Excerpt: ...he document as a “motion” rather than a supplemental brief resulted in the clerk's office assigning a hearing date. Thus, a hearing was created on April 18, 2023 for hearing on Defendant's “motion regarding settlement credits.” Since it is clear that such document is the supplemental briefing requested by the Court on Defendant's motion for attorney's fees and costs, and not an entirely new motion, the Court orders the hearing on Defendan...

Excerpt: ...is tentative ruling and in compliance with CRC Rule 3.1312. The Court exercises its discretion and considers the opposition, despite it being untimely filed by a day. Analysis: This Court previously sustained a demurrer filed by Defendants Community Support Network and Tom Bieri challenging the First Amended Complaint on the basis that Plaintiffs' causes of action are barred by the Worker's Compensation Exclusivity Rule. The Court found that Plai...

Excerpt: ...nstate his license to practice law or to withdraw as counsel for Plaintiff. A copy of the Court's OSC was mailed to the State Bar. The Court directed Mr. Friedman to file any response to the Court's Order to Show Cause no later than nine Court days prior to the hearing. However, the Court has not received a written response and Mr. Friedman has not withdrawn as counsel on this case. The State Bar's website indicates counsel is still suspended. Ba...

Excerpt: ...e same document was attached as an exhibit to the declaration of Cross‐Defendant's counsel, so the Court has considered it as evidence. As the prevailing party on this motion, Cross‐Complainant Sonoma Horse Park's counsel shall prepare a written order for this motion that is consistent with this tentative ruling and in compliance with Rule 3.1312. Cross‐Complainant Sonoma Horse Park's motion for summary adjudication is DENIED. Cross‐ Comp...

Excerpt: ...2019, and Permanent Injunction. Defendant has not filed an opposition to the application. Specifically, the Judgment “permanently enjoined and restrained” Defendant as follows: Defendant, and/or his successors in interest, and each of their agents, servants, employees, and persons acting on their behalf or in concert with them, are permanently enjoined and restrained from maintaining or allowing others to maintain or conduct any activity or u...

Excerpt: ...ecoverable in the court's discretion under subdivision (c), the expense must be both reasonable in amount and reasonably necessary to the conduct of the litigation, rather than merely beneficial or convenient. (CCP § 1033.5(c)(2); Seever v. Copley Press, Inc. (2006) 141 Cal.App.4th 1550, 1558 & fn. 5.) “Whether a cost item was reasonably necessary to the litigation presents a question of fact for the trial court and its decision is reviewed fo...

Excerpt: ...penhausen filed suit against Defendants/Cross-Complainants Michael Funez and Linda Pardini alleging breach of contract and foreclosure of mechanics lien arising out of an agreement between the parties for the construction of Defendants' home. In exchange for reconstructing their home, Defendants were to pay Plaintiff $2,979,550. Plaintiff alleges that prior to the completion of the home construction, Defendants informed him that they were termina...

Excerpt: ... complaint, liberally construed, can state a cause of action under any theory or if there is a reasonable possibility the defect can be cured by amendment.” Kong v. City of Hawaiian Gardens Redevelopment Agency (2002) 108 Cal.App.4th 1028, 1037. The requests for judicial notice are GRANTED. The Court may take judicial notice of official acts and court records of this state. (Evid. Code §§ 452(c); (d).) Procedural History & Facts On April 4, 2...

Excerpt: ...d cause of action. (Hahn v. Merda (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 740, 747.) Complaints are read as a whole, in context and are liberally construed. (Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318; see also, Stevens v. Superior Court (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 594, 601.) In reviewing the sufficiency of a complaint, courts accept as true all material facts properly pleaded, but not contentions, deductions, or conclusions of fact or law, or the construction of instru...

Excerpt: ...native request for a protective order is DENIED because the stipulated protective order approved by the Court on May 9, 2022 sufficiently protects Plaintiff's interests. The parties are reminded that such protective order remains in place and must be adhered to during their discovery practices. Plaintiff's counsel shall submit a written order consistent with this tentative ruling and in compliance with Rule 3.1312. Background: Plaintiff has broug...

Excerpt: ...cause of action. (Hahn v. Merda (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 740, 747.) Complaints are read as a whole, in context and are liberally construed. (Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318; see also, Stevens v. Superior Court (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 594, 601.) In reviewing the sufficiency of a complaint, courts accept as true all material facts properly pleaded, but not contentions, deductions, or conclusions of fact or law, or the construction of instrume...

Excerpt: ...n compliance with Rule 3.1312. Standard on Demurrer A demurrer tests whether the complaint sufficiently states a valid cause of action. (Hahn v. Merda (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 740, 747.) Complaints are read as a whole, in context and are liberally construed. (Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318; see also, Stevens v. Superior Court (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 594, 601.) In reviewing the sufficiency of a complaint, courts accept as true all material ...

Excerpt: ...tions to Plaintiff's evidence number five and six are sustained based on lack of foundation, the balance are OVERRULED. Defendants' counsel shall submit a written order consistent with this tentative ruling and in compliance with Rule 3.1312. General Underlying Facts: Plaintiff was hired by Defendant The Permanente Medical Group (“TPMG”) as a Laboratory Technician II (in other words a phlebotomist) in January of 2019. (Undisputed Material Fac...

Excerpt: ...ties' reference: This matter was previously on for hearing on September 14, 2022, prior to which the Court issued a tentative ruling requiring the parties' appearances if verifications were not provided by the Cross‐ Defendants prior to the hearing. No party called to request oral argument by 4:00 p.m. the day prior to the hearing; however, counsel for Cross‐Defendants appeared before the Court at the time set for hearing and explained he had...

Excerpt: ...s of approval); (2) any design immunity that existed was lost due “changed conditions” of the subject roadway that created a dangerous condition of which defendant was aware, and on which it failed to perform remedial work or provide warnings; (3) that even if design immunity exists, the design immunity does not defeat plaintiff's “failure to warn” theory of liability; and (4) defendant has engaged in conduct with respect to discovery tha...

Excerpt: ...and CONTINUED to January 6, 2023, at 3:00 p.m. in Department 18. The parties are directed to engage in further meet and confer efforts for the purpose of agreeing on a referee or submitting the information requested by the Court below. Plaintiff's counsel shall submit a written order to the Court consistent with this tentative ruling and in compliance with CRC Rule 3.1312. Standards on Summary Judgment Summary adjudication “shall be granted if ...

Excerpt: ...es that the Court may enter judgment pursuant to the terms of a settlement and, if requested by the parties, the Court may retain jurisdiction over the parties to enforce the settlement. “Section 664.6 permits the trial court judge to enter judgment on a settlement agreement without the need for a new lawsuit.” (Osumi v. Sutton (2007) 151 Cal.App.4th 1355, 1360.) “Although a judge hearing a section 664.6 motion may receive evidence, determi...

Excerpt: ...ntiff alleges in his complaint that while he was a minor and a patron of Defendant BGCS, Defendant Paul Kilgore, an employee of BGCS, sexually assaulted him during the course and scope of Defendant Kilgore's employment duties. Plaintiff alleges that Kilgore sexually assaulted numerous children during his employment as an athletic director, counselor, and mentor for children at BGCS. It is alleged that numerous complaints were made about Kilgore's...

Excerpt: ...Court granted the motion to quash because the Court determined that service was not properly effectuated through electronic means. The Court refers the parties to the Court's April 20, 2022 Minute Order. Petitioners argued at the time that the 100 day deadline for service set forth in CCP § 1288 had not yet passed because it had not begun to accrue. Petitioners argued this was because the arbitration award was served upon them electronically, no...

Excerpt: ...rt's tentative ruling as he did not believe verifications would be provided prior to the hearing, but only that morning had received and provided the verifications to moving parties. He expressed uncertainty about whether he was required to request oral argument given that he had provided the verifications, but done so after the time to request oral argument had passed. He indicated he wished to argue the issue of sanctions. The Court concluded t...

Excerpt: ...valid. Plaintiff argues that the offer was invalid because a section 998 offer cannot include a requirement that Plaintiff indemnify and hold Defendant harmless against third party claims; rather, a section 998 offer must be unconditional. (MPA iso motion to strike/tax, p. 2.) This overstates the matter. In Valentino v. Elliott Sav-On Gas, Inc. (1988) 201 Cal.App.3d 692, cited by Plaintiff, the 998 offer required the plaintiff to release the defe...

Excerpt: ...l interrogatories (SIs) against Defendant under Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) § 2030.300 and to compel production of documents (“RPODs”) from Defendant under CCP § 2031.310. Aguilera filed an opposition on September 29, 2022, only four court days prior to hearing. The opposition is untimely and is not considered. The Motion is DENIED. I. The Discovery Requests Stonecushion served Aguilera with SIs Set One and RPODs on December 8, 2021...

Excerpt: ...l Holzman arising out of the alleged wrongful termination, Plaintiff further alleged that there existed between him and Defendants Hines, Harper, and MacKenzie a “side-agreement” in which the three defendants agreed to pay Plaintiff $300,000 if he were terminated without cause. Defendants Hines, Harper, an MacKenzie have now entered into an agreement with Plaintiff to pay Plaintiff $352,500 in exchange for release of all the claims against th...

Excerpt: ...e set at premium 2022 local rates; (2) time spent on and costs relating to the “tree claims” were ordered excluded; (3) Defendant was ordered to submit an updated memorandum of costs which reflects deductions of the costs related to the tree claims and other costs conceded by Defendant as not recoverable; and (4) Costs for models, enlargements, and photocopies were ordered recoverable. The Court now issues the following ruling on the remainde...

Excerpt: ...g party entitled to have fee award offset by the amount already paid in settlement by the other parties]; Bravo v. City of Santa Maria (9th Cir. 2016) 810 F.3d 659, 667 [non-moving party entitled to an offset of costs to the extent that the litigation expenses have already been reimbursed].) Not doing so would result in an improper windfall for Defendant. (Corder, supra, at 839.) Accordingly, Defendant Landmark is ordered to submit to the Court, ...