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

2604 Results

Location: Sonoma x
2023.12.13 Motion for Summary Judgment 065
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Pardo, Oscar
Hearing Date: 2023.12.13
Excerpt: ... 1-50 alleging causes of achon for: 1) Motor Vehicle Negligence; and 2) General Negligence. This matter is on calendar for the motion by Defendants for summary judgment pursuant to Cal. Code Civ. Proc. ("CCP") S 437c. For the reasons set forth below, the motion for summary judgment is DENIED. The Burdens on Summary Judgment A. Generally Summary judgment "shall be granted if all the papers submitted show that there is no triable issue as to any ma...
2023.12.13 Motion for Attorney Fees 072
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Honigsberg, Christopher
Hearing Date: 2023.12.13
Excerpt: ... IRP Fund II Trust 2A; IRP REO II, LLC; and Servis One, Inc. dba BSI Financial Services (all represented by same counsel) obtained an order for summary judgment in their favor. The fourth defendant (Entra Default Solutions) never appeared in the achon and their default was taken on November 29, 2021. On July 28, 2023, defendant IRP REO II, LLC (the property owner) filed and served a CCP section 405.30 motion to expunge the lis pendens and for att...
2023.12.13 Demurrer to TAC, Motion to Strike, for Sanctions 120
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Honigsberg, Christopher
Hearing Date: 2023.12.13
Excerpt: ...s to the Second Amended Complaint into this ruling. In that ruling, the Court explained in detail why the Third Amended Complaint would be the Plaintiffs' final opportunity to properly plead their case. Plaintiffs did not challenge that tentative ruling. Plaintiffs have not at any point attempted to meet their burden of provng how they can fix the deficiencies in their pleading by amendment. (Goodman v. Kennedy (1976) 18 Cal.3d 335, 349.) Still, ...
2023.12.13 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings 072
Location: Sonoma
Judge: DeMeo, Bradford
Hearing Date: 2023.12.13
Excerpt: ...ing that he owns real property at 29 Old Creek Road, Petaluma, California (the "Property"), complains that Defendant has attempted to foreclose on a deed of trust (the "DOT") recorded against the Property securing a loan (the "loan"), in violation of applicable guidelines regarding loan modification and forbearance, and requirements for a single point of contact ("SPOC"). He asserts that Defendant's conduct violated Civil Code ("CC") sections 292...
2023.12.06 Motion to Certify Case as Class Action 610
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Broderick, Patrick M
Hearing Date: 2023.12.06
Excerpt: ... Hospital ("Hospital") and Signature Healthcare Services, LLC ("Signature")(together "Defendants" or "Employer") failed to pay members of the Class for work performed, and that Class members skipped or delayed taking meal and rest periods due to understaffing by Employer and that Employer did not pay meal and rest break premiums. Plaintiff alleges that she was regularly in charge of far more patients than allowed by law and that Employer relied h...
2023.12.06 Demurrer 115
Location: Sonoma
Judge: DeMeo, Bradford
Hearing Date: 2023.12.06
Excerpt: ...ppen without taking appropriate measures to stop it or report it. She alleges that she was 59 years old at the time she filed the complaint. She further asserts that the complaint is timely pursuant to Code of Civ-l Procedure ("CCP") section 340.1, which became effective on January 1, 2020, because the achon is for recovery of damages suffered as a result of childhood sexual assault and she filed the action prior to December 31, 2022. She also as...
2023.12.06 Motion for Attorney 378
Location: Sonoma
Judge: DeMeo, Bradford
Hearing Date: 2023.12.06
Excerpt: ...oject") belonging to Real Party in Interest Safeway, Inc. ("RPI") at the corner of South McDowell Blvd and Maria Drive, which the city council ("Council") of Respondent City of Petaluma ("Respondent") approved at a final hearing on April 1, 2019, reversing a prior vote of December 3, 2018. Respondent's Planning Commission ("Commission") had approved a CEQA mitigated negative declaration ("MND") and Site Plan and Architectural Review ("SPAR") for ...
2023.12.06 Motion for Interlocutory Judgment, Writ of Execution 675
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Broderick, Patrick M
Hearing Date: 2023.12.06
Excerpt: ...having been filed, the motion is granted to the extent that this court finds plaintiff Natsios is entitled to partition of the Property by its sale. The court takes judicial notice of the Judgment by Stipulation filed on March 30, 2022, in the Marin County Superior Court, CIV-2003458, Natsios v. Neilsen ("Judgment"). The Judgment states it is entered in favor of plaintiff Manny Natsios ("Natsios") on his cause of achon related to 191 Butterfield ...
2023.12.06 Motion for Summary Judgment 817
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Honigsberg, Christopher
Hearing Date: 2023.12.06
Excerpt: ...d by the defense in support of the motion is so scant that it fails to provide the Court with a full picture of the circumstances. An example of this includes the excerpts of Plaintiff's deposition provided in Exhibit F of Defendant's Index of Exhibits. While it is true that a party need not provide the Court with an entire deposition transcript, a party should not solely provide the Court with excerpts that include testimony that is most favorab...
2023.12.06 Motion for Leave to File Complaint 882
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Broderick, Patrick M
Hearing Date: 2023.12.06
Excerpt: ... file a cross-complaint. They argue the court should use its discretion to deny the motion. At any time during the course of the lawsuit, the court retains power to permit defendant to file or amend a cross-complaint to avoid forfeiture of defendant's "related" claim. Indeed, the court "shall grant" leave as long as defendant is acting in good faith. (CCP S 425.50.) As section 426.50 does not apply as between defendants, the cross-complaint is no...
2023.12.06 Motion to Compel Arbitration 273
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Pardo, Oscar
Hearing Date: 2023.12.06
Excerpt: ... Proc. ("CCP") S 1280 et seq. (the "CAA"). The Motion is GRANTED. The Basis for the Motion Plaintiff offered construction services to Defendants Gaebler and Steinberg under a construction contract. See FAC, Exhibit A (the "Contract"). The Contract contains an arbitration provision covering "any claim arising out of or relating to this contract". See Contract, pg. 9. The Contract was signed by all parties. Governing Law A party seeking to compel a...
2023.12.06 Motion to Dismiss Petition for Writ of Mandate on Grounds of Mootness 342
Location: Sonoma
Judge: DeMeo, Bradford
Hearing Date: 2023.12.06
Excerpt: ... failed to act with due process and have failed to demonstrate that his alleged misconduct is related to the practice of medicine or puts health and safety of others at risk. He also raises other allegations regarding lack of authority or jurisdiction and the need for an oath of allegiance or "fidelity bond," claiming that "Respondents," specifically William Prasifta as Executive Director of the Medical Board of California and deputy attorney gen...
2023.12.06 Motion to Quash Subpoena Duces Tecum, Compel Further Responses 500
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Pardo, Oscar
Hearing Date: 2023.12.06
Excerpt: ...nt"). This matter is on calendar for Plaintiff's four motions: (1) moton to quash subpoena duces tecum, (2) motion compelling further responses to form interrogatories ("Fls"), general, from Defendants under Code of Civil Procedure ("CCP") SS 2030.300, and (3) moton compelling further responses to form interrogatories, employment ("EROGs") set one and (4) motion compelling further responses to form interrogatories, EROGS, set two, from Defendants...
2023.12.06 Motion to Strike 197
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Broderick, Patrick M
Hearing Date: 2023.12.06
Excerpt: ... of the Workers' Compensation Act." Plaintiff argues that Defendant waived this affrmative defense for failing to plead it in his initial answer. Plaintiff only cites authority that an affirmative defense must be pleaded to be entitled to it. No authority is cited that it must be raised in the first answer filed. Additionally, in reply, Plaintiff discusses at length the meaning of "or," in the language of the statute that reads a "party may amend...
2023.12.06 Petition to Compel Arbitration 161
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Honigsberg, Christopher
Hearing Date: 2023.12.06
Excerpt: ...der late-filed opposition papers for good cause if there is no undue prejudice to the moving party." (Correia v. NB Baker E/ec„ Inc. (2019) 32 Cal.App.5th 602, 613.) "The circumstances surrounding an untimely opposition to a petition or motion to compel arbitration should be viewed under 'the strong policy of the law favoring the disposition of cases on the merits . (Correia, at 613.) The Court exercises its discretion to consider Respondent's ...
2023.12.06 Special Motion to Strike 177
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Honigsberg, Christopher
Hearing Date: 2023.12.06
Excerpt: ...CP S 425.16(b)(1) provides that a cause of action against a person "arising from any act of that person in furtherance of the person's right of petition or free speech under the United States Constitution or the California Constitution in connection with a public issue" shall be subject to a special motion to strike, unless the court determines that the plaintiff has established that there is a probability that the plaintiff will prevail on the c...
2023.11.29 Petition for Writ of Mandate on Grounds of Mootness 342
Location: Sonoma
Judge: DeMeo, Bradford
Hearing Date: 2023.11.29
Excerpt: ...t with due process and have failed to demonstrate that his alleged misconduct is related to the practice of medicine or puts health and safety of others at risk. He also raises other allegations regarding lack of authority or jurisdiction and the need for an oath of allegiance or "fidelity bond," claiming that "Respondents," specifically William Prasifta as Executive Director of the Medical Board of California and deputy attorney general Janssen ...
2023.11.29 OSC Re Contempt 409
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Broderick, Patrick M
Hearing Date: 2023.11.29
Excerpt: ...er month for his own use, and (4) hiring personnel without Plaintiff's knowledge or consent — and paying them in cash without following any accounting procedures. The willful failure to comply with a court order constitutes contempt. (In re Grayson (1997) 15 Cal.4th 792, 794.) Contempt requires establishing that a party failed to comply with its order, that the party was aware of the order and had the ability to comply with it, and that the fai...
2023.11.29 Motion to Set Aside Default 721
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Pardo, Oscar
Hearing Date: 2023.11.29
Excerpt: ...th argue extensively about the applicability of the discretionary undertaking provision in CCP S 917.9. Both parties largely cite cases which predate the 1958 amendment that created the current version of 917.9, and associated statutes. The concern raised is that the interlocutory judgment compels the sale of the property, and therefore is an order under CCP S 917.4, under which no stay is issued unless the Court sets an undertaking. No party rai...
2023.11.29 Motion to Expunge Lis Pendens 883
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Honigsberg, Christopher
Hearing Date: 2023.11.29
Excerpt: ...lidity of the claims asserted against this specific defendant. Plaintiff asserts a cause of action for cancellation of instruments against Defendant Catamount, seeking to cancel Catamount's Trustee's Deed upon Sale ("TDUS") granting it title to the property underlying this conflict. Plaintiff asserts a related declaratory relief cause of acton as well. Title was formerly held by Plaintiff Plaintiff alleges that he has been erroneously deprived of...
2023.11.29 Motion to Compel Answers 535
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Pardo, Oscar
Hearing Date: 2023.11.29
Excerpt: ...oduction of documents ("RPODs") from Defendant under CCP SS 708.030 & 2031.300. The unopposed Motion is GRANTED. Defendants shall serve verified responses free of objections within thirty (30) days of notce of entry of the order on this Motion. Defendants shall pay $50 in sanctions to Plaintiff within thirty (30) days of notce of entry of the order on this Motion. Governing Law A judgment creditor generally has the same rights to propound discove...
2023.11.29 Motion to Compel Answers 069
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Pardo, Oscar
Hearing Date: 2023.11.29
Excerpt: ...rom Defendant under CCP SS 708.030 & 2031.3(1). The unopposed Motion is GRANTED. Defendants shall serve verified code-compliant responses free of objections within thirty (30) days of notice of entry of the order on this Moton. Defendants shall pay $60 in sanctions to Plaintiff within thirty (30) days of notice of entry of the order on this Motion. Governing Law A judgment creditor generally has the same rights to propound discovery to the judgme...
2023.11.29 Motion for Summary Judgment, Adjudication 950
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Honigsberg, Christopher
Hearing Date: 2023.11.29
Excerpt: ...ry Plaintiff's SAC asserts four causes of action for: (1) Discriminaton Based on Sex in Violation of FEHA; (2) Hostile Environment Harassment in Violation of FEHA; (3) Retaliation in Violation of FEHA; and (4) Failure to Prevent in Violation of FEHA. (SAC, 7-21.) These causes of action are brought due to events that occurred while she worked as a volunteer firefighter for Defendant. (Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of MS] ["MSJ MP...
2023.11.29 Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint 955
Location: Sonoma
Judge: Pardo, Oscar
Hearing Date: 2023.11.29
Excerpt: ... Air Commercial Real Estate Association Standard Industrial/commercial Single-Tenant Lease agreement (the "Lease"). This matter is on calendar for the motion by Schaefer and Scoble ("Amending Parties") pursuant to Cal. Code Civ. Proc. ("CCP") S 473 for leave to amend the Cross-complaint ("SCC"). The motion is opposed by Pearson and PPI ("Opposing Parties"). The Motion is DENIED. Facts and Procedure The original complaint in this action was filed ...
2023.11.29 Motion for Attorney Fees 378
Location: Sonoma
Judge: DeMeo, Bradford
Hearing Date: 2023.11.29
Excerpt: ...oject") belonging to Real Party in Interest Safeway, Inc. ("RPI") at the corner of South McDowell Blvd and Maria Drive, which the city council ("Council") of Respondent City of Petaluma ("Respondent") approved at a final hearing on April 1, 2019, reversing a prior vote of December 3, 2018. Respondent's Planning Commission ("Commission") had approved a CEQA mitigated negative declaration ("MND") and Site Plan and Architectural Review ("SPAR") for ...

2604 Results

Per page

Pages