Excerpt: ... of the stated causes of action. The Code dictates that a motion for summary adjudication may only be granted if the issue in dispute completely disposes of an entire cause of action, affirmative defense, a claim for damages or an issue of duty. As the Court reads the motion and separate statement, Defendants set forth multiple separate issues related to the element of duty as well as additional separate issues related to the elements of breach a...

Excerpt: ...causes of action for negligence, fraud, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, breach of the Business and Professions Code and to quiet title, and she is entitled to attempt to do so. In addition, Plaintiff's third cause of action, for an accounting, fails to set forth any relationship between her and Defendants that would give rise to an entitlement to that relief, but, again, she may be able to do so. Plaintiff is theref...

Excerpt: ...only remaining cause of action at issue. Specifically, Plaintiff admits that Defendant granted all of her requests for accommodation during her employment. (UMF11-13; Plaintiff's Additional UMF 47, 54.) The additional facts argued by Plaintiff with regard to the allegedly pretextual reasons for her discharge are irrelevant to a claim under Gov. Code §12940(m). (Jensen v. Wells Fargo Bank (2000) 85 Cal.App.4 th 245.) Plaintiff's Objections to Def...

Excerpt: ...te causes of action for negligence, fraud, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, breach of the Business and Professions Code and to quiet title, and she is entitled to attempt to do so. In addition, Plaintiff's third cause of action, for an accounting, fails to set forth any relationship between her and Defendants that would give rise to an entitlement to that relief, but, again, she may be able to do so. Plaintiff is the...

Excerpt: ...y imposed by an administrative agency is a matter vested in the discretion of the agency and its decision may not be disturbed unless there has been a manifest abuse of discretion.” (Landau v Superior Court (1998) 81 Cal.App.4 th 191, 217.) Furthermore, “In reviewing the exercise of this discretion we bear in mind the principle ‘[c]ourts should let administrative boards and officers work out their problems with as little judicial interferen...

Excerpt: ...e that claim due to its failure to seek injunctive or other extraordinary relief as required by Gov't. Code §3309.5(d)(1). Moreover, it is Plaintiff's burden to establish how the pleading may be properly amended, and the Court finds that Plaintiff has failed to meet that burden in this context. Specifically, Plaintiff fails to provide any authority establishing that he is entitled to assert a claim for extraordinary relief, i.e. by way of petiti...

Excerpt: ...ting preliminary approval. Having considered the unopposed motion for final approval and the supporting declarations and evidence, the Court finds that the settlement was entered into good faith, is fair, reasonable and adequate, and satisfies the standards for final approval under California law. (Civil Code §1781; Code Civ. Proc. §382; Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 3.769.) Good cause appearing to the satisfaction of the Court, the proposed settleme...

Excerpt: ...sponse did not comply with Code Civ. Proc. §2031.240 et seq. Moreover, the items appear to be reasonably related to the subject matter of the suit herein and the proper subject of discovery. Finally, Plaintiff has the burden of demonstrating why the existing protective order is inadequate to address its expressed privacy and confidentiality concerns and has failed to make any showing in that regard. Therefore, Plaintiff shall provide a further v...

Excerpt: ...ent, as detailed in the Demurrer. Defendant also properly points out that the Complaint is uncertain and ambiguous, in that Plaintiffs' Complaint purports to allege causes of action under the FEHA, but the Right to Sue Notice they attached to their Complaint came from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. This suggests that Plaintiffs failed to exhaust their administrative remedies. The Self-Help Center offers free help to people who are r...

Excerpt: ...as was the cause of action) was “incidental” to the primary claims set forth in their petition. See Regalado v. Regalado (1961) 198 Cal.App.2d 549. The primary purpose of Petitioners' claims was not partition – thus there is no basis for apportionment of their attorney's fees under Code of Civil Procedure Section 874.010 et seq. Additionally, Petitioners seek to impose costs of proof under Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.420 on the bas...

Excerpt: ...ller for the relevant time period. Based on the supplemental declaration of counsel submitted in connection with this matter, the Court now makes the following ruling with regard to the fees and costs sought herein: As previously noted, Defendant does not dispute the moving party's entitlement to post-stipulation fees under the above-referenced statutes, but contests the reasonableness of the hours claimed. The successful party is normally entitl...

Excerpt: ...ails to allege that Defendants knew or should have known that the driver to whom the vehicle was entrusted was incompetent to drive. (Jen-Weld, Inc. v. Superior Court (2005) 131 Cal.App.4 th 853, 864.) Moreover, the Complaint fails to plead any acts or omissions which Plaintiff claims to have constituted Defendants' alleged negligence. (Berkley v. Dowds (2007) 152 Cal.App.4 th 518, 527; Guilliams v. Hollywood Hospital (1941) 18 Cal.2d 97, 101.) ...

Excerpt: ...s not strictly limited to claims brought under the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act, as Plaintiff argues, it is not intended to apply to the type of claim alleged here. Therefore, the demurrer to this portion of Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint is sustained without leave to amend. Accordingly, Defendant's Motion to Strike Portion of Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint in GRANTED IN PART WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND AND DENIED IN PART. Those p...

Excerpt: ...ion, to the subject discovery within 30 days of service of notice of entry of the order. Plaintiff's request for monetary sanctions is denied. A pro per litigant is not entitled to recover reasonable attorney's fees in connection with a motion to compel discovery. (Kravitz v. Superior Court (Milner) (2001) 91 Cal.App.4 th 1015.) While expenses actually incurred in connection with the failure to respond to discovery may be recoverable, Plaintiff h...

Excerpt: ...in this motion with additional time and effort expended in good faith. The Court's assessment in this regard is based on the fact that both parties appear to demonstrate a willingness to compromise to some degree in order to reach an acceptable resolution of the issues presented. Therefore, the hearing is continued for this purpose and counsel are instructed to continue to meet and confer in good faith. If such efforts prove unsuccessful at resol...

Excerpt: ...cted on the purported “claim form” published by the District. Moreover, absent evidence of delivery or mailing to the appropriate recipient, it is Plaintiff's burden to establish actual receipt and no such evidence has been presented herein. Assuming arguendo that receipt by the appropriate recipient can be established, the Court nevertheless finds that the subject correspondence in June 2018 failed to constitute a claim because it omitted th...

Excerpt: ...majority of the hours claimed were reasonably incurred and substantially contributed to the ultimate successful result. (Ketchum v. Moses (2001) 24 Cal.4th 1122, 1132; Horsford v. Board of Trustees of Calif. State University (2005) 132 Cal.App.4th 359, 394.) This includes time spent to prepare this motion and to oppose Defendants' Motion to Tax Costs. In its determination of reasonable hourly rates, the Court has considered the skill and experien...

Excerpt: ... determined to rule on the merits of the demurrer, as follows: Based upon review of the moving and supporting papers, the Court SUSTAINS Defendant 7/11, Inc.'s Demurrer to the First Cause of Action in its entirety. The Complaint admits that Plaintiff was injured during the course of his employment with 7/11, Inc.; therefore, Plaintiff's exclusive remedy lies in the Worker's Compensation system. As Plaintiff has not opposed the demurrer and it doe...

Excerpt: ... testimony and has not otherwise been authenticated, making it inadmissible hearsay. Despite the above-referenced deficiencies in the moving and supporting evidence, the Court finds that Plaintiffs' counsel's declaration raises an issue with regard to his client's current ability to submit to a deposition based on events which apparently transpired after the instant motion was filed. For that reason, the hearing is continued and counsel are instr...

Excerpt: ...endant is entitled to an order compelling Plaintiff to provide answers, without objection, to the subject discovery. Due to the impending trial date, Plaintiff shall serve such answers within 10 days of the date of the hearing. Further, the Court finds that Defendant is entitled to an award of monetary sanctions. (Code Civ. Proc. §§2030.290(c), 2031.300(c), 2023.010, 2023.030(a); Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 3.1348(a).) Plaintiff is ordered to pay $...

Excerpt: ...While a trial plan might be useful in determining whether a class should be certified in the first instance, as discussed in Duran, in this case the class was certified by Order dated June 25, 2019. Defendant's motion is thus an attempt to challenge the Court's decision to certify the class when the time to bring a motion for reconsideration has passed and there is no new evidence or new law to serve as a basis for such a motion. That said, a tri...

Excerpt: ... a judgment on equitable grounds due to lack of due process or extrinsic fraud or mistake also does not apply here. (Kulchar v. Kulchar (1969) 1 Cal.3d 467, 471-473.) ...

Excerpt: ...s. Nor is such a claim preempted by ERISA; the new cause of action is not entirely dependent upon Explanations of Benefits, but refers to other behaviors as well. Under these circumstances, Morris B. Silver M.D. Inc. v. International Longshore & Warehouse (2016) 2 Cal.App.5th 793, does not require a finding of federal preemption. b) Just as it was appropriate to consolidate the first two cases brought by Plaintiff against Defendant based upon the...

Excerpt: ...irectly related to the merits of the causes of action alleged in the Third Amended Complaint, such that the provisions of Code Civ. Proc. §597 do not apply in this context. In addition, the Court finds that the overall “gist” of the action is legal in nature; to the extent that the 8 th Cause of Action seeks an equitable remedy, the allegations therein are so intertwined with Plaintiff's legal claims as to make a separate trial impractical i...

Excerpt: ...e court also takes judicial notice of plaintiff's answer in the UD case. (Ibid.) The court's review of these documents indicate that some of the causes of action in the FAC are barred by the UD judgment. (See, e.g., Pacific Mutual Life Ins. Company of California v. McConnell (1955) 44 Cal.2d 715, 724–725 [“While different causes of action were involved in the present proceeding and [the previous related] one, the parties were the same, and it...