Excerpt: ...einafter “Defendant”) during the period of August 28, 2017, to June 1, 2020, as a non-exempt, hourly-paid General Winery Worker at Defendant's Skylane location in Sonoma County. (Declaration of Virginia Lawson in Support of Defendant's Amended Motion to Compel Arbitration and Dismiss Non-Individual PAGA Claims [“Lawson Decl.”], ¶ 3.) As part of the hiring process, Plaintiff signed an Arbitration Agreement (the “Agreement”), that was ...

Excerpt: ...referred to as “Defendants”). The Prior Action involved 97 plaintiffs and 28 defendants. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants negligently mishandled the litigation which resulted in Plaintiff's award being diminished, allowed defendant Zuckerman to obtain bankruptcy protection shielding him from the judgment, miscalculated how much of the award Plaintiff was entitled to, failed to allocate any of the award for fees and costs to Plaintiff, and ha...

Excerpt: ...e opposition. The Court does exercise its discretion to do so and has considered Plaintiff's opposition. This matter was recently before the Court on a motion filed by Plaintiff for which Plaintiff failed to follow the Rules of Court and the Court warned Plaintiff of the necessity to do so. The Court reiterates that admonition now and informs Plaintiff that any future filings that do not comply with the Rules of Court will not be considered by th...

Excerpt: ... reply on motions for summary judgment may not exceed 10 pages. Accordingly, the Court will consider only the first 10 pages of the memorandum. Objections: Plaintiffs' objection to Defendants' evidence is OVERRULED. The following objections made by Defendants are SUSTAINED: objection numbers 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, and Plaintiffs' additional undisputed material facts numbers 41 and 73. The remaining objections made by Defendants are OV...

Excerpt: ...l Further Responses to Requests for Production, Set One, a Motion to Compel Further Responses to Form Interrogatories – General, Set One, and a Request for Judicial Notice. Plaintiff provides the declaration of attorney Megan Clark and attached exhibits in support of the motions. Defendants assert that on June 30, 2022, they served a Request for Production of Documents, Set One and Form Interrogatories – General, Set One on Plaintiff (“Disc...

Excerpt: ..., the Complaint was dismissed as to Michael Lateef, as an individual. On October 12, 2022, Defendant Hanson Bridgett, LLP (“Defendant Law Firm”) filed this motion to compel arbitration and stay this action. Plaintiffs filed an opposition. Defendant Law Firm filed a reply. Relevant Facts Defendant Law Firm and Plaintiff Paul Bigham entered into an attorney-client relationship for Defendants to provide legal services regarding the sale of Plain...

Excerpt: ...t McKissock and Defendant Healy were employees of Defendant SVH working in human resources. On August 8, 2022, Plaintiff filed the now operative first amended complaint (“FAC”) adding Sonoma Valley Hospital Foundation (“Defendant Foundation”) as a defendant and alleging three causes of action for (1) violation of Civil Code §56.20(b); (2) violation of Civil Code §56.20(c) [1]; and (3) fraud. [2] The above-mentioned defendants are collec...

Excerpt: ...tiffs filed an opposition. On December 20, 2022, Plaintiff filed a request for dismissal as to Defendants Yeng Brooks, Tina Rivera and Christina Cramer, and for the cause of action of fraud as to Defendant County. Accordingly, only the causes of action for violations of Civil Code §56.20 against Defendant County of Sonoma (“Defendant County”) remain at issue in this demurrer. Plaintiff is a former employee of Defendant County who complains t...

Excerpt: ...omplaint is GRANTED in part. Defendant's motion to strike the portions of Plaintiff's opposition and portions of Plaintiff's counsel's declaration in support of the opposition is DENIED. Defendant's counsel shall submit a written ruling consistent with this tentative ruling and in compliance with Rule 3.1312. I. Applicable Standards A demurrer tests whether the complaint sufficiently states a valid cause of action. (Hahn v. Merda (2007) 147 Cal.A...

Excerpt: ...yment. “Under the respondeat superior doctrine, an employer is liable for the torts of its employees committed within the scope of employment.” (Crouch v. Trinity Christian Ctr. of Santa Ana, Inc. (2019) 39 Cal.App.5th 995, 1011.) “An employee's willful, malicious, and even criminal torts may fall within the scope of his or her employment, even though the employer did not authorize the employee to commit crimes or intentional torts.” (Id....

Excerpt: ...d by authority. Furthermore, Defendant's motion is not frivolous. Plaintiff's counsel shall submit a written order consistent with this tentative ruling and in compliance with Rule 3.1312. Analysis: 1. Legal 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...

Excerpt: ...it a written order consistent with this tentative ruling and in compliance with Rule 3.1312. Defendant's Request for Judicial Notice: Defendant requests the Court take judicial notice of the following: 1. Defendant's assertion that Consuelo Enriquez never agreed to the written agreement alleged and attached as Exhibit A to Plaintiff's SAC as to any property. 2. Defendant's assertion that Consuelo Enriquez never agreed to any oral agreement with P...

Excerpt: ...hat there is no triable issue as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. (CCP § 437c(c).) A party moving for summary adjudication of a cause of action must prove that the cause of action has no merit and summary adjudication may only be granted if it completely disposes of the cause of action. (CCP § 437c(f)(1).) “A defendant or cross-defendant has met his or her burden of showing that a cause o...

Excerpt: ...Procedure section 1032, which provides, in subdivision (b), that ‘[e]xcept as otherwise expressly provided by statute, a prevailing party is entitled as a matter of right to recover costs in any action or proceeding.'” (Santisas v. Goodin (1998) 17 Cal.4th 599, 606 (“Santisas”).) “For the purpose of determining entitlement to recover costs, Code of Civil Procedure section 1032 defines ‘prevailing party' as including, among others, ‘...

Excerpt: ...eil (“Weil”), Matthew Zdanek (“Zdanek”), Robert J. Sunderland (“Sunderland”), Dale Davis (“Davis”), Jim Nord (“Nord”)(Nord, Davis, Duval, Hing, Fung, Poeng, and Zdanek hereinafter referred to as “Represented Doe Defendants”), and Sunderland McCutchan, Inc. (“SMI”) (SMI, SMP, McCutchan and Sunderland jointly referred to as “Attorney Defendants”) (all defendants together referred to as “Defendants”). The Prior Ac...

Excerpt: ...o believe Plaintiff was subject to the childhood sexual abuse alleged in the Complaint. The Court reviews the certificates of merit in camera to determine if there is a “reasonable and meritorious cause for the filing of the action” against each particular defendant, and if such finding is made, the duty to serve that defendant arises. (CCP § 340.1(i).) The fact that the certificates of merit are reviewed in camera before the complaint may b...

Excerpt: ...dication of each of Plaintiff's three causes of action alleged against them. In her opposition, Plaintiff has agreed to withdraw her First Cause of Action for Premises Liability on the theory of dangerous condition of public property and her Second Cause of Action for General Negligence. Plaintiff is only pursuing her Third Cause of Action for Breach of Mandatory Duty. Therefore, the motion for summary adjudication of the First and Second Causes ...

Excerpt: ... distress, menace (extortion), and conspiracy (the “Complaint”). Defendant filed an Anti‐SLAPP motion pursuant to Code Civil Procedure (“CCP”) § 425.16. The Anti‐ SLAPP motion was a granted by this Court on April 13, 2022, (“Order”) and is presently on appeal. This matter is on calendar for Defendant's Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs. Judicial Notice Defendant requests the Court take judicial notice of the Complaint filed by...

Excerpt: ... compel arbitration of the Cross‐Complaint pursuant to Cal. Code Civ. Proc. (“CCP”) § 1281.2. Plaintiff's petition to compel arbitration and stay proceedings as to the Cross‐Complaint is GRANTED in part. 1. Facts and Procedure The Complaint in this matter arises out of a credit line extended to Defendant by Plaintiff. Plaintiff and Defendant had other business dealings which included a partnership agreement for the Kozy Kar. See Plaintif...

Excerpt: ...o. 19 and SSUF No. 20. All other objections are overruled. Counsel for Defendant Jennifer Vertz shall prepare a written order consistent with this tentative ruling and in compliance with Rule 3.1312. Underlying Facts (all facts are derived from the parties' separate statements of material fact and the supporting evidence): Plaintiff, Jeffrey White, (hereafter “Jeffrey” or “Plaintiff”) was involved in a romantic relationship with Defendant...

Excerpt: ...raph refers to the employee of Bremer Whyte Brown & O'Meara, LLP who are purported to have worked on Defendants' case. The Court addresses the objection to Exhibit 5 below. All other evidentiary objections are OVERRULED. Plaintiffs' motion to strike/tax Bluestone's costs is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The request to strike the memorandum of costs is denied. However, the request to tax defendant's costs is granted. Defendant Bluestone's co...

Excerpt: ...or the sale of real property to Plaintiffs Elia and Miguel Murillo by Defendant/Cross‐Complainant Thuy Machica. Defendant Juan Nieto, as an agent of Defendant Coldwell Banker, represented Plaintiffs in the transaction. Defendant/Cross‐Defendant Angelica Reynosa, as an agent of Defendant/Cross‐Defendant Homesmart, represented Cross‐Complainant Machica in the transaction. Cross‐Defendant Judith Browning is also an agent of Homesmart. Defe...

Excerpt: ...emurrer 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 facts properly pleaded, but not contentions, deductions...