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

2596 Results

Location: Sonoma x
2019.11.27 Motion for Protective Order 545
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2019.11.27
Excerpt: ...ial notice is granted. A court shall limit the scope of discovery “if it determines that the burden, expense, or intrusiveness of that discovery clearly outweighs the likelihood that the information sought will lead to the discovery of admissible evidence” (Code Civ. Proc., §2017.020, subd. (a)) or if it determines the discovery sought “is unreasonably cumulative or duplicative, or is obtainable from some other source that is more convenie...
2019.11.27 Demurrer 450
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Dollard, Jennifer V.
Hearing Date: 2019.11.27
Excerpt: ...al.4th 26, 38; Fox v. JAMDAT Mobile, Inc. (2010) 185 Cal.App.4 th 1068, 1078 (“as long as a complaint consisting of a single cause of action contains any well-pleaded cause of action, a demurrer must be overruled even if a deficiently pleaded claim is lurking in that cause of action as well.”) Respondent Deborah Senecal (“Senecal”) argues that “Petitioner has not pled the necessary facts that he is the son of the Deceased.” However, P...
2019.11.27 Motion to Compel Deposition of PMK 088
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2019.11.27
Excerpt: ...ilure to participate in the meet and confer process. Timeliness Defendant argues that plaintiff's motion is untimely as CCP section 2025.480 requires a motion to be filed within 60 days after the completion of the record of the deposition. Defendant argues that the date it served its objections is equivalent to the record of deposition. Unzipped Apparel, LLC v. Bader (2007) 156 Cal.App.4th 123, provides that “under the plain meaning rule, the A...
2019.11.27 Motion for Summary Judgment, Adjudication 621
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2019.11.27
Excerpt: ...of agency or employment at the time of the subject accident. For the reasons stated below, the motion is DENIED. Defendants' objection, number 1 is overruled. The statement that a true and correct copy of the Traffic Collision Report is attached is not hearsay. The declaration states that the declarant has personal knowledge of the report, which is likely as an associate at the firm representing the plaintiff. Defendant's objection, number 2 is s...
2019.11.27 Motion for Reconsideration 816
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2019.11.27
Excerpt: ...nse to her discovery request, Plaintiff discovered that Defendant failed to disclose material facts about the Property to buyer KS Manson Partners, LP (“KSMP”) that, if appropriately disclosed, would likely substantially affect any potential purchaser's valuation of the property. Plaintiff has also received two appraisals of the Property which indicate values significantly below the pending KSMP offer and provide significant new information w...
2019.11.27 Motion for Reconsideration 282
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Hardcastle, Allan D
Hearing Date: 2019.11.27
Excerpt: ...s favor on December 11, 2017. On September 15, 2017, Plaintiff filed the complaint in this action and asserts causes of action to quiet title and for declaratory relief against Phan and the County of Sonoma. The complaint is based on Plaintiff's allegations that the County “erroneously assessed taxes on the Property;” Plaintiff's failure to pay the erroneously assessed taxes; the County's subsequent tax sale of the property to Phan at a publi...
2019.11.27 Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement 036
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Hardcastle, Allan D
Hearing Date: 2019.11.27
Excerpt: ...he class action settlement; 2. Provisionally certifying the Settlement Class, which is defined as: all persons employed by Defendant Escalante-Sonoma, LLC (“Defendant”) in California during the Settlement Class Period and who received a wage statement from Defendant at any time from February 28, 2018 through January 24, 2019, except for individuals who have waived, released and/or recovered monies upon the claims or any of the claims, in whol...
2019.11.27 Motion for Attorney Fees 027
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Hardcastle, Allan D
Hearing Date: 2019.11.27
Excerpt: ...attacks; stomach problems; diarrhea; cognitive impairment; fatigue; chronic fatigue; chest pains; and urinary tract and bladder infections. In the complaint, Plaintiff alleged that she sought to work the day shift as a reasonable accommodation and provided five medical notes to Defendants but that Defendants did not engage in a good faith interactive process and took her off schedule and then sent her back to academy training because she was a di...
2019.11.20 Motion for Summary Judgment, Adjudication 268
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Dollard, Jennifer V.
Hearing Date: 2019.11.20
Excerpt: ...Insurance Company had a duty under a homeowners policy to pay them for their losses due to the destruction of their home in the Tubbs fire. Mid-Century, in turn, moves for summary judgment or adjudication on the ground that there was no insurance policy in effect at the time of plaintiffs' loss, therefore, plaintiffs cannot prove any of their claims. Mid-Century's request for judicial notice of the complaint is granted. Plaintiffs' residence was ...
2019.11.20 Motion to Enforce Judgment, Issue Contempt Order, Issue Mandatory Injunction 686
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Dollard, Jennifer V.
Hearing Date: 2019.11.20
Excerpt: ...ards, shall authorize, in writing, George Montana Hartley to deal with the County of Sonoma regarding the process of and obtaining the permits necessary to legalize the barn at 310 Pleasant Ave., Santa Rosa, CA as a dwelling unit so he can continue to reside in the barn for 10 years after 6/28/14, as intended by the Settlor. 7. George Montana Hartley may attempt to legalize the barn as a dwelling unit, and shall pay all expenses incurred to make ...
2019.11.20 Motion to Impose Personal Liability on Third Party 121
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Dollard, Jennifer V.
Hearing Date: 2019.11.20
Excerpt: ...t: $7,322.15. However, the moving party relies on the wrong statute: CCP §701.020. CCP §701.020 falls under the chapter governing enforcement of money judgments by execution, not the chapter governing earnings withholdings orders. “Except as otherwise provided by statute, this chapter governs enforcement of a money judgment by a writ of execution.” (CCP §699.010.) And, as the Law Revision Commission Comments to section 699.010 state: “Se...
2019.11.20 Motion to Quash, Modify or Limit Subpoenas 476
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Broderick, Patrick M
Hearing Date: 2019.11.20
Excerpt: ...y privilege set forth in Evidence Code section 1014. Roe v. Sup. Ct. (1991) 229 Cal.App.3d 832, 837. When seeking information that potentially falls under the right of privacy, the party demanding disclosure must show a particularized need for the confidential information. Merely being relevant to the subject matter is not enough, and the moving party must show that the information is directly relevant to the case, in other words that it is essen...
2019.11.20 Motion to Quash, Modify or Limit Subpoenas 680
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Broderick, Patrick M
Hearing Date: 2019.11.20
Excerpt: ...i (1979) 93 Cal.App.3d 669, 679. The protection is not absolute and the information is discoverable where the need for discovery outweighs the privacy concerns. Palay v. Sup. Ct. (1993) 18 Cal.App.4th 919, 933; see also, Britt v. Sup. Ct. (1978) 20 Cal.3d 844, 859-862. To overcome the privacy right, the party seeking the information must show a particularized need and that the information is “directly relevant” to a cause of action or defense...
2019.11.20 Motion to Strike 723
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2019.11.20
Excerpt: ... 425.16(e)(1) and (2) respectively make the anti-SLAPP statute applicable to causes of action arising from “any written or oral statement or writing made before a legislative, executive, or judicial proceeding, or any other official proceeding authorized by law;” and to “any written or oral statement or writing made in connection with an issue under consideration or review by a legislative, executive, or judicial body, or any other official...
2019.11.20 Motion to Strike Punitive Damages 847
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Broderick, Patrick M
Hearing Date: 2019.11.20
Excerpt: ...cedure sections 472, 473. A party may amend any pleading “once … of course, and without costs, at any time before the answer or demurrer is filed, or after demurrer and before the trial of the issue of law thereon ....” Code of Civil Procedure section 472, emphasis added. Defendant Eduardo Juarez Espinosa (“Espinosa”) has already answered and this pending hearing is on for only a motion to strike, not a demurrer. The Court therefore fin...
2019.11.20 Motion for Summary Adjudication 164
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2019.11.20
Excerpt: ...t all times mentioned in this complaint, [defendant] GUEN as a professional acupuncturist, treated plaintiff as a patient for which such treatment on May 18, 2016 the State of California Department of Consumer Affairs Acupuncture Board disciplined GUEN for “having sexual relations with a patient.” The issue of duty in a negligence action is a question of law and may be determined on a motion for summary judgment. (J.L. v. Children's Institute...
2019.11.20 Special Motion to Strike 663
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Hardcastle, Allan D
Hearing Date: 2019.11.20
Excerpt: ..., roof and fence until Ms. Garwood's death in July 2018. According to Defendants, after Content purchased the property, she discovered the common roof, wall and fence were in need of repair. Content apparently made multiple requests to Ms. Garwood prior to her death but Ms. Garwood refused to contribute to the repairs so Content was force to pay 100% of certain “critical” repairs. After Ms. Garwood's death, Content contacted Plaintiff, as Exe...
2019.11.6 Motion to Disqualify Counsel 208
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2019.11.6
Excerpt: ...ondie and/or defense counsel and Plaintiffs Joan Coke and Helen Straessle; prohibiting Defendants and their current counsel, or any newly appointed counsel, from utilizing at trial or in any other manner any communications from Plaintiffs Joan Coke and/or Helen Straessle; and prohibiting Defendants or their counsel, current or newly appointed, from obtaining or using any testimony from Plaintiff Helen Straessle in any manner whatsoever. On Septem...
2019.11.6 Demurrer 841
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Broderick, Patrick M
Hearing Date: 2019.11.6
Excerpt: ...r other remedy. However, Plaintiff fails to state facts sufficient to constitute any cause of action and the allegations are fundamentally unclear. Nothing indicates what Defendants actually did, who Defendant Claudine Kent even is or how she is involved, what defamation occurred, when, or the context or nature of it. As for demurring party, Plaintiff fails to state any statutory bases of liability, which is required for this Defendant as a gover...
2019.11.6 Motion for Attorneys' Fees 907
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Hardcastle, Allan D
Hearing Date: 2019.11.6
Excerpt: ...contends that because the action resulted in a settlement by which Defendants would pay Plaintiff a monetary amount, Plaintiff is necessarily the “prevailing party” and is entitled to recover his reasonable attorneys' fees under the applicable statutes and under the parties' settlement agreement. Plaintiff contends he has incurred $59,283.75 in attorneys' fees and $3,346.33 in costs related to this action. Thus, Plaintiff seeks a total award ...
2019.11.6 Motion for Default Judgment and Permanent Injunction 342
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Hardcastle, Allan D
Hearing Date: 2019.11.6
Excerpt: ...tgage Loan Trust 2005-WL2 (“Deutsche Bank”) on or about May 2, 2019. On August 30, 2019, when neither defendant had filed a response to the Complaint, the County filed a Request for Entry of Default against both defendants and the default was entered the same day. In this motion, the County moves for a default judgment under Code of Civil Procedure section 585(b) and requests that the Court issue a permanent injunction enjoining Tinker from, ...
2019.11.6 Motion for Injunctive Relief, Abatement of Nuisance, and Appointment of Receiver 904
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Dollard, Jennifer V.
Hearing Date: 2019.11.6
Excerpt: ...ts. Therefore, the motion is denied without prejudice. Health & Safety Code § 17980.7(c) provides: “The enforcement agency, tenant, or tenant association or organization may seek and the court may order, the appointment of a receiver for the substandard building pursuant to this subdivision. In its petition to the court, the enforcement agency, tenant, or tenant association or organization shall include proof that notice of the petition was se...
2019.11.6 Motion for Summary Adjudication 172
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2019.11.6
Excerpt: ...�� (“GLV”) and Percy Miller, aka Master P (together “Plaintiffs”). For the reasons discussed below, the motion for summary adjudication is DENIED. 1. First Cause of action for Breach of Oral Contract; Second Cause of action for Breach of Implied Contract Defendants argue Privateer is entitled to summary adjudication on GLV's causes of action for breach of an oral and implied contract because the alleged contract is invalid under the statu...
2019.11.6 Motion to Compel Mental Exam 697
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Hardcastle, Allan D
Hearing Date: 2019.11.6
Excerpt: ...controversy by claiming a brain injury as a result of the subject October 2017 accident…” (Motion at 2:5-7.) Defendant contends there are “specific facts” from Plaintiffs deposition testimony, medical records, and a recent independent physical examination conducted by Deborah Doherty, M.D., which provide support for the requested exam. Additionally, Defendants aver that the initial examination by Dr. Doherty was interrupted by a paralegal...
2019.11.6 Motion to Transfer Venue 868
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Broderick, Patrick M
Hearing Date: 2019.11.6
Excerpt: ... 7, 8-9. Venue in transitory actions generally is properly in the county where the defendant resides, with certain exceptions. Code of Civil Procedure section 395(a). Venue in contract actions is also proper where the contract was entered into, i.e., where the words of acceptance were spoken, or where the obligation was to be performed. Code of Civil Procedure section 395(a). Contrary to the rule for actions against individuals, in actions agains...

2596 Results

Per page

Pages