Excerpt: ...egations regarding service. The court declines defendant's invitation to revisit this issue, since the ground defendant asserts is the same that supported the motion the court partially granted on January 25, 2019, when the court vacated the default and ordered defendant to answer. The court declined to quash service of summons, as well, and will not entertain an untimely request to<0003008600030014001300 13001b000f0003[ subd. (a).) ...

Excerpt: ...ich may be resolved by summary judgment. (Ibid.) The evidence and inferences are in conflict in this case. Accordingly, the Court finds Defendant has failed to show there are no triable issues of fact. b) Plaintiff's Motion for Sanctions for Defendants' Refusal to Withdraw Frivolous Motion for Summary Judgment – HEARING REQUIRED. ...

Excerpt: ...sing statement and the referenced declarations and supporting exhibits. However, Defendants' failure in the first instance to supply sufficient evidence to negate the existence of a triable issue regarding the third cause of action for fraudulent inducement/concealment obviates further consideration of the evidentiary objections by either party. In each case, Defendants' proffered “fact” consists instead of a litany of conclusory and conteste...

Excerpt: ...e and import of federal preemption. Federal preemption, contrary to Defendant's assertion, is not merely a sub-species of “choice of law.” To the contrary, it goes to a trial court's fundamental subject matter jurisdiction, i.e., where federal law preempts state law it is not simply a question of which law one “chooses” to employ; it is instead a binary mandate that state law be disregarded in favor of federal law by virtue of the Suprema...

Excerpt: ...s that Plaintiff has established a reasonable excuse for the delay in amending the complaint to substitute Nathan Conner and Tisa Conner for DOES 1 and 2. Accordingly, the demurrer is overruled. b) Defendant's Motion to Strike Portions of First Amended Complaint – GRANTED, without leave to amend. A defendant may challenge the adequacy of punitive damages allegations by a motion to strike. (PH II, Inc. v. Superior Court(1994) 33 Cal.App.4th 1680...

Excerpt: ...ective Order to Modify the Subpoenas to: 1. Memorial Medical Center, 2. Memorial Medical Center/Billing Dept., 3. Memorial Medical/Radiology Dept., 4. Sutter Physical Services/Recovery Dept. TPL Unit, and Request for Sanctions in the amount of $1,810.00 against defendants and its attorney of record; c) Plaintiffs' Motion to Quash Defendant's Subpoenas for Medical Records; or in the Alternative for a Protective Order to Modify the Subpoenas to: 1....

Excerpt: ...bility theory. (Chavers v. Gatke Corp. (2003) 107 Cal.App.4th 606, 617; La Vista Cemetery Assoc. v. Am. Sav. & Loan Ass'n (1970) 12 Cal.App.3d 365, 369.) The same holds true for Plaintiff's “aiding and abetting” theory. (Casey v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 1138, 1145.) The Third Cause of Action, as amended, fails to allege and plead with particularity the facts required for a conspiracy theory for the reasons set forth in De...

Excerpt: ... 1131, 1135.) Any significant departure from the procedural requirements on new trial motions deprives the trial court of power to grant the motion. Strict literal compliance is required. (Telefilm, Inc. v. Superior Court (1949) 33 Cal.2d 289, 294; Sanchez-Corea v. Bank of America (1985) 38 Cal.3d 892, 899.) Here, Plaintiff has failed to file any supporting memorandum as required. (Code Civ. Proc. § 657; Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 3.1600.) While th...

Excerpt: ...cause of action or issue that is the subject of the motion in conjunction with the supporting material facts claimed to be without dispute with respect to each such cause of action or issue. (Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 3.1350(d)(1).) As such, the Separate Statement does not conform to the format specified by Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 3.1350(h). Such deficiencies are particularly troubling in the context of the moving defendant's alternative request fo...

Excerpt: ...r, the Court finds that Defendant/Cross-Complainant is not entitled to recover attorney's fees incurred in connection with the conversion cause of action in the Complaint or the defamation cause of action in the Cross-Complaint (on which she did not prevail at trial). Therefore, the court is inclined to reduce the lodestar amount of attorney's fees claimed by Defendant/Cross-Complainant herein by one-third in order to more accurately reflect the ...

Excerpt: ...523-524; Hearn v. Howard (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 1193, 1206; Anderson v. Sherman (1981) 125 Cal.App.3d 228, 238 [reasonableness of the misconception and justifiability of the failure to determine the correct facts or law are discretionary determinations for the trial court].) Acting pro se, moving party initiated this action by filing one suit and naming each of the defendants independently. His testimony indicated an awareness of the defendant wi...

Excerpt: ...n interest in the affected real property, may apply at any time to the court to expunge the lis pendens. (Miller & Starr California Real Estate, 4th ed., § 10:154; Code of Civil Procedure, § 405.30.) The standard of proof for expungement of a lis pendens is that “the court shall order that the notice be expunged if the court finds that the claimant has not established by a preponderance of the evidence the probable validity of the real proper...

Excerpt: ...and analogous to those of section 473(b). (Mannino, supra, 142 Cal.App.3d at 779.) Where, as here, the responsibility for the waiver is solely attributable to the attorneys, the mandatory relief provisions, by analogy, strongly suggests relief should be granted based on the remedial purposes of the statutes in question. (Lang v. Hochman (2000) 77 Cal.App.4th 1225, 1228.) The Court finds that timely supplemental responses were made by moving party...

Excerpt: ...rmit him to impair or destroy the client's cause of action or defense. (Seacall Develop. Ltd. v. Santa Monica Rent Control Bd. (1999) 73 Cal.App.4 th201; Orange Empire Nat. Bank, (1968) 259 Cal.App.2d 347.) Defendant shall file her answer within 20 days. ...

Excerpt: ...hth Causes of Action herein, to the effect that no trial of such issues shall be had until final determination of the family law action. (Code Civ. Proc. §597.) The Court notes, however, that the First Amended Complaint in the instant action asserts claims on behalf of an additional plaintiff, Behavioral & Educational Strategies & Training (“BEST”), which is not a party to the earlier action; the Court has no authority to order that the inst...

Excerpt: ...ction of privileged materials, Plaintiff is nevertheless entitled to Code- compliant responses which provides sufficient factual information to allow Plaintiff to evaluate the merits of any 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 be produced. Defendant shall provide further verified responses to the subject within ...

Excerpt: ...s stated, or which could be stated” and the voluntary dismissal with prejudice of Plaintiff's Complaint. Unlike the cases cited by both parties, Defendant's statutory offer contained no exemplar release or any express mention of the terms. As such, it is ambiguous as to any limitation of the “could be stated” claims to those arising out of the claim or claims actually raised in the case at bar. A section 998 offer must be reasonably certain...

Excerpt: ...or the purpose of establishing an official record or evidentiary fact by law, such as the court records and documents evincing title. (Code Civ. Proc. § 430.70; Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 3.1113(l); Ross v. Creel Printing & Publishing Co., Inc. (2002) 100 Cal.App.4th 736, 743; Day v. Sharp (1975) 50 Cal.App.3d 904, 914.) Regarding the first cause of action, for violation of Civil Code section 2937, the Court's judicial notice of the existence of th...

Excerpt: ...ration both relate to the substantive merits of the motion, and are not akin to the sort of blatant procedural mistakes that have been found tantamount to an involuntary dismissal or default. To the contrary, the attorney omissions in the case at bar—taken at face value—involve at best a misapprehension or misunderstanding as to the evidentiary rules, burdens and merits raised by the Defendants' motions for summary judgment. Accordingly, the ...

Excerpt: ...and/or unreasonable, such that the burden shifts to Plaintiff to show that the items charged were for matters necessarily relevant and material to the issues involved in the action. (Nelson v. Anderson (1999) 72 Cal.App.4 th 111, 131; Oak Grove School Dist. V. City Title Ins. Co. (1963) 217 Cal.App.2d 678, 698.) The Court acts within its discretion in determining whether costs are excessive and should be reduced. (Levy v. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S....

Excerpt: ... notice of its preparation by the reporter from the raw shorthand marks, and arguably not until signed and/or certified as such by the reporter itself. The intended use of the transcript is for trial and the reporter's sealing and certification are part and parcel of use and admiss<005700030049004c005100 47005600030057004b00480003> motion timely as the deposition was re-noticed, obligating objections to have been served upon such re-noticing, abs...

Excerpt: ...on Defendants Southern California Permanete Medical Group and the Permanete Medical Group, Inc.'s Demurrer to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint The Court grants Defendants Southern California Permanete Medical Group and the Permanete Medical Group, Inc.'s Request for Judicial Notice. Evidence Code § 452(h). Judicial Notice is taken of Defendants' Exhibit A. The court sustains Defendants Southern California Permanete Medical Gro...

Excerpt: ... party's notice of intent are either not authorized statutory causes for new trial nor coherently related by moving party to an authorized statutory cause, or else moving party did not address or support such non-statutory causes in moving party's memorandum and affidavits. (Code Civ. Proc. § 659(b) [new trial motion limited to statutory grounds in notice of intent]; Code Civ. Proc. § 659a [supporting brief and affidavits required after filing ...

Excerpt: ...omplaint pleads facts which, when liberally construed, support Cross-Complainant's claim of delayed discovery. Therefore, the Court cannot conclude that the claims therein are time-barred as a matter of law at this stage. With regard to the First Cause of Action for Fraud, the Court finds that the Cross-Complaint does not allege facts with the required degree of specificity and is uncertain as to the conduct allegedly committed by these moving Cr...

Excerpt: ...ove School Dist. V. City Title Ins. Co. (1963) 217 Cal.App.2d 678, 698.) The Court further finds that Defendant has offered adequate substantiation as to some of the challenged costs but not as to others. The Court acts within its discretion in determining whether costs are excessive and should be reduced. (Levy v. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th 807, 816-817.) The Court notes that Defendant has withdrawn its requests for co...