Excerpt: ... Two, Nos. 34, 36, and 43. The motions are DENIED as to all other discovery. Jacoby requested sanctions of $13,050.00 against Defendant. Sanctions are partially GRANTED for the reduced amount of $6,525.00. Procedural History Jacoby commenced this wage and hour class action against Defendant for alleged violations of various Labor Codes. (Motion to Compel Further Responses re Production Requests [“MTCFR PROD”], 3:25-27.) Jacoby served set one ...

Excerpt: ...lowing Smashmallow to conduct limited discovery to determine whether VADO has the minimum contacts with California necessary for this court to have jurisdiction over it. VADO opposes the motion arguing that Smashmallow's discovery is not limited to the issue of jurisdiction. Smashmallow served a Notice of Deposition of Defendant VADO Beheer B.V. by and through Person or Persons Most Knowledgeable Pursuant to CCP § 2025.230. (“Depo Notice”) (...

Excerpt: ...(Motion, 1:2-4.) The sales contract Plaintiff entered into with Bone contained an arbitration provision covering claims that arose out of the purchase or condition of the Nissan Rogue. (Id. at 1:9-13.) Plaintiff and Bone were signatories of the sales contract but not Nissan, and the contract expressly applied to Bone and its agents. (Ibid.) The relevant portions of the arbitration provisions read as follows: “You agree to the terms of this cont...

Excerpt: ...regarding discovery has been made, it is irrelevant on future hearings enforcing the order whether that order was erroneous, as the appropriate relief would be to appeal the erroneous order, not to ignore the efforts to enforce it. In re Marriage of Niklas (1989) 211 Cal.App.3d 28, 35-36. CCP § 2025.450(g)(1) provides that a monetary sanction “shall” be imposed against the party losing a motion to compel deposition unless the court finds “...

Excerpt: ... Underlying facts Plaintiff M.A. Silva Corks (“Silva”), a manufacturer of wine packaging, began leasing a warehouse in north Santa Rosa from defendant Ursus Development (“Ursus”) in 2014 with an option to buy. Ursus agreed to make improvements to the building, including modification of the roof and installation of batt insulation under the roof. Ursus hired defendant and moving party DES Architect and Engineer (“DES”) to provide the a...

Excerpt: ...2 and 2572 ½ Bodega Avenue, Petaluma, California (APN 021-041- 025) (the “Subject Property”). (Undisputed Material Fact [“UMF”], ¶ 1.) The parties dispute the size of the Subject Property. Mendonca says it is ½ acre. Linsenmeyer claims it is larger. Both agree it is improved by a main residence and accessory dwelling unit (“Unit 2572 ½”). (Ibid.) The parties inherited the Subject Property from Mendonca's father Johnnie Lear (“Le...

Excerpt: ...iginal beneficiary of the Deed of Trust (DOT) for this property, Defendant Deutsche Bank National Trust Company (Deutsche) is the current beneficiary of the DOT, Defendant Nationstar Mortgage LLC dba Mr. Cooper (Mr. Cooper) is the servicer of the loan secured by the DOT, and Defendant The Mortgage Law Firm, PLC is the Trustee of the DOT. After Plaintiff's wife passed away, Plaintiff's daughter began managing Plaintiff's financial matters. After r...

Excerpt: ...arranty Act, Civ. Code § 1790 et seq. (the “Act”); 2) breach of implied warranty under the Act; and 3) violation of §1793.2 under the Act. This matter is on calendar for the motion by Plaintiffs to compel further production directed at the document requests set forth in Plaintiffs' first demand for inspection (the “RPODs”). The Motion is GRANTED. I. Governing Law Regarding RPODs, a party to whom a document demand is directed must respon...

Excerpt: ... to take her son out of a car which Defendant was driving. Only one Plaintiff, Jeanine Grider (“Plaintiff” or “Jeanine”) is identified as a party, and she is self-represented, but the FAC appears to assert claims on behalf of minor son, William Grider (“William”). Defendant answered the FAC and later brought a special motion to strike the sixth cause of action pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16. The court granted that ...

Excerpt: ...mnity. The 1XC incorporates the allegations of the complaint which allege that defendants PG&E, Mountain, and Moreno Consulting Group, Inc. (“Moreno”) in 2020 owned, possessed, supervised, operated, maintained, leased, occupied, and/or otherwise controlled a worksite in Santa Rosa near 6101 Cleland Road in Santa Rosa. (Complaint ¶10.) On October 12, 2020, while Plaintiff was at the property, Defendants' alleged negligence caused a tree to fa...

Excerpt: ... Nathaniel Engquist is OVERRULED. The motion to strike is MOOT. 1. Note regarding combined motions The County has filed three motions as one. The County should note that it is the practice in this court for demurrers and motions to strike to be filed as separate motions. 2. Complaint This action involves property owned by the Howard Jay Engquist 2010 Revocable Trust. On March 24, 2010, Howard recorded a deed granting real property located at 250 ...

Excerpt: ... TRVFD, “Defendants”), arising initially out alleged violations of the Court's orders in another case, SCV- 266225. This matter is on calendar for demurrers to all causes of action within the SAC by TRVFD, the County and Thompson pursuant to Cal. Code Civ. Proc. (“CCP”) § 430.10(e) for failure to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, that there is another action proceeding between the same parties, and for misjoinder of...

Excerpt: ...tentative ruling and in compliance with Rule 3.1312. Analysis: CCP § 1048 states that “[w]hen actions involving a common question of law or fact are pending before the court, it may order a joint hearing or trial of any or all the matters in issue in the actions; it may order all the actions consolidated and it may make such orders concerning proceedings therein as may tend to avoid unnecessary costs or delay.” (CCP § 1048(a).) “The court...

Excerpt: ...lying Facts: Carmen Marinsik (hereafter, “Marinsik”) was the owner of 1928 Camino Del Prado, Santa Rosa, California. (Undisputed Material Fact “UMF”, 1.) This residence was destroyed in the October 2017 Tubbs Fire. (UMF, 2.) Marinsik intended to rebuild the residence on the Camino Del Prado property and hired Defendant Gregory Mitchell dba Mitchell and Company as her general contractor to handle all aspects of rebuilding the residence. (U...

Excerpt: ... pay Plaintiff the full amount owed after Plaintiff suffered a loss (the “Loss”) to the Property. Motion Defendant moves the court for a protective order shielding it from the burden and expense of responding to Plaintiff First Set of Requests for Admission (“RFAs”), First Set of Requests for Production (“RFPs”), and First Set of Special Interrogatories (collectively, the “Discovery”). Alternatively, it asks the court to extend th...

Excerpt: ...verages but that although Youngs performed, Defendants breached the contract by failing to pay the amount owed. Plaintiff filed this action to collect the debt, allegedly $6,381.54, plus costs, legal fees, and interest. Defendants failed to appear, so Plaintiff obtained their default on November 16, 2021, and obtained a default judgment against them on January 12, 2022 for $9,249.34. Post-Judgment Discovery Plaintiff served Defendants by mail wit...

Excerpt: ...ng to pay the amount owed. Plaintiff filed this action to collect the debt, allegedly $15,795.66, plus costs, legal fees, and interest. Defendants failed to appear, so Plaintiff obtained their default on May 25, 2023, and obtained a default judgment against them on June 23, 2023 for $20,425.41. Post-Judgment Discovery Plaintiff served Defendants by mail with post-judgment discovery on July 25, 2023; the discovery included one set of production de...

Excerpt: ... any time determines that there has been a change of law that warrants it to reconsider a prior order it entered, it may do so on its own motion and enter a different order.” Plaintiff argues that Defendant's motion to compel arbitration was granted based upon the ruling in Felisilda v. FCA US LLC (2020) 53 Cal.App.5th 486 compelling arbitration based upon principles of equitable estoppel. Plaintiff argues that the Third District Court of Appea...

Excerpt: ...Sonoma County but does have an office in San Francisco and that, according to Revenue and Taxation Code (“RTC”) section 6933, venue is proper only in a county where the Attorney General maintains an office. There is no opposition to the motion. When a party contends that an action has been brought in the wrong court, i.e., that venue is not proper in the court in which the action has been brought, the party may move to transfer venue to a pro...

Excerpt: ...a (the "Property"). Defendant has filed the instant motion for issuance of an order to show cause ("OSC") re: contempt against the receiver, Mark Adams ("Receiver"). The motion is DENIED. Judicial Notice As a preliminary matter, the Court takes permissive judicial notice of the docket within this case, including the orders therein, and the filings of the Receiver in this case. Judicial notice of official acts and court records is statutorily appr...

Excerpt: ...tions to compel answers to special interrogatories ("Sl") against Defendant under Code of Civil Procedure ("CCP") S 2030.300, and to compel compliance with Plaintiff's request for production of documents ("RPOD") under CCP S 2031.310. The motions are GRANTED. Governing Law A. Special interrogatories A party may propound up to 35 special interrogatories to another party. (CCP S 2030.030(a).) If the party propounds more than 35, it must attach to e...

Excerpt: ...his matter is on calendar for Defendant's motion to strike pun-tive damages. The motion to strike is DENIED. Governing Law A. Motion to Strike Punitive Damages A motion to strike lies where a pleading contains "irrelevant, false, or improper matter[s]" or is "not drawn or filed in conformity with the laws of this state, a court rule, or an order of the court." CCP S 435(b). However, "falsity," must be demonstrated by reference to the pleading its...

Excerpt: ...ez, "Defendants"), and Does 1-100. The Complaint alleges a variety of causes of action derived from work contracted to be performed by Defendants. Grape Land has filed a cross- complaint alleging further contract actions ("Cross-complaint"). This matter is on calendar for Plaintiffs' motion to strike particular claims from the Cross-complaint, or in the alternative, to require a bill of particulars under Code of Civil Procedure ("CCP"), S 454. Pl...

Excerpt: ...y premiums, but Defendant failed to pay premiums owed. It seeks to collect the unpaid premiums. Plaintiff filed this action on June 26, 2023. It later filed a proof of service for the summons and complaint on September 6, 2023, purporting to show service on Defendant personally on August 2, 2023, at 3:39 p.m.at 689 Benicia Drive, santa Rosa, CA 95409. Defendant failed to appear, so Plaintiff obtained Defendant's default on September 26, 2023. Pla...

Excerpt: ...Dave Leuschner and James Leuschner. As for the subpoena served on the LLP, this court directs the LLP to submit responsive documents to Department 16's chambers within 15 days of this order for in camera review. On November 15, 2023, Defendants issued deposition subpoenas for business records to Dave Leuschner; James Leuschner; and Plaintiffs' attorneys, the law firm Perry, Johnson, Anderson, Miller, & Moskowitz, LLP. (O'Rourke decl., 94, Exhibit...