Excerpt: ...e class allegations, leaving just her PAGA claim. What remains, as such, of this motion is whether the PAGA claim is subject to arbitration. First, defendant did not ask this Court to compel arbitration of the PAGA cause of action (see Notice 2:5‐6 and MPA 1:19‐24). Second, as both sides readily concede, the established law here in California is that PAGA claims are not subject to an aggrieved employee's private agreement with an employer to ...

Excerpt: ... prayer for punitive damages. The issue is whether the third cause of action, to which the prayer for punitive damages attaches, is viable in light of the economic loss rule. The economic loss rule bars most tort claims for purely economic losses covered by a contract, but does not apply to tort claims based on a theory that the defendant actually said something to the plaintiff at or about the time of contracting that was materially false. This ...

Excerpt: ...nt Nirmal Singh – for a derivative undertaking of $50,000. Regarding plaintiffs' motion for clarification, this apparently stems from the following statement contained in this Court's 09/01/21 minute order: “the only way to streamline what remains of these complex disputes post‐arbitration is to bring all of the remaining matters under one metaphorical roof in the form of a master complaint by Doan et al under the lead case 684071, with aba...

Excerpt: ...pproval. 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.) The class is conditionally certified for purposes of settlement and this matter is therefore d...

Excerpt: ... Motion to Strike Portions of First Amended Complaint; e) DMC Defendants' Demurrer to First Amended Complaint; f) Hospitalists of Modesto Medical Group Inc., Arun Monoharan MD, and Li Huang, MD's Demurrer to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint – After thorough review of the operative pleading in this case, the Defendants' special motions to strike, the Plaintiff's oppositions thereto, as well as the relevant statute (CCP Section 425.16) and cas...

Excerpt: ...chael C. Kronlund is appointed as referee for all purposes related to discovery in this action. Mr. Kronlund's address and telephone number are as follows: Quinn | Kronlund, LLP, 3439 Brookside Road, Suite 207, Stockton, CA 95219; (877) 943‐3955. 2. The following exceptional circumstances require this appointment: The parties' continual pursuit of numerous, time‐consuming motions related to discovery issues throughout the pendency of the matt...

Excerpt: ...n this matter and does not file any opposition to the Plaintiff's application for writ of possession. Additionally, Plaintiff caused the clerk to enter Defendant DTL Logistics Inc.'s default on 4/21/22. Based on its review of the Plaintiff's application, the declaration filed in support of the application and the operative complaint in this matter, the Court finds Plaintiff has established the probable validity of its claim to possession of the p...

Excerpt: ...nes associated with new tax liens incurred from 2018 forward. Motion to augment the judgment is DENIED without prejudice. Although the Judgment entered on 01/25/12 indicates that it “may be amended nunc pro tunc to include any and all additional [fees/fines] for the 2010/2011 and subsequent tax years” (see Para 5, emphasis added), this was a default judgment and the operative pleading does not include any claim for debts that accrued from 201...

Excerpt: ... Court this day are two plaintiff motions for order compelling further responses to Special Interrogatory Nos 14, 25, 40‐ 45, 51‐63, 65, and further responses to Document Production Nos 1‐3, 9, 13‐16, 17, 31, 37‐78, 84‐87. The motions are GRANTED in part, and DENIED in part. Regarding the Special Interrogatories, while the defendant is correct that – to some extent – these motions (like many in the lemon law field) are an exaltati...

Excerpt: ... terms of that settlement, which this Court subsequently confirmed on 12/17/21. There is a genuine concern regarding this Court's continued jurisdiction to resolve this motion in light of plaintiff's dismissal with prejudice entered 11/12/21, Victoria's failure to personally request jurisdiction reserved, and the previously pending appeals. See Mesa RHF Partners, L.P. v. City of Los Angeles (2019) 33 Cal.App.5th 913, 916‐ 919; Cunningham v. Mag...

Excerpt: ...ion for final approval of the settlement. The gross settlement amount (“GSA”) is $225,000.00, which is intended to cover 149 class members. This represents an average payout of just under $800.00. This is a non‐reversionary settlement (meaning nothing goes back to the defendant). Based on the whole of the record, this Court concludes that the gross settlement amount is fair and reasonable in light of the pertinent factors to consider. See J...

Excerpt: ... WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Although the underlying motions to compel were served upon defendant personally, notice of this Court's 12/10/21 order was only served upon defense counsel (who had just emerged from suspension). The current motion for terminating sanctions was also served only on defense counsel, despite his 11/29/21 declaration indicating that he had COVID, his secretary died from COVID, and his office was – to put it politely – in shamb...

Excerpt: ...der barring defendants from selling the property before plaintiff's right to purchase can be fully vetted on the merits. Within 10 days after service of a written notice of entry of an order, an aggrieved party may make a motion to reconsider the order based upon new or different facts, circumstances, or law. CCP §1008(a). The moving party must demonstrate something new or different for the court to consider, and a satisfactory explanation for n...

Excerpt: ...rogatories, Set Two Propounded on Plaintiff Raven Sharp and Request for Monetary Sanctions – This is a business dispute between putative partners in a marijuana dispensary, with a sprinkling of alleged attorney self‐dealing. Before the Court this day are three defense motions seeking orders compelling further responses to special interrogatories and requests for production of documents (the motion set for 04/28/22 is included herewith). At is...

Excerpt: ... Before the Court this day is the hearing on plaintiff's application for final approval of the settlement. The gross settlement amount (“GSA”) is $925,000.00, which is intended to cover 2,469 class members. This is a non‐reversionary settlement (meaning nothing goes back to the defendant). Based on the whole of the record, this Court concludes that the gross settlement amount is fair and reasonable in light of the pertinent factors to consi...

Excerpt: ...sel, class representative, third‐party administrator), preliminary approval of settlement, and approval of a PAGA portion. Since the last hearing, plaintiff has addressed the concerns raised by this Court, including payment of the $75 filing fee per § 2699.3(a)(1)(B), submission of the actual proposed settlement to the LWDA per §2699(l)(3), and provision of a conformed copy of the complaint to the LWDA within 10 days of filing per §2699(l)(1...

Excerpt: ...ice staff in failing to provide a conformed copy of the complaint to the LWDA within 10 days of filing per §2699(l)(1). This Court will forgive the error since no prejudice is shown. Plaintiff has provided the requested information supporting the request for reimbursement of litigation costs, as well as a declaration from plaintiff supporting his request for an enhancement. Since plaintiff actually attended the mediation, his request for $7,500....

Excerpt: ...y “first look” at the records and authority to redact as warranted. The motion is in essence a CCP §1008 request for reconsideration of that 06/08/21 order, and shall be viewed as such. A motion for reconsideration is only timely if presented “within 10 days after service upon the party of written notice of entry of the order,” subject to challenge. CCP §1008(a). There is no notice of entry in this Court's registry, and no evidence of a...

Excerpt: ...pposed demurrer to plaintiff's complaint, which does not effectively state any cause of action. The demurrer is SUSTAINED with 20 days leave to amend. Injunctive relief is not itself a cause of action, but rather a remedy attendant a properly‐framed substantive claim. Department of Fair Employment and Housing v. Superior Court (2020) 54 Cal.App.5th 356, 384‐ 385. The pleading here might be one for declaratory relief pursuant to CCP §1060, or...

Excerpt: ...ed. While this was previously sufficient inandof itself to seek withdrawal, the current rule requires counsel to “given the client a reasonable warning after the breach that the lawyer will withdraw unless the client fulfills the agreement or performs the obligation.” Compare CRPC 3‐700(C)(1)(f) with CRPC Rule 1.16(b)(5). There is no statement regarding client consent or proposed order with the motion. See CRC 3.1362(c) and (e). Motion DENI...

Excerpt: ... Motion to Strike Portions of First Amended Complaint; e) DMC Defendants' Demurrer to First Amended Complaint; f) Hospitalists of Modesto Medical Group Inc., Arun Monoharan MD, and Li Huang, MD's Demurrer to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint – This is a business dispute between an oncologist and the hospital with which is works. The operative pleading is the First Amended Complaint filed 11/15/21, which includes eight (8) causes of action aga...

Excerpt: ...ng the principal record of transactions between a debtor and creditor arising out of a contractual relationship between the two. CCP §337a. Defendant filed an answer denying all allegations of wrongdoing, and asserting a number of defenses to the debt – including at its core that she did not request or “accept” the credit card. There is no opposition filed to the motion. The moving papers do appear to have been mail ‐served on defense co...

Excerpt: ...nopposed demurrer to plaintiff's pleading, which defendant describes as a disguised writ of mandate. The demurrer is SUSTAINED with 20 days leave to amend. Injunctive relief is not itself a cause of action, but rather a remedy attendant a properly‐framed substantive claim. Department of Fair Employment and Housing v. Superior Court (2020) 54 Cal.App.5th 356, 384‐385. The pleading here might be one for declaratory relief pursuant to CCP §1060...

Excerpt: ...y be set aside on grounds implicating the validity of the sister‐state judgment (CCP §1710.40), and CCP §473.5 is generally inapplicable to motions attacking domestication of a sister‐state judgment. See Conseco Marketing, LLC v. IFA & Insurance Services, Inc. (2013) 221 Cal.App.4th 831, 844; Airlines Reporting Corp. v. Renda (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 14, 21. However, before drilling down into the merits, this Court notes that there is no proo...

Excerpt: ...7 (hereinafter “Pena”). Pena is a class action lawsuit against the same defendant, based on the same wage/hour violations. A PAGA cause of action was added to that case on 01/07/22. The case at bar is not a class action, but instead a straight PAGA action. The case at bar was filed 12/07/21 – after Pena was commenced but before the PAGA cause of action was added. Courts wrestling with this issue have looked to pleas in abatement, the policy...

Excerpt: ... a traditional writ of mandate under CCP §1085. Traditional mandamus is used to review adjudicatory decisions made without conducting evidentiary hearings required by law. Scott B. v. Board of Trustees of Orange County High School of Arts (2013) 217 Cal.App.4 th 117, 122‐124. It is most commonly used to compel an agency to exercise either a ministerial, or a discretionary, duty. See Keyes v. Bowen (2010) 189 Cal.App.4 th 647, 657‐ 661. An ac...

Excerpt: ...successful Vietnamese farmers), Harpreet Dhaliwal (gas station operations), and Amanda Bui (attorney and investment advisor). The “defendant group” includes Nirmal Singh (successful businessman), his long‐standing attorneys, and various persons/entities associated with his business. Before the Court this day is the continued hearing on defendants' special motion to strike seven of the eight causes of action in the Master Complaint. As previ...

Excerpt: ...e accident. The motion to quash is DENIED, but a protective order is GRANTED limiting the reach of the subpoenas to just five years pre‐ accident. Plaintiff's request for sanctions is DENIED because the demand to limit the records to “parts of the body” impacted is not reasonable given the type of injuries claimed, and a good faith meet and confer (CCP §§ 1987.1, 1985.3, 2017.020, 2025.420(a)) should have led to some resolution without ju...

Excerpt: ...w regarding the sufficiency of the allegations set forth in the complaint. The challenge is limited to the “four corners” of the pleading (which includes exhibits attached and incorporated therein), or from matters outside the pleading which are judicially noticeable. The complaint is read as a whole. Material facts properly pleaded are assumed true, but contentions, deductions or conclusions of fact/law are not. In general, a pleading is ade...

Excerpt: ...�Doe” and seeking leave to amend the pleading with that party's true name. CCP §474. Ignorance relates to either the defendant's identity (his name) or the capacity/manner in which the defendant may be responsible for the wrongdoing described in the operative pleading. McOwen v. Grossman (2007) 153 Cal.App.4 th 937, 942‐943. Ignorance as to “who” or “in what capacity” must be real, not feigned. See A.N. v. County of Los Angeles (2009...

Excerpt: ...d as follows: Delores Gates (hereinafter “decedent”) was an 88 year‐old elderly woman afflicted with dementia, and residing full‐time at defendant's senior memory care facility in Modesto since the summer of 2019. On the evening of 05/06/20, staff members applied a prescription lice treatment to decedent's scalp in the hopes of eradicating an on‐going (at recurring) lice infestation. The topical treatment was to have been rinsed out tha...

Excerpt: ...each of a mandatory duty under Govt. Code §815.6. Public employee liability is limited by statute, and 815.6 specifies that liability only attaches to public entities. Individuals are not public entities. See Govt. Code §811.2. This is further evident from Govt. Code §820.4 [public employees not liable for failing to enforce laws], §821 [public employees not liable for failing to enforce enactments], and §822.2 [public employees not liable f...

Excerpt: ...bstantial injustice. Reales Investment, LLC v. Johnson (2020) 55 Cal.App.5 th 463, 468; Hamilton v. Orange County Sheriff's Dept. (2017) 8 Cal.App.5 th 759, 766. Thus, “an affirmative showing of good cause” is required for any such motion. See CRC 3.1332(c). Good cause generally exists where (1) parties, lawyers or essential witness are unavailable for trial “because of death, illness, or other excusable circumstances;” (2) new counsel mu...

Excerpt: ...esto. Plaintiff was a front‐seat passenger in a Chevy Silverado truck. Defendant James Adams was operating a cement mixer on behalf of do‐defendants Calaveras Materials and/or South Valley Materials, and collided into the rear of the truck plaintiff was in. This would be a garden‐variety auto accident case but for plaintiff's contention that the defendants are morally culpable beyond mere negligence because they had reason to know that Adam...

Excerpt: ...atories from Frank E. Montenegro and for Monetary Sanctions Against Frank E. Montenegro, R. Dewey Wheeler, Luanne Rutherford, and Mcnamara, Ney, Beatty, Slattery, Borges & Ambacher LLP, Pursuant to CCP, Section 2030.300; c) Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel Further Responses to First Set of Special Interrogatories from Celia M. Montenegro and for Monetary Sanctions Against Celia M. Montenegro, R. Dewey Wheeler, Luanne Rutherford, and Mcnamara, Ney, Be...

Excerpt: ...of good faith and fair dealing; Unruh; negligence; FEHA discrimination; defamation; and privacy violations. The pleading was filed ostensibly by Allan Ladd – the conservatee – and Pamela Ladd – the conservator. Before the Court this day is a defensive demurrer and motion to strike, directed at the entirety of the pleading. Although the demurrer and motion to strike were served on plaintiff(s), no proper opposition was filed. There was a “...

Excerpt: ...lish by a preponderance of the evidence that plaintiff actually signed any contract containing an arbitration agreement. See Civil Code §1633.9; Bannister v. Marinidence Opco, LLC (2021) 64 Cal.App.5th 541, 546; Fabian v. Renovate America, Inc. (2019) 42 Cal.App.5th 1062, 1065; Ruiz v. Moss Bros. Auto Group, Inc. (2014) 232 Cal.App.4th 836, 844. Defendant also waived the right to seek arbitration by waiting 245 days from appearing to bring the m...

Excerpt: ...ting separate lawsuits for trial, where they involve common questions of law or fact. The purpose is to enhance trial court efficiency and avoid the danger of inconsistent adjudications. As such, the power to consolidate cases pursuant to CCP §1048(a) only exists when the actions subject to consolidation are still pending. See Hamilton v. Asbestos Corp., Ltd. (2000) 22 Cal.4th 1127, 1147‐1148; Martin–Bragg v. Moore (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 367...

Excerpt: ...leave to file a cross‐complaint against co‐defendant Hisun Motors Corp. USA (hereinafter “Hisun”) for express contractual indemnity and declaratory relief. The motion is GRANTED. First, since L&K never filed an answer to Hisun's 06/05/20 cross‐complaint, Hisun never secured entry of default thereon, and Hisun did not dismiss its cross‐complaint until after the pending motion was filed, L&K was arguably entitled as a matter of right to...

Excerpt: ...voked to bypass state law statutory protections. Where a collective bargaining agreement contains an arbitration clause, both sides shall be imputed with an intention to arbitrate claims relating to rights provided by that agreement, but shall not be imputed with an intention to also arbitrate facially‐similar statutory claims unless the agreement includes a clear and unmistakable waiver thereof. This Court finds the decisions in Wilson‐Davis...

Excerpt: ...e at any time [between 01/21/17] and when notice to the class is sent.” Before the Court this day is the initial hearing on plaintiff's application for provisional certification of a class, preliminary approval of class settlement, and approval of a PAGA settlement. The gross settlement amount (“GSA”) is $600,000.00, which is intended to cover 1,260 employees suffering one of many wage/hour violations. The hearing is CONTINUED to address/re...

Excerpt: ...d a motion to strike directed at the prayer for punitive damages. The demurrer is SUSTAINED with 30 days leave to amend. The motion to strike is MOOT. The suggestion for a stay of the action pending the Supreme Court's review in Rattagan v. Uber Technologies, 19 F.4 th 1188 (9 th Cir. 2021) is premature. To begin, while the parties seem to agree that the principal issue to address on the demurrer is the economic loss rule, it is not quite so simp...

Excerpt: ...r, in pro per. On 03/12/21, plaintiff caused to be served upon defendant at his address of record Request for Admissions 1‐6. Pursuant to CCP §§ 1013 and 2033.250, defendant had 35 days from the mailing to provide a verified written response. Defendant did not timely (or ever) serve responses. See Russo Decl Para 6. Pursuant to CCP §2033.280(b), the party propounding RFAs may “move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the...

Excerpt: ...rejudice. Courts have a duty of inquiry regarding the grounds for the motion, and are not required to accept at face value vague, unsupported or uncertain representations as to reasons why an attorney wants out. Manfredi & Levine v. Superior Court (1998) 66 Cal.App.4th 1128, 1134‐1136. Counsel has a corresponding duty to respond and to describe the general nature of the issue, within the confines of any privilege. Aceves v. Superior Court (1996...

Excerpt: ...non‐exempt employees of [Mercer Foods LLC] within the State of California between 01/04/17 and the present.” Before the Court this day is the initial hearing on plaintiff's application for provisional certification of a class, approval of the management group (class counsel, class representative, third‐party administrator), preliminary approval of settlement, and approval of a PAGA portion. The application must be continued to 04/19/22 at 8...

Excerpt: ... Court this day is a defense demurrer directing at the elder abuse cause of action in the First Amended Complaint, and a motion to strike directed at the prayers for treble damages and attorney fees. Regarding the elder abuse cause of action, to state such a claim, plaintiffs must plead with particularity facts for each of the following essential elements: (1) decedent was a dependent adult; (2) decedent was abused or neglected; (3) defendant's e...

Excerpt: ...� 2699.3(a)(1)(B), (c)(1)(B). Counsel to advise. 1. A conformed copy of the complaint “shall” be provided to the LWDA “10 days following commencement” of the action. §2699(l)(1). Counsel to explain the delay. 2. The LWDA is supposed to receive a copy of the actual proposed settlement agreement, not just notice of a settlement. Compare Safaei Decl para 25 with §2699(l)(3). 3. Regarding litigation costs, there is no paid invoice provided ...

Excerpt: ... Defendant Ciminocare dba Orangeburg Manor; Request for Sanctions – This is a personal injury action. Before the Court this day are three motions, filed by the plaintiffs, seeking an order compelling the defendants to provide further supplemental responses to Form Interrogatories (12.1, 12.6), and Document Requests (4, 8, 9). The motions are GRANTED as set forth herein. A party responding to interrogatories has an obligation to provide response...

Excerpt: ...een the parties to arbitrate the claims at issue in the operative Complaint. Although the parties did agree to arbitrate “any dispute arising from enrollment (excluding non‐ payment of tuition or fees),” the term enrollment is ambiguous. Whether it is to be interpreted against the defendant (Civil Code §1654) or still in favor of arbitration (Western Bagel Co., Inc. v. Superior Court (2021) 66 Cal.App.5th 649, 663‐668), enrollment is gen...

Excerpt: ... to either motion, and indeed has not been heard from since he DocuSigned the substitution of attorneys on 08/30/21. The motion for terminating sanctions is DENIED without prejudice. The discovery statutes evince an incremental approach to discovery sanctions, starting with monetary sanctions and ending with the ultimate sanction of termination. Cedars–Sinai Medical Center v. Superior Court (1998) 18 Cal.4th 1, 12. Although this Court has broad...