that Plaintiffs entered into an Owners Contract Agreement with Defendant Ken Medrano, individually and dba Kendell Brook Builders (“Defendant Medrano”), and that as part of the work to be completed, Defendant Medrano retained Jack Shapiro and Shapir...
2019.2.27 Motion for Summary Judgment, Adjudication 135
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Hardcastle, Allan D
Hearing Date: 2019.2.27
Excerpt: ...ts a motion directed to a prior complaint. [Citation.] Thus, once an amended complaint is filed, it is error to grant <00570044004c0051004800 005500480059004c0052[us complaint. [Citation.] As our colleagues in Division Two have explained, “a court granting plaintiff leave to amend a cause of action should not at the same time attempt to summarily adjudicate material issues which underlie that same cause of action. After a cause of action is ame...
2019.2.27 Motion to Quash Service 262
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Hardcastle, Allan D
Hearing Date: 2019.2.27
Excerpt: ...preme Court of the State of New York, County of New York entitled Brembo S.p.A. v. T.A.W. Performance Index No. 654931/2017 (the New York Case) which it argues involves the same Distribution Agreement as in the instant case. For the reasons explained below, the court finds that Brembo is not subject to the jurisdiction of the court, and therefore the service of summons is properly quashed. Quash Summons Based on a Lack of Jurisdiction Amended Com...
2019.2.27 Motion to Strike 185
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Dollard, Jennifer V.
Hearing Date: 2019.2.27
Excerpt: ...ce of a memorandum as an admission that the motion or special demurrer is not meritorious and cause for its denial and, in the case of a demurrer, as a waiver of all grounds not supported. (b) Contents of memorandum The memorandum must contain a statement of facts, a concise statement of the law, evidence and arguments relied on, and a discussion of the statutes, cases, and textbooks cited in support of the position advanced. Plaintiff shall subm...
2019.2.27 Motion to Strike for Malicious Prosecution 877
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Hardcastle, Allan D
Hearing Date: 2019.2.27
Excerpt: ...s prosecution claim. Defendant contends that Plaintiffs have failed to meet that burden and therefore, the motion to strike should be granted and the complaint should be stricken. Plaintiffs oppose the motion on several grounds. First, Plaintiffs argue that the motion is procedurally defective under Code of Civil Procedure section 1005 and California Rules of Court, rule 3.1110 because Defendant's moving papers did not include the time and date o...
2019.2.27 Motion to Vacate Application to Renew Judgment 896
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2019.2.27
Excerpt: ...d] over twelve years before the request to renew of the judgment has been filed.” Plaintiffs refer to their Exhibit A to support this argument, which is a December 9, 2008 “Modified Judgment” entered in Defendant's favor following a remittitur from the Court of Appeal, which affirmed the trial court's prior award of expert fees and litigation costs but reversed the trial court's award of attorneys' fees to Defendant. Alternatively, Plaintif...
2019.2.27 Motion to Withdraw 073
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Dollard, Jennifer V.
Hearing Date: 2019.2.27
Excerpt: ... as filed does not reflect the correct upcoming hearing date and there is no proof of service of the motion on the intervenors. Nor is there proof of service demonstrating that plaintiff, who resides out-of- state, was notified of the new hearing date for the motion to withdraw and informed of the upcoming motion to expunge. The court is inclined to grant the motion if Mr. Kelly can demonstrate on or before the hearing that proper notice has been...
2019.2.22 Motion to Set Aside Entry of Default 192
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Hardcastle, Allan D
Hearing Date: 2019.2.22
Excerpt: ... have not filed an opposition to the motion. Defendant's Motion is GRANTED. Defendant shall file his proposed answer within five days of service of the Court's final ruling on this motion. Code of Civil Procedure section 473(b) provides for both discretionary and mandatory relief from an entry of default. (See, Even Zohar Construction & Remodeling, Inc. v. Bellaire Townhouses, LLC (2015) 61 Cal.4th 830, 838– 839; see also, Benedict v. Danner Pr...
2019.2.22 Motion to File Amended and Supplemental Complaint 939
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Dollard, Jennifer V.
Hearing Date: 2019.2.22
Excerpt: ... defendants. Therefore, plaintiff seeks leave to file a supplemental complaint based on the new facts that have arisen since plaintiff filed her original complaint. She concedes these new facts give rise to new causes of action which also necessitates adding parties as defendants. Plaintiff also appears to argue that she has amendments to make to her complaint based on the fact she dismissed some defendants from certain causes of action. Defendan...
2019.2.22 Motion to Consolidate 773
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2019.2.22
Excerpt: ...on Insurance Fund's unopposed motion to consolidate its Subrogation Action with this case pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) section 1048(a). CCP section 1048(a) provides: “When actions involving a common question of law or fact are pending before the court, it may order a joint hearing or trial of any or all the matters in issue in the actions; it may order all the actions consolidated and it may make such orders concerning procee...
2019.2.22 Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay 276
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Dollard, Jennifer V.
Hearing Date: 2019.2.22
Excerpt: ...er 9, 2016. The Complaint contains a single cause of action for premises liability. This matter is on calendar for Defendants' motion to compel arbitration and stay pursuant to the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) and California Arbitration Act on the basis that: 1) Plaintiff received the benefits conferred by the terms of service containing the agreement to arbitrate disputes “arising out of or related to” the use of Airbnb's platform, wh...
2019.2.22 Motion to Reopen Discovery 455
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Hardcastle, Allan D
Hearing Date: 2019.2.22
Excerpt: ...170011001300 005100030057004b0048[ grounds that there is “good cause” for the Court to exercise its discretion and reopen discovery on this limited issue and that Defendant will not suffer prejudice if discovery is reopened and limited as requested. Defendants oppose the motion and contend that Plaintiff has known about Defendants' contractual limitation of liability defense for 15 years and has chosen to ignore it. Thus, Defendants aver that...
2019.2.22 Motion to Set Aside Dismissal 738
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Hardcastle, Allan D
Hearing Date: 2019.2.22
Excerpt: ...ntiff's Motion is GRANTED. Unless this tentative ruling is contested, <0057004800470003005a00 005000520057004c0052[n. Code of Civil Procedure section 473(b) provides for both discretionary and mandatory relief from an entry of default. (See, Even Zohar Construction & Remodeling, Inc. v. Bellaire Townhouses, LLC (2015) 61 Cal.4th 830, 838– 839; see also, Benedict v. Danner Press (2001) 87 Cal.App.4th 923, 927.) As relevant here, the mandatory re...
2019.2.22 Motion for Summary Judgment 135
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Broderick, Patrick M
Hearing Date: 2019.2.22
Excerpt: ...ontrary. Defendant also presents no facts or evidence in opposition. Defendant instead objects to Plaintiff's evidence, particularly the documents in Exhibit B, as inadmissible hearsay which does not meet the requirements for the business-records exception under Evidence Code section 1271. Evidence Code section 1271 governs the admissibility of business records, and information therefrom, as an exception to the hearsay rule. It states, in full, �...
2019.2.22 Motion to Set Aside Entry of Default 687
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Dollard, Jennifer V.
Hearing Date: 2019.2.22
Excerpt: ...counsel states in his declaration that entry of default was “due to my inadvertence, mistake and neglect.” (Decl. of Reustle, ¶24.) Under the circumstances, “relief is available regardless of whether the attorney's neglect is excusable.” (J.A.T. Entertainment, Inc. v. Reed (1998) 62 Cal.App.4th 1485, 1492.) Accordingly, the court shall grant the motion and direct defendants' counsel to pay plaintiff $1,965 in reasonable compensatory ...
2019.2.22 Motion to Strike or Tax Costs 273
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Dollard, Jennifer V.
Hearing Date: 2019.2.22
Excerpt: ...n Arshi carrying a loan in the amount of $72,500. The promissory note for Arshi's loan to plaintiff, among other things, was a main issue in this case. After a court trial, judgment was entered in plaintiff's favor. Plaintiff filed a costs memo and Arshi now moves to strike or tax costs. Per CCP §1032(a)(4), a prevailing party includes the party with a net monetary recovery. Here, the court finds plaintiff was the prevailing party. In this actio...
2019.2.22 Petition to Confirm Arbitration Award 582
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Dollard, Jennifer V.
Hearing Date: 2019.2.22
Excerpt: ...osition that the petition must be denied because a copy of the agreement to arbitrate is not attached to the petition as required by CCP §1285.4(a). On the merits, respondent argues the award must vacated because: (1) the arbitrator exceeded his power and the award cannot be corrected without affecting the merits of the decision upon the controversy submitted; and (2) respondent's rights were substantially prejudiced by misconduct of the arbitra...
2019.2.6 Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement 764
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Dollard, Jennifer V.
Hearing Date: 2019.2.6
Excerpt: ...ntage of objectors is small.” (Dunk v. Ford Motor Co. (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 1794, 1802.) Plaintiff has adequately demonstrated that the above factors have been satisfied and the court reaffirms its certification of the settlement class for settlement purposes. The court also approves plaintiffs' request for $13,066.00 in settlement administration expenses and for a service award to the named plaintiff, Seth Swan, in the amount of $6,000. The co...
2019.2.6 Demurrer 873
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Dollard, Jennifer V.
Hearing Date: 2019.2.6
Excerpt: ...ate from this action. The County demurs on the ground that plaintiff has failed to state a cause of action because the factual allegations are insufficient to establish that the County (as opposed to the Town of Windsor) owned or controlled the public property where the accident occurred or owed a duty to plaintiff. The County argues it is “indisputable” that it does not have ownership or control over the location where the accident occurred....
2019.2.6 Demurrer 999
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Dollard, Jennifer V.
Hearing Date: 2019.2.6
Excerpt: ...respondents: (1) violated the Brown Act (Gov. Code, §54950 et seq.) by denying him the right to fully comment at the meeting; and (2) violated Government Code section 1090 and Government Code section 87100 by failing to disclose alleged conflicts of interest and failing to abstain from contracting with Colantuono, Highsmith & Whatley, PC (“CHW”) to represent the county in defending against petitioner's pending lawsuit challenging pension inc...
2019.2.6 Motion for Terminating, Monetary Sanctions 366
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Dollard, Jennifer V.
Hearing Date: 2019.2.6
Excerpt: ... monetary sanctions are ordered. In this fraud action involving the sale of real property, defendants Kerston and Robison failed to abide by this court's October 2, 2018 Order. The Order required defendants to provide verified responses to plaintiff's request for production, without objections, and to pay plaintiff $1,460 in monetary sanctions, within 20 days of notice of entry of the order. Because of defendants' failure to obey the court's orde...

2604 Results

Per page

Pages