Excerpt: ... against Renascent Builders for indemnity. Plaintiffs' insurer, Property and Casualty Insurance Company of Hartford (“Insurer”) brought a separate subrogation case against both Private Properties and Nathan Antonio Serratore dba Renascent Builders (“Renascent”) as defendants in a subrogated complaint (“Consolidated Complaint”). Private Properties filed a cross complaint against Renascent in the subrogation case as well. Insurer's matt...

Excerpt: ...s on calendar for two motions by Defendant for summary judgment of the Complaint and Cross- Complaint and the motion by the Cross-Defendant for summary adjudication pursuant to Cal. Code Civ. Proc. (“CCP”) § 437c. Defendant's Motion for summary Judgment of the Complaint is MOOT. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment of the Cross-Complaint is DENIED due to the presence of triable issues of material fact. Cross- Defendant's Motion for Summar...

Excerpt: ...dison (2009) 174 Cal.App.4th 646, 650 (discussing the validity of attorney's fees provisions in local ordinances under Govt. Code § 25845, and that it may be explicitly superseded by stipulation of the parties). The previous tentative ruling stated below is affirmed. Plaintiff County of Sonoma (the “County”) filed the complaint in this action against the property owners in this case, Ian Porter, Chelsea Porter (“Defendants”) and Does 1-3...

Excerpt: ...uant to Cal. Code Civ. Proc. (“CCP”) § 435. The motion is GRANTED with leave to amend. I. Facts Plaintiff's complaint filed on August 24, 2021, alleges one motor vehicle cause of action, one count of negligence and willful misconduct. It alleges Defendant Cummings had a vehicle to vehicle collision with Plaintiff, subsequently intentionally struck Plaintiff with the vehicle, then fled the scene. It alleges that Defendant Obrien allowed Defen...

Excerpt: ...fendants”), Linwood Homes, Ltd. (since dismissed with prejudice), and American Contractors Indemnity Company (“ACI”). This matter is on calendar for the motion by Plaintiffs to compel Defendants to produce documents pursuant to deposition notices. The Motion is GRANTED in part. I. Procedural Posture Plaintiffs moved to compel deposition of Defendant Lucas. The deposition remains unfinished, but Plaintiffs allege that the documents produced ...

Excerpt: ...harvesting 267 acres of redwood forest along the South Fork of the Gualala River (“the Project”) on land which RPI's owner, Daniel Falk (“Falk”) owns (“the Project Site”). Respondent issued the Notice of Filing of the Project application on December 10, 2020 and after receiving public comments, Respondent on April 13, 2021 issued both its responses to comments and its notice that it approved the Project and the THP. Petitioner contend...

Excerpt: ...Code Civ. Proc. (“CCP”) § 430.10(e). The demurrer is SUSTAINED with leave to amend. Defendant Gillian also has filed a motion to strike, which is DENIED. I. Legal Standard A demurrer can be utilized where a complaint discloses some defense that would bar recovery, including where it shows that the statute of limitations has run. Guardian North Bay, Inc. v. Sup. Ct. (2001) 94 Cal.App.4th 963, 971- 972. But to be subject to a general demurrer,...

Excerpt: ...receiver, namely Michael Brewer, to seize and sell liquor license number 521912 to satisfy the Judgment. A judgment debtor's interest in an alcoholic beverage license is not subject to execution (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code (“CCP”) § 699.720(a)(1)), and therefore may be applied to the satisfaction of a money judgment only by appointment of a receiver under CCP § 708.630. CCP § 708.630(b) provides that the Court may appoint a receiver to transfer ...

Excerpt: ...nsurance policy proceeds. Plaintiff asserts three causes of action his complaint: 1) wrongful interference with a contract; 2) fraud by intentional misrepresentation, and 3) common counts, money had and received. On November 18, 2020 Defendant filed a Petition for Probate of the Will and for Letters of Testamentary of the Estate of Decedent, Sonoma County Superior Court Case Number SPR-095168 (the “Probate Matter”), which is ongoing. Prior to...

Excerpt: ...endants' Anti-SLAPP motion brought pursuant to Cal. Code Civ. Proc. (“CCP”) § 425.16, and Defendants' Demurrer and Motion to Strike. The Anti-SLAPP Motion is DENIED. The Demurrer and Motion to Strike are continued to March 9, 2022. I. The Complaint The Complaint alleges that Defendant Murray knowingly and intentionally misappropriated funds due to the Plaintiffs as beneficiaries of a trust (the “Trust”) and that they refused to be accoun...

Excerpt: ..., 2021. This Motion is GRANTED in part in that Defendant is awarded $32,001 for successfully litigating the motion for judgment on the pleadings and for bringing this Motion. Defendant is entitled to attorneys' fees. Defendant has moved for attorneys' fees under Cal. Civ. Code § 1717. California Civil Code (“CC”) § 1717(a) provides in relevant part: “In any action on a contract, where the contract specifically provides that attorney's fee...

Excerpt: ...ode § 1790 et seq. (the “Act”) (against Defendant); 2) failure to repair under the Act (against Defendant); 3) failure to provide required parts under the Act (against Defendant); 4) breach of express written warranty under the Act, Civil Code §§ 1791.2 and 1794 (against Defendant); 5) breach of implied warranty of merchantability (against Dealer); and 6) fraud by omission (against Defendant). This matter is on calendar for Defendants' mot...

Excerpt: ...�). This matter is on calendar for the motion by Defendant to compel arbitration pursuant to the California Arbitration Act, Cal. Code Civ. Proc. (“CCP”) § 1280 et seq. (the “CAA”), and for a stay, on the grounds that Plaintiffs agreed to arbitrate any dispute arising out of the rental agreement. The Court has reviewed the moving papers, the opposition and the reply, along with the accompanying documentation. The Motion is GRANTED. I. Th...

Excerpt: ... Motion is GRANTED in the amount of $100,802. I. Relevant Facts The County filed the initial complaint on January 16, 2020. Thereafter, this matter proceeded to court trial on March 4, 2021, involving 10 days of trial before the respective side rested their cases. Site inspection of the property at issue followed on March 22, 2021. 25 of Plaintiff's 37 exhibits were received into evidence, and the County produced multiple witnesses deemed credibl...

Excerpt: ... protective order pursuant to CCP § 2034.250, Cal. Evid. Code (“EC”) § 723, and the Court's inherent authority, to preclude or limit Plaintiffs' designation of 51 treating physicians as non-retained experts. Moving Defendants' motion for a protective order is DENIED. I. Procedural History During discovery, Plaintiff disclosed a number of retained expert witnesses, including medical experts. Plaintiff also disclosed 51 treating physicians as...

Excerpt: ...s Motion is GRANTED in part in that Plaintiff is awarded $32,244.42 for prevailing on Plaintiff's 664.6 Motion and for bringing this Motion. Plaintiff is entitled to attorneys' fees. Plaintiff's unopposed motion for judicial notice of documents also filed within this case is GRANTED. The document Plaintiff sought to enforce as the settlement agreement (the “Document”) contains a provision that states: “Attorneys' fees. If any Party brings a...

Excerpt: ...alings (the “Complaint”). The Parties also have a pending dissolution, Sonoma County Family law case SFL082060. This matter is on calendar for Moving Defendant's demurrer to the Complaint pursuant to Cal. Code Civ. Proc. (“CCP”) § 430.10(a)&(c) for lack of jurisdiction, as well as demurring on other bases, as well as Defendant's motion to strike pursuant to CCP § 435 et seq. In the alternative, Defendant requests a stay of this case so ...

Excerpt: ...peared on August 26, 2021. At the conclusion of the hearing, the court dismissed the matter without prejudice. Plaintiff requests set aside of a dismissal but has not established either the error of a party or filed an affidavit of attorney fault. Therefore, Plaintiff has failed to establish the necessary requirements for relief under CCP § 473 (b). Relief upon CCP § 473 (b) is conditioned upon the “mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusab...

Excerpt: ...a)(1) and § 576. Plaintiff objects to the declaration of James Sansone, claiming the statements are hearsay, speculative and conclusive, lacking foundation and personal knowledge, and unsupported expert opinion. The court sustains the objection on the grounds of hearsay, lack of foundation and speculation and conclusory statements. Evidence Code § 1220 is unapplicable, as it applies to admissions of a party opponent, and this statement is offer...

Excerpt: ... (“CCP”) § 2033.280(b), and to compel answers to form interrogatories (“FIs”). I. Relevant Law Cal. Code Civ. Proc. (“CCP”) § 2033.280(a) provides in relevant part that if a party to whom requests for admission are directed “fails to serve a timely response,” the party to whom the requests are directed waives any objection. CCP § 2033.280(b) provides that “[t]he requesting party may move for an order that the genuineness of a...

Excerpt: ...rnia Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) § 2025.480 motion to compel a deposition answer to a question posed to the Responding Defendant's PMQ that Responding Defendant's counsel instructed the PMQ not to answer. Plaintiff also requests a protective order directing defense counsel from instructing any witness from answering a question absent a claim of privilege. Moving party also requests monetary sanctions for fees/costs incurred in bringing t...

Excerpt: ...) elder abuse (Cal. Welf. & Ins. Code (“WIC”)) § 15600 et seq.; 3) wrongful death. This matter is on calendar for Moving Defendant's demurrer to the FAC pursuant to Cal. Code Civ. Proc. (“CCP”) § 430.10(e) for failure to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action and CCP § 430.10(f) for uncertainty, as well as Moving Defendant's motion to strike pursuant to CCP § 435 et seq. I. Legal Standards A demurrer can be used only t...

Excerpt: ...E REQUIRED. The previously posted tentative ruling is as follows: Plaintiff China Page (“Plaintiff”) filed the complaint in this action against defendants Kristen Staley Griffith (“Defendant”) and Does 1-25 with causes of action for general negligence (the “Complaint”). The Complaint alleges that on September 17, 2016 Plaintiff was injured when Defendant struck Plaintiff in the head. This matter is on calendar for Plaintiff's motion t...

Excerpt: ...e of this order. Plaintiff shall pay $1,176.90 in sanctions to Defendants within thirty (30) days of notice of entry of the order on this Motion. I. Relevant Law CCP § 2025.450(a), provides: “If, after service of a deposition notice, a party to the action or an officer, director, managing agent, or employee of a party, or a person designated by an organization that is a party under Section 2025.230, without having served a valid objection unde...

Excerpt: ...ations. Cal. Code Civ. Proc. (“CCP”) § 430.10(e). The demurrer is OVERRULED. I. Legal Standard A demurrer can be utilized where a complaint discloses some defense that would bar recovery, including where it shows that the statute of limitations has run. Guardian North Bay, Inc. v. Sup. Ct. (2001) 94 Cal.App.4th 963, 971- 972. But to be subject to a general demurrer, the running of the statute must appear “clearly and affirmatively” from ...