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

371 Results

Clear Search Parameters x
Location: Sonoma x
Judge: Wick, Arthur A x
2020.07.08 Motion for Conditional Certification of Class and Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement 302
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2020.07.08
Excerpt: ...smissed his cross-complaint. This matter is on calendar for Plaintiffs' unopposed motion for conditional certification of the class and preliminary approval of the class action settlement (the “Motion”). The parties are REQUIRED TO APPEAR to address why payments to the members of the class are being made on a strictly pro rata basis based on weeks worked regardless of their positions and rate of pay, even though members of the class were empl...
2020.07.01 Motion to Bifurcate 540
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2020.07.01
Excerpt: ...m bifurcated and tried first before the Court pursuant to Cal. Code Civ. Proc. (“CCP”) §§ 598 and 1048. Plaintiffs' brief contains a lengthy discussion of the merits of their claim, which is outside the scope of the Court's inquiry on this Motion. However, Plaintiffs also oppose the Motion on the basis that the Motion is untimely because it was set for hearing fewer than 30 days before the then-scheduled trial date, as well as on the basis ...
2020.06.24 Motion to Quash Service of Summons, to Dismiss 831
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2020.06.24
Excerpt: ...ays due to discovery disputes, they were set for May 20, 2020. However, due to a scheduling conflict with Petitioner's attorney, the parties in march 2020 stipulated to a continuance to June 24, 2020. As a result of the stipulation, however, the court order setting the new hearing date required the reply papers to be filed by May 8, 2020. The reply papers on these matters were filed on June 17, 2020. The moving parties claim that this lateness wa...
2020.06.17 Motion to Remand Case Back to Trial Court 881
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2020.06.17
Excerpt: ...resided over the small claims trial/proceeding. Both parties represented themselves at the small claims trial. Defendant thereafter filed an appeal from the small claims court decision, pursuant to CCP Sec.116.710 and CCP Sec.116.750. Defendant was represented by O'Brien, Watters, and Davis, LLP in the appeal (which, by statute, consists of a de novo hearing before a different judicial officer). Plaintiff had retained counsel to represent her in ...
2020.06.03 Motions to Extend Time to Respond to Discovery, to Compel Responses 190
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2020.06.03
Excerpt: ...ponses to Plaintiff's Form Interrogatories, Set One; Special Interrogatories, Set One; Request for Production of Documents, Set One; and Requests for Admission, Set One. Defendant's request for an extension to respond to discovery requests is GRANTED. For the reasons stated below, the court hereby orders Defendant David Robert Fritschi, Jr., to provide further responses to all of Plaintiff's outstanding discovery requests that are the subject of ...
2020.05.29 Motion to Stay Arbitration 723
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2020.05.29
Excerpt: ... that controversy, the court shall order the petitioner and the respondent to arbitrate the controversy if it determines that an agreement to arbitrate the controversy exists, unless it determines that:…(c) A party to the arbitration agreement is also a party to a pending court action or special proceeding with a third party, arising out of the same transaction or series of related transactions and there is a possibility of conflicting rulings ...
2020.05.20 Petition for Writ of Mandate for Failure to Provide Fair Hearing 378
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2020.05.20
Excerpt: ...rit of mandate, “[t]he inquiry in such a case shall extend to the questions whether the respondent has proceeded without, or in excess of, jurisdiction; whether there was a fair trial; and whether there was any prejudicial abuse of discretion.” In such cases, where “the issue is whether a fair administrative hearing was conducted, the petitioner is entitled to an independent judicial determination of the issue.” Pomona Valley Hospital Med...
2020.05.20 Motion to Strike Complaint 069
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2020.05.20
Excerpt: ...esolving the merits of a section 425.16 motion involves a two-part analysis, concentrating initially on whether the challenged cause of action arises from protected activity within the meaning of the statute and, if it does, proceeding secondly to whether the plaintiff can establish a probability of prevailing on the merits. (Ampex Corp. v. Cargle (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 1569.) The court accepts as true all evidence favorable to the plaintiff and ...
2020.05.13 Motion to Lift Stay of Proceedings 015
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2020.05.13
Excerpt: ...emic, the matter was continued to May 13, 2020, at 3:00 p.m. in Department 17. The previously posted tentative ruling is as follows: Plaintiff Austin Kooba moves to lift the stay of the proceedings on the grounds that the Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) claim in the first cause of action for Paid Sick Leave is not subject to arbitration because there is no private right of action and because every claim sued under the PAGA i...
2020.05.13 Motion for Preliminary Injunction 863
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2020.05.13
Excerpt: ...servicer was not entitled to record a notice of default, or if a notice of default has already been recorded, record a notice of sale or conduct a trustee's sale until the later of… “the later of 15 days after the denial of the appeal or 14 days after a first lien loan modification is offered after appeal but declined by the borrower, or, if a first lien loan modification is offered and accepted after appeal, the date on which the borrower fa...
2020.05.13 Demurrer, Motion to Strike 179
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2020.05.13
Excerpt: ...olations on the ground that it is uncertain. The demurrers are SUSTAINED with leave to amend. Third Cause of Action for Fraud and Statutory Violations The parties have agreed that the alleged statutory violations are only against Defendant David Lucas for his alleged failure to provide a 7-Day Right of Cancellation Notice to the Plaintiffs and that the demurrer with regard to statutory violations is moot. With regard to the cause of action as it ...
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 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 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 �...
2020.03.04 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 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 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�...
2020.02.26 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...
2020.02.21 Motion to Lift Stay of Proceedings 015
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2020.02.21
Excerpt: ...h cannot be arbitrated, the stay is no longer justified. The motion is GRANTED. The stay is hereby lifted. Defendant The Permanente Medical Group, Inc. opposes the motion. Defendant argues that based upon Plaintiff's allegations, there are two claims for damages pleaded in a single cause of action: (1) there is a demand for payment of the Plaintiff Austin Kooba's accumulated sick pay, and (2) a demand for damages in a representative PAGA claim fo...
2020.02.21 Motion for Summary Judgment 709
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2020.02.21
Excerpt: ...for Damages for Negligence and Premises Liability. The FAC alleges that on January 3, 2017, Plaintiff was legally on property located at 19323 Sonoma Highway, Sonoma, California 95476 (“the Property”). On that date, an uncovered and exposed interior bolt located at the Property caught on Plaintiff's pants while he was carrying material and/or otherwise performing work, ultimately causing Plaintiff to fall, causing him serious bodily injury. P...
2020.02.05 Motion to Quash Service of Subpoena, for Production of Docs, for Sanctions 956
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2020.02.05
Excerpt: ...y 93 W, Whitefish, MT 59937, from September 1, 2018, through current, including but not limited to: The name of the host(s) of the property; all listed email address(es) of the host(s) of the property (9/1/18-current); the rental income payout method; the total dollar amount of payouts from 9/1/18- current; the nightly rate (range of rates, if applicable); the name of the financial institution where the rental income payouts go; the name of the i...
2020.02.05 Motion for Summary Adjudication 935
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2020.02.05
Excerpt: ...; and, adjudication that plaintiff breached her duty of care regarding the amount of defensible space defendant owed plaintiff. Defendant opposes the motion. The court need not rule on the objections as they are not material to the disposition of this motion. (See CCP section 437c(q).) The motion is DENIED in its entirety. The operative pleading is the Fourth Amended Complaint (“4AC”) filed on July 26, 2019. It alleges that in 2015, defendant...
2020.02.05 Demurrer 179
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Wick, Arthur A
Hearing Date: 2020.02.05
Excerpt: ...d Causes of Action in the Cross-Complaint; and Motion to Strike. Cross-Defendants allege that the first and second causes of action fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. They cite CCP section 430.10(e) and Bus. & Prof. Code sections 7159(7)(A) and 7159.6. They also bring a motion to strike pursuant to CCP sections 436 and 437, alleging that Exhibits 7, 8, and 13 should be stricken as they are illegible and that Exhibits 7, 8, 10...

371 Results

Per page

Pages