Excerpt: ...will produce documents and a privilege log in response to Requests 1 through 21; 31 through 36; 43, and 44, as well as verifications to the original responses. As Requests 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, and 46, Plaintiff has made the initial good cause showing that these requests are related to the issue of staffing and corporate ratification and are limited to those staffed in the same unit or wing where the decedent was housed. Defendant has not demonstra...

Excerpt: ...Plaintiff has not explained why his position as supervisor would waive his requirement to complete training. Rather, Plaintiff's training records demonstrate he completed other training as a supervisor, which Plaintiff does not dispute. The training records show Plaintiff actually completed the arbitration policy training using his unique login and personalized password. There is substantial evidence to support the finding that Plaintiff actually...

Excerpt: ...e Court declines to award issue sanctions at this time; however, this determination is made without prejudice to consideration of the propriety of such sanctions in the event of future failures to comply with the Court's orders. Therefore, the Court finds that Plaintiff is entitled to monetary sanctions in connection with the defense's above- described misuse of the discovery process, which necessitated the instant motion. Sanctions are awarded a...

Excerpt: ...ories, numbers 4.1 and 4.2, at issue. Defendant concedes the propriety of a further response. Therefore, Plaintiff's Motion is GRANTED. Defendant's verified responses to Form Interrogatories 4.1 and 4.2 are due within ten (10) days of the Court signing the Order. Plaintiff requests $3,770 in monetary sanctions. Since Defendant has conceded that a further response is warranted, sanctions are appropriate. However, as there are only two form interro...

Excerpt: ...hat Defendant has entirely failed to respond to the subject discovery and all objections have been waived. (Code Civ. Proc. §§2030.290(a).) Therefore, Plaintiffs are entitled to an order compelling Defendant to provide answers, without objection, to the subject discovery within 14 days. The Court further finds that Plaintiffs are entitled to an award of monetary sanctions in connection with Defendant's failure to respond to the subject discover...

Excerpt: ...February 23, 2018. Respondent's decedent Linda L. Butler was entitled to rely on the Affidavit. Petitioner's conclusory statements in the First Amended Petition that decedent Butler “knew” Respondent Richardson's affidavit was fraudulent are not supported by any facts. The Court is not required to assume that conclusory statements are true on demurrer. (See Serrano v. Priest (1971) 5 Cal.3d 584, 591 – conclusory allegations against defendan...

Excerpt: ...s that the proposed class representative and/or the proposed amended allegations are legally insufficient is not properly before this court. “[T]he better course of action [is] to allow [Plaintiff] to amend the complaint and then let the parties test its legal sufficiency in other appropriate proceedings.” (Kittredge Sports co. v. Superior Court (1989) 213 Cal.App.3d 1045, 1048.) Furthermore, while it appears there has been some delay in seek...

Excerpt: ...not explicitly set forth in the administrative charge if they are like or reasonably related to the other charges set forth and could reasonably be expected to grow out of the administrative investigation. (Nazir v. United Airlines, Inc. (2009) 178 Cal.App.4 th 243.) Here, the Court finds that the allegations in the EEOC Complaint, when liberally construed, sufficiently raise the issue of discrimination based on sex, such that a reasonable invest...

Excerpt: ...ating specific facts supporting the claimed insufficiency of the Defendant's responses and agreement to produce documents. With regard to Request Nos. 40-44, Plaintiff failed to make a foundational showing that such discovery is reasonably likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence in this case. Moreover, the defense has submitted evidence demonstrating that its objections based on relevance and burden/oppression are well-taken under ...

Excerpt: ...oduce admissible evidence demonstrating the existence of a triable issue of material fact. (Code Civ. Proc. §437c(p)(2).) The Court finds that Plaintiffs have met their burden in this regard and have demonstrated the existence of material factual disputes. (See, at a minimum, Plaintiffs' evidence in response to UMFs 45-55.) With regard to evidentiary objections, the Court notes that Plaintiffs' objections to Defendant's moving evidence were not ...

Excerpt: ...address reasonably known to Plaintiff. This new evidence appears to perhaps go to actual knowledge, which the Court did not, and does not, believe is relevant. Plaintiff further claims that “Despite clear notice of her intent to provide evidence at the hearing, the Court neither permitted Plaintiff's testimony nor her additional documentary evidence to be considered, nor did the Court grant a continuance to allow full hearing on the matter with...

Excerpt: ...elated to alleged defects, problems, complaints, symptoms, and/or features of the subject vehicles that are not at issue in this action, as defined by Plaintiff's pleadings and responses to discovery to date. Such requests are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence herein. However, the moving papers do not afford sufficient information for the Court to determine which specific requests should be covered by the c...

Excerpt: ...in its contentions, and this determination may only be made upon final resolution of the competing contract claims. (Frog Creek v. Frog Creek Partners, LLC v. Vance Brown, Inc. (2012) 206 Cal.App.4 th 515, 539-540.) Therefore, “a court may not award fees under Civil Code section 1717 to one party for prevailing on a complaint and another for prevailing on a cross- complaint arising under the same contract.” (Id., at 538.) ...

Excerpt: ... Motion to Strike (Code Civ. Proc. 425.16). (See, e.g. Dickinson v. Cosby (2017) 17 Cal.App.5 th 655; Sylmar Air Conditioning v. Pueblo Contracting Services, Inc. (2004) 122 Cal.App.4 th 1049.) The demurrer to the First Cause of Action is overruled; the Court finds that the allegations, when liberally construed, are sufficient to constitute the stated cause of action. The demurrer to the Third Cause of Action is moot, as that claim has been dismi...

Excerpt: ...hat the subject requests are worded broadly enough to potentially call for the production of privileged materials, Plaintiffs are nevertheless entitled to Code-compliant responses which provide sufficient factual information to allow Plaintiffs to evaluate the merits of the claims of privilege, including provision of a privilege log where necessary. The Court further finds that all responsive documents not subject to a claim of privilege should b...

Excerpt: ...viously awarded $395 an hour to Davis Boat's counsel for its trial court attorney fees (exs. 5 and 9), Davis Boat requests the same $395 per hour for its appellate counsel's work.” Marshall Cole's Declaration in Support of the Motion for Attorney's Fees after the jury trial, filed March 10, 2020, identifies $385 per hour as the rate this Court awarded to lead counsel. Additionally, Exhibit 3 to Mark Schaeffer's Declaration estimates 10 (ten) ad...

Excerpt: ...elief under Code Civ. Proc. §473(b). In addition, the Court finds that Defendants failed to seek relief within a reasonable time and have failed to offer a reasonable excuse for the delay. (Code Civ. Proc. §473(b); Huh v. Wang (2007) 158 Cal.App.4 th 1406; Ludka v.Memory Magnetics, Int'l. (1972) 25 Cal.App.3d 316.) The moving party bears the burden of demonstrating that relief was sought within a reasonable time, whether or not the other party ...

Excerpt: ...nterrogatories, Set One is GRANTED as to Numbers 15.1 and 17.1. The objections are untimely and have been waived. The responses are evasive and warrant a further response that is statutorily compliant. Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Further Responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One is DENIED as to Numbers 2.11, 2.12, 2.13, 4.1, 4.2, 12.1, 12.2, 12.3, 12.7, 13.1, and 14.1. Defendant's January 30, 2021 amended responses withdrew the objections at is...

Excerpt: ...ause the evidence and case law cited in the Reply is new, Defendant must be afforded an ample opportunity to respond. Therefore, this Court continues the hearing on Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Adjudication as to these causes of action only, as well as Defendant's Objections to the Evidence and Plaintiff's Reply Objections to the Evidence to Wednesday, June 9, 2021 at 8:30am in Department 22. Defendant's Response is due 14 days before the conti...

Excerpt: ...acts. The Court has considered the following Tech-Bilt, Inc. v. Woodward-Clyde & Associates (1985) 38 Cal.3d 488 factors: 1. The amount in question operates as a relatively small percentage of the claimed damages. Walsh & Simmons' argument regarding lost income appears sound, but special and general damages remain substantial. Nonetheless, it is unclear what liability there is or what the chances of success are at trial. The supplemental filings ...

Excerpt: ...ipient witness identified as “Fabiola.” The defense has demonstrated entitlement to discovery on these issues, and the Court finds that Plaintiff's asserted privacy concerns do not outweigh the right to discovery in this instance. The Court finds that the questions regarding counsel's referral of Plaintiff to certain health care providers qualify as prima facie confidential communications pursuant to Evidence Code §952, and Defendants have n...

Excerpt: ... property in the separate statement. This view appears mistaken. An allegation of interference with the property is not the same as an allegation of full conversion. 2. Plaintiff contends that the quiet title action would not affect easements. In fact, quiet title is often used against adverse easement claims. (See: Hansen v. Sandridge Partners, L.P. (2018) 22 Cal.App.5th 1020, 1033-1034: quiet title judgment for prescriptive easement establishes...

Excerpt: ...§15610.23 excludes acute conditions caused by alcohol dependency is not supported by the cases cited or even by subsection (b) of §15610.23 referring to health facilities defined in Cal. Health & Safety Code 1250.3 (“chemical dependency recovery hospital,” providing inpatient care for persons dependent on alcohol (and/or drugs)). Since Plaintiff alleges the decedent was grossly impaired and actually under the influence of alcohol at the tim...

Excerpt: ...demonstrates that Cross-Defendant Staffing Solutions Inc.'s failure to respond to the amended cross-complaint was the result of “mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect” as set forth in Code of Civil Procedure section 473(b). Furthermore, contrary to opposing counsel's arguments in opposition, the discretionary provisions of Section 473(b) are available under these circumstances. “Discretionary relief may be granted for excusab...

Excerpt: ...s matter. Therefore, the Court presumes that the motion is directed against its order dismissing the action on 6-5- 2020. Plaintiffs have failed to set forth any facts or admissible evidence in support of their request for relief herein. Therefore, they have failed to demonstrate sufficient grounds for the relief requested and the motion is DENIED. (b) The motion is moot in view of the Court's above denial of the concurrent motion to set aside th...