Excerpt: ...nt to constitute a cause of action), it was not waived by defendant's failure to demur. (Id. at 340.) The Answer, when read as a whole, and particularly in context with the allegations of the Complaint, contains sufficient facts to put Plaintiff on notice of the basis of Defendant's claims. (Perkins v. Superior Court (1981) 117 Cal.App.3d 1, 6; South Shore Land Co. v. Peterson (1964) 226 Cal.App.2d 725, 733-34: “if one of the defenses or counte...

Excerpt: ...Starn Farms since his cell phone was associated with the business and he represented himself as Darryl Starn for business purposes. (Undisputed Material Fact #10; Plaintiff's Additional Facts ## 11, 12, 13, 14, 16.) When speaking with Plaintiff's private investigator, Troy Starn made a statement the dog was a biter and he testified he would never touch the dog. (Undisputed Material Fact #11; Plaintiff's Additional Fact #15.) Therefore, there are ...

Excerpt: ...igeon's person and heroin in a napkin on his seat. Mr. Pigeon's passenger also had a large sum of cash. Mr. Pigeon's home was then subject to the probation search and paraphernalia consistent with drug sales (i.e. scale, baggies, large quantities of cash in smaller bills) was found. Mr. Pigeon's criminal case (CR-19-000041) resulted in a guilty plea to Cal. Health & Safety Code 11378 (possession for sale) and his conviction was entered on Novembe...

Excerpt: ... to Enforce Settlement Agreement – STAYED. a) and b) DENIED. Southwest Law Center's Notice of Appeal filed on April 16, 2021 does not relate to APMI/Alamo Surgery Center's Cross-Complaint, and therefore, these Motions are not stayed. (Cal. Civ. Pro. 916.) The Court finds that the Cross- Complaint is not compulsory, and therefore, the Motion to Strike the Cross-Complaint in its entirety on this basis is denied. The Court also finds that the Cros...

Excerpt: ...�that discovery be essentially self-executing.” (Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 402, internal quotations and citations omitted.) Generally, then the parties are free to use any of the statutory methods, in any sequence, and since neither the discovery nor the responses are filed with the court, the court does not consider the propriety of the demands or adequacy of a response un...

Excerpt: ... is aware that Plaintiff has also filed a Motion to remove the action to federal court, no such removal has occurred nor is there any evidence a federal complaint was actually filed. Therefore, at the time of Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration, there are no new facts or law for the Court to reconsider. ...

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: ...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: ...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: ...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: ...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: ...§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: ...minent domain action after a project is started or even completed, and the City even cites to the applicable statutes by which a court order for prejudgment possession is obtained in such proceedings, the City of Modesto failed to avail itself of such timely proceedings. The City of Modesto opted to purchase the property interests at issue rather than commence eminent domain proceedings. It cannot now obtain a right to condemn the same property i...

Excerpt: ...nts finding Plaintiff is not entitled to deduct its own fees and costs from the settlement fund before interpleading the funds with the Court for adjudication of the competing interests thereto. While interpleader is an appropriate remedy to the disputes arising from the fact that the settlement was too small to pay all lienholders, much less to leave anything for the plaintiff in the underlying litigation, the entire fund must be interpleaded. (...

Excerpt: ...of costs appear to be proper and reasonable, as do all but one of the “costs” included on Petitioner's memorandum here, the burden is on the party challenging costs to show otherwise. Ladas v. California State Auto. Assn (1993) 19 Cal.App.4th 761. The challenging party may meet its burden by showing the entire costs bill is improper rather than challenging particular items. However, conclusory allegations that an item was neither necessary no...

Excerpt: ...ed a general release of all claims as well as a waiver of Civil Code section 1542 (Exhibit U to Defendant's Compendium of Evidence.) This language contained in the general release is plain on its face. Plaintiff argues that the release is invalid and unenforceable because she did not believe she was releasing and waiving all previous acts of discrimination, harassment and retaliation. She contends that there must be independent evidence, separate...

Excerpt: ...court OVERRULES the demurrer. The FAC retains allegations that defendants Trevethan and Gordon violated Education Code section 44113, and the demurrer gives no reason to think these allegations are insufficient. (See, e.g., Quelimane Co. v. Stewart Title Guaranty Co. (1998) 19 Cal.4th 26, 38 [“If the complaint states a cause of action under any theory, regardless of the title under which the factual basis for relief is stated, that aspect of th...

Excerpt: ...ary Sanctions – GRANTED, sanctions imposed in the reduced amount of $1,700. a) The motion is moot to the extent to which it requests an order compelling defendant to produce a deponent, as defendant has agreed to do just that. The court orders defendant to produce a deponent in response to plaintiffs' subpoena within 30 days of this order. The court also orders that deponent to produce documents on the following conditions: All objections based...

Excerpt: ...actually be awarded under section 1021.6 until “the trier of fact determine[s] that the indemnitee was without fault in the principal case which is the basis for the action in indemnity or . . . the indemnitee ha[s] a final judgment entered in his or her favor granting a summary judgment, a nonsuit, or a directed verdict” (§ 1021.6), the court sees no reason why the request for fees should not be made in the pleadings, on the assumption that...

Excerpt: ...go v. Empire Today LLC (2012) 205 Cal.App.4th 1138,1145.) Here, while plaintiff has demonstrated something in the way of procedural unconscionability (but cf. Performance Team Freight Systems, Inc. v. Aleman (2015) 241 Cal.App.4th 1233, 1248 [failure to provide documents in Spanish dis not establish unconscioability without evidence that Spanish translations were requested or that they would have helped]), she has not shown substantive unconscion...

Excerpt: ... to Form Interrogatories, Set One, from Defendant Kooger Farms, LLC and Conditional Request for Sanctions in the Sum of $1,050; d) Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Further Responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One, from J. Jesus Munoz Velasco and Conditional Request for Sanctions in the Sum of $1,050 – a) – d) – MOOT as to all issues raised except whether surveillance recordings of Plaintiff are to be immediately produced to Plaintiff. As to t...

Excerpt: ...aims as well as a waiver of Civil Code section 1542. (Exhibit U to Defendant's Compendium of Evidence.) This language contained in the general release is plain on its face. Plaintiff argues that the release is invalid and unenforceable because she did not believe she was releasing and waiving all previous acts of discrimination, harassment and retaliation. She contends that there must be independent evidence, separate and apart from the release i...

Excerpt: ...hese motions were last before the Court in December 2020. While some issues remain outstanding, it appears that they may not survive the taking of two depositions. Accordingly, this Court orders that Travelers Insurance shall produce the person or persons most knowledgeable, as noticed in Core Brands' Third Amended Notice, for deposition by February 15, 2021. Travelers and Modesto City Schools are entitled to object to questions asked in the cour...