Excerpt: ... that he or she will prevail on the claim, neither that determination nor the fact of that determination shall be admissible in evidence at any later stage of the case, or in any subsequent action, and no burden of proof or degree of proof otherwise applicable shall be affected by that determination in any later stage of the case or in any subsequent proceeding. Plaintiffs' Request for Judicial Notice in support of their motion is GRANTED in part...

Excerpt: ...t was granted leave to amend his answer on December 4, 2020. As Plaintiff correctly notes, thirty (30) days from December 4, 2020 is January 3, 2021 (a Sunday). Thus, pursuant to statute, Defendant had until January 4, 2021 (Monday) to file his amended (verified) answer to Plaintiff's verified first amended complaint. Defendant failed to file an amended (verified) answer on or before January 4, 2021. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 43...

Excerpt: ...roperty a lessee is using as a residence, and Plaintiffs were not using this property as a residence, but essentially as a storage area / museum. As Defendants argue, the lease was more in the nature of a commercial lease than a residential lease. However, Plaintiffs argue in their opposition to the demurrer that the unlawful detainer action utilized by Defendants here applied only to a trailer on the property, and not to the storage area / museu...

Excerpt: ...l, or when the proposal was accepted so as to complete the formation of the contract. Defendant is correct that this matters in light of the applicable statute of limitations. The Court finds that the allegations of the second and fourth causes of action are sufficiently alleged so as to state causes of action. The First Amended Complaint alleges that Defendant Rogers was a party to the alleged contract and received a benefit from Plaintiff's wor...

Excerpt: ... Development Agency, while in the pending arbitration she represents no one but herself. As the Court of Appeal held recently in Jaboe v. Hanlees Auto Group (2020) 53 Cal.App.5 th 539, 557: “Because a PAGA claim is representative and does not belong to an employee individually, an employer should not be able dictate how and where the representative action proceeds.” Nor has Defendant demonstrated that abatement is appropriate. A review of the...

Excerpt: ...ent, whether written or oral. The applicable statute of limitations is therefore two years under Code of Civil Procedure, section 339. As the original cross-complaint was not filed until March 12, 2020, six years after Carlson left the property, the statute of limitations has run. Nor does the doctrine that a cross-complaint “relates back” to the filing of the original complaint save this cause of action, as the complaint was filed on April 1...

Excerpt: ... filing of a claim for property damage only led to a comedy of errors. Plaintiff's counsel prepared a claim for both property damage and bodily injury, but somehow neglected to send it to the City. In the meantime, the City rejected the original claim. When Plaintiff's counsel received the rejection, she logically concluded that the rejection applied to the claim she thought she had filed. This new evidence brings all of the facts into context, a...

Excerpt: ...ch has not agreed to arbitrate and is not bound by the plaintiff's agreement to do so. As the court noted in Correia v. N.B. Baker Electric, Inc. (4 th Dist. 2019) 32 Cal.App.5 th 602, 622: “These courts [that is, the California Courts of Appeal that have considered the question] have uniformly held that an employee's predispute agreement to arbitrate PAGA claims is not enforceable without the state's consent.” See also Collie v. Icee Co. (4 ...

Excerpt: ...gnosed with any asbestos-related disease or condition, undergone any BAP1 gene testing, and, if so, where the testing was performed. Plaintiffs objected on the grounds that the interrogatories are not relevant nor reasonable calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence; breach of the attorney-client privilege and work-product doctrine; the invasion of the privacy of third parties; and that the information sought constitutes prematur...

Excerpt: ...n that the Motion to Intervene is untimely. The cases Plaintiff cites, Allen v. California Water &Tel. Co. (1947) 31 Cal.2d 104, 108 and Sanders v. Pacific Gas & Elec. Co. (1975) 53 Cal.App.3d 664, both deal with motions to intervene brought after a trial or hearing, and are inapplicable to the present case. In addition, Plaintiff has been disingenuous about its failure to notify CSAA of the default judgment; he served another insurance company i...

Excerpt: ... asks that the following excerpts be sealed from the public:  CVMG's Second Amended Complaint at 5:5-10, 9:28-10:3, 10:21-22, 10:28, 11:1-2, 35:26, 36:2-3; and  CVMG's “mootness brief” at 2:10, 6:10-20. These are the same excerpts that defendant asked this Court to seal a few months back. As a refresher, this Court denied the request in pertinent part as follows: “Based on the foregoing, it is impossible to effectively seal ‘financi...

Excerpt: ... 22 [“A court may take judicial notice of the existence of each document in a court file, but can only take judicial notice of the truth of facts asserted in documents such as orders, findings of fact and conclusions of law, and judgments”].) Because the Court cannot take judicial notice of the testimony and other admissions by Plaintiff in the preceding federal litigation, the Court cannot conclude that Plaintiff suffered no injury. The Cour...

Excerpt: ...er, that Aspiranet knew of and ratified the harmful conduct of its counselor to Plaintiff. None of the various arguments Aspiranet raises takes this into account. Therefore, Aspiranet argues that the sexual abuse of Plaintiff by one of its counselors was outside the course and scope of that counselor's employment. However, Plaintiff alleges that Aspiranet knew of the sexual abuse, but continued to allow the counselor to take her under-aged client...

Excerpt: ...ddress Plaintiff's current ill health, or otherwise. While this Court is sympathetic to Plaintiff, and wishes him a swift recovery, the failure to respond to the discovery or Plaintiff's counsel's failure to communicate with defense counsel is improper. The Court therefore grants Plaintiff 15 days to respond to Defendant's Requests for Production of Documents, Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories and Deeming Requests for Admission. Furth...

Excerpt: ...dividuals have not left the Hospital's employ, and to get further information about them at that time, Plaintiff may file supplemental interrogatories, especially as Defendant has agreed to allow Plaintiff more discovery than that to which he is entitled under the Code of Civil Procedure. None of the case law cited by Plaintiff requires further information be provided regarding witnesses who are employees of a party. Nor does this holding require...

Excerpt: ...ded in preparing a reply brief and in arguing this motion, as the motion is unopposed. The hourly rate is appropriate for Stanislaus County, and the time expended is also appropriate. Defendant Bouma's proposed order is proper in form. This Court will sign the order once it is amended to reflect the dollar figure actually awarded. ...

Excerpt: ...�nancial, operational, contractual, and other commercially sensitive information” of the parties, health plans, and physicians. Their requests are very broad. A party requesting that a record be filed under seal must file a motion or an application for an order sealing the record. The motion or application must be accompanied by a memorandum and a declaration containing facts sufficient to justify the sealing. CRC 2.550(b)(1). For a court to or...

Excerpt: ...��Whether a motion is actually a motion for reconsideration of a prior ruling is determined by the relief sought and not by the label attached to it.” Powell v. County of Orange (2011) 197 Cal.App.4th 1573, 1577. Here, the relief Crabtree Schmidt seeks in the motion is, basically, an order “reversing” the Court's orders on Gabriel Ashlock's ex parte requests for relief as applied to Crabtree Schmidt. Crabtree Schmidt doesn't believe that th...

Excerpt: ...iff's social security number in order to fulfill its tax-reporting obligations, but that is dependent upon Plaintiff achieving any recovery in this case. The information requested in Special Interrogatory No. 1 can be provided should it become necessary at some point in the future. There is no time at which answers to Special Interrogatories 2 through 6 are necessary to Defendants' tax-reporting obligations. Special Interrogatory No. 7, the only ...

Excerpt: ... was paid for, and granted a security interest in the equipment to Plaintiff “to secure payment of the purchase price and performance of all obligations under this Agreement.” The agreement further required Defendant to return the equipment. Section 697.530 does not apply under these circumstances. Defendant fails to identify the motion as to which it claims this is an untimely motion for reconsideration, and this Court has not been able to i...

Excerpt: .... The amount of fees awarded does not include a multiplier of 1.5, as requested by Gabriel Ashlock. The Court does not believe a multiplier is justified at this stage of the proceedings, as the uniqueness and complexity of the issues confronted during the pre-trial and trial stages no longer existed during the appellate proceedings. b) Fourth Petition for Attorneys' Fees and Costs: At this time the Court DENIES the petition without prejudice. Ini...

Excerpt: ...rtis item k, $435 for Schofield item c, $715 of the Pimentel cost (item 8, minus the statutory witness fee), and item 9 in its entirety ($2,373.85). The remainder of the motion to tax is DENIED. Petitioner to prepare proposed order hereon. b) GRANTED in part, DENIED in part Based on the breadth of the subpoenas, and the failure to specify records sought, the motion to quash all four subpoenas is GRANTED. Petitioner, as the prevailing party hereon...

Excerpt: ...moving defendants “stood in the shoes” of PVC as its successors-in interest, and if Plaintiffs had prevailed on such causes they would have been entitled to seek attorney's fees from Defendants herein under the contractual provisions. (Reynolds Metals Co. v. Alperson (1979) 25 Cal.3d 124, 128.) Having reviewed the declarations and evidence submitted with the moving papers, as well as the supplemental declarations of Lewis Soffer, Amy Mathews,...

Excerpt: ...'s motion to compel responses given that Defendants have now served responses to all of the pending discovery. The Court notes that Defendants served those responses pursuant to their representation made during the parties' “meet and confer” process that they would do so as soon as the Court issued a ruling on the Defendants' petition to compel binding arbitration. There is no information contained in the Court's file as to the sufficiency of...

Excerpt: ...e submitted with Defendants' Requests for Judicial Notice, the Court finds that the Complaint fails to state facts sufficient to state the subject causes of action against the moving Defendants. (Code Civ. Proc. §438.) As Plaintiffs' opposition appears to suggest the existence of additional facts which may support certain of the subject causes of action, Plaintiffs are granted 20 days' leave to file an amended pleading ...