Excerpt: ...ars to identify factual issues with regard to whether the defect at issue triggered the potential for liability under the notce provisions of Modesto Municipal Code S 7-1.304. (See, e.g. UMF 12, 13, 18, 23-25.) In addition, Defendants' evidence does not support the conclusion that the subject defect was trivial as a matter of law. (See, e.g. UMF 24.) Assuming arguendo that Defendants had met the initial burden of establishing prima facie entitlem...

Excerpt: ...nd Blanca Padilla's Motion to Deem Admitted the Truth of the Matters Asserted in Requests for Admissions; Request for Monetary Sanctions — GRANTED, and unopposed. (a) The Court finds that Plaintiff, Viorica Jerrick, entirely failed to respond to the subject discovery and all objections are waived. (Code Civ. Proc. S 2030.290(a).) Therefore, Defendants are entitled to an order compelling Plaintiff to provide verified responses, without objection...

Excerpt: ...l — and some fail for clear reasons. The Court is also required to limit sanctions, if any, to those that will deter the behavior. In this case, the request for attorney fees was by statute or case law, and by a reasonable extension of case law. Nonetheless, the Court does not view it as the sort of abusive conduct it finds sanctionable (and I have, indeed, found conduct sanctionable, and have issued sanctions designed to deter the adverse cond...

Excerpt: ...and the California Judicial Canons all require the Court to treat trial dates as firm. With regret, the Court believes it has an affrmative obligation to grant the motion under these circumstances. The Court is not at all persuaded by Plaintiff's claim that this amendment could not have been effectuated earlier. But Higgins v. Del Faro (1981) 123 Cal.App.3d 558, 565 instructs that trial courts should be very liberal indeed as to allow-ng amendmen...

Excerpt: ..., 1287.4.) In that event, judgment shall be entered in the amount of $4,925 plus interest at 10% per annum from 3-23-23 to the date of judgment. (b) Preliminarily, the Court notes that the “trial” referenced in the instant mo
Ÿon appears to reference the hearing on Pe
Ÿ
Ÿoner's request to conÞrm the contractual arbitra
Ÿon award issued on 2-23-23. In addi
Ÿon, the Court notes that the hearing on the subject pe
Ÿ
Ÿon was previously con...

Excerpt: ...the statutory limits placed on motions for summary adjudication in this instance. Additionally, Plaintiff's previous motion for summary adjudication was denied on the merits— thus she is not entitled to a second bite at the apple. In determining the previous motion, the Court properly applied the statutory limits set forth in Section 437c and found that the issue on which the Plaintiff was attempting to secure summary adjudication would not com...

Excerpt: ...ural unconscionability and some degree of substantive unconscionability. The Court finds that the agreement at issue is unenforceable due to unconscionability. The Court finds that procedural unconscionability is shown by the fact this is a contract of adhesion, there is no claim that the terms were negotiable, and under either party's factual assertions, there was some requirement to sign and return the documents to be hired. The offer also expi...

Excerpt: ...s wasn't accurate, and the Court ordered that the motion be immediately filed. Defense counsel indicated that the motion had already been prepared. The Court sanctioned counsel $750 to be paid to Plaintiff's counsel to pay for his time and efforts in appearing and going through two separate packets which did not contain points and authorities. The Court has discretion whether to accept the points and authorities, and uses that discretion to do so...

Excerpt: ...D, in part. a) The Court finds that Defendant failed to timely respond to Plaintiff's Requests for Production, Set One, propounded by Plaintiff on August 2, 2022, and further failed to comply with the Court's order of June 15, 2023, to produce all outstanding discovery. All objections to the requested discovery are hereby waived. Code of Civ. Proc. 52031.300(a)). Defendant is hereby ordered to produce all the requested documents within fifteen (1...

Excerpt: ...ight to li
Ÿgate this ma
©er to the extent of Defendant Gary Lee Cooksey dba Cooksey Construc
Ÿon's “available” insurance proceeds – the Court Þnds that the ques
Ÿon of “availability” is not fully and fairly resolved such that the Court can approve the se
©lement as it currently stands. Here, the non-se
©ling party is arguably en
Ÿtled to conduct discovery in order to fully answer the ques
Ÿon of what insurance proceeds are “...

Excerpt: ...appearing Councils. (Corporations Code S6020(a). This would include any debt or liability attributable to any of the constituent Councils to said merger. Furthermore, a plaintiff could sue a dissolved corporation for damage or injury caused by the corporation's predissoluton activities even though the plaintiff sustained or discovered the damage or injury after the corporation had dissolved. (Penasquitos, Inc. v. Superior Court, (1991) 53 Cal.3d ...

Excerpt: ...t was not a condition of Plaintiff's employment. The Court further finds, in combination with the voluntary nature of Plaintiff's signing of said arbitration agreement and the PAGA opt-out clause, that said arbitration agreement exhibits a low degree of procedural unconscionability. (Kinney v. United Healthcare Servs., Inc. (1999) 70 Cal. App. 4th 1322, 1329.) The Court also finds that any elements of substantive unconscionability that may exist ...

Excerpt: ...in Department 23; With regard to Special Interrogatories 1, 4, 14, and 16, the Court finds that Defendant has provided Code-compliant responses and no further responses are required. With regard to Special Interrogatories 18 and 19, however, the Court is inclined to find that Defendant is entitled to the requested discovery, provided that the responsive information can be limited to avoid the disclosure of personal identifying information of non-...

Excerpt: ...ood faith meet and confer herein. As set forth in Plaintiffs' counsel's reply in support of the motions, Defendant has served supplemental responses to the Plaintiffs' Requests for Production of Documents, Set One, and Plaintiffs anticipate "meeting and conferring on these issues." Counsel are encouraged to engage in substantive meet and confer efforts prior to the next hearing date and are reminded that civil discovery is intended to be self-exe...

Excerpt: ...-Acute Healthcare Center of Modesto and Plaintiff Marcus Nichols. (Souza v. Westlands Water Dist., (2005) 135 Cal. App. 4th 879) The Court further finds that although a party to a contract may rescind a contract if the consent of the party rescinding was given by fraud, when the rights of others have intervened and circumstances have so far changed that rescission may not be decreed without injury to those parties and their rights, rescission wil...

Excerpt: ... December 2019, been put on inquiry, if not actual notice, of defects with her vehicle for her cause of achon for fraudulent concealment to have accrued so as to begin the tolling of the three year statute of limitations on her claim for fraudulent concealment. (Cal. Civ. Proc. Code S 338). The Court therefore finds that Plaintiff's cause of action, which was first filed on January 23, 2023, is time barred. The Court also finds that Plaintiff's c...

Excerpt: ...ponses are confusing and fail to identify whether Plaintiff possesses any materials responsive to the subject requests. Moreover, with regard to the asserted objections, the responses fail to identify the materials subject to the same and fail to provide sufficient information (or a privilege log) for the defense's use in determining whether the claimed privileges apply. Lastly, the responses fall to prov-de adequate support for Plaintiff's claim...

Excerpt: ...art, unopposed; c) Plaintiff Douglass Montgomery's Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set One from Defendant Animal Health International, Inc., and Request for Monetary Sanctions — a) The Court finds that Defendant has failed entirely to timely respond to Plaintiff's Request for Form Interrogatories, Set One, propounded on 5/8/23. Therefore, all objections to same are accordingly waived. Plaintiff is therefore en...

Excerpt: ...a Diaz v. General Motors LLC: "This Court once again reminds the Erskine Law Group, Inc. not to cite to unpublished Superior Court cases. (T8G Ins. Service Corp. v. Superior Court (2CM) 96 Cal.App.4th 443, 447, fn2.) Further reminders will come with sanctions." This further reminder comes from an opposition filed three weeks later. The Court suggests that counsel take a stronger interest in the rules governing attorney conduct. The Erskine Law Gr...

Excerpt: ...ute a conflict. (End disclosure). Prior contnuance: The Court begins by noting that at the ex parte hearing on June 8, 2023, continuing the then-set trial date to October, Plaintiffs' counsel agreed with the assertion that liability was and remains a serious issue. Further, at that hearing, all parties represented that the primary delay issue was mediation and that the Court's delayed ruling on the Motion for Summary Judgment contributed to the d...

Excerpt: ...on of the LICL; a First Amended complaint adding a PAGA claim was filed shortly afterward. The subject settlement agreement and proposed notice are attached as exhibits to Attorney Bokhour's declaration in support of the motion herein. The motion is also supported by a declaration from Attorney Falakassa (primarily as to the experience of class counsel and reasonableness of the charged fees) and by a declaration from the representative plaintiff,...

Excerpt: ...e that a person was, at the time a harm was suffered by another, insured wholly or partially against loss arising from liability for that harm is inadmissible to prove negligence or other wrongdoing" l; Bell v. Bayerische Motoren Werke Aktiengesellschaft (2010) 181 Cal.App.4th 1108 [Evidence that a person was insured against liability for another person's injury is irrelevant to both the question of liability and the amount of damages for neglige...

Excerpt: ...itatons to Superior Court cases are not permitted. (TBG Ins. Service Corp. v. Superior Court (2002) 96 Cal.App.4th 443, 447, fn2.) There are good reasons for this rule; the Court does not have access to every trial court ruling, and cherry-picking is unhelpful. Further, I have an ethical obligation to be an independent jurist." Despite being aware of this rule, Plaintiff chose to file a brief that re-argued that this court should consider other t...

Excerpt: ...aintiff's argument that the communications regarding the multiple extensions of time afforded Defendant established Defendant's waiver of objections is not correct; none included an express waiver. (Code Civ. Proc., S 2031.270(c).) Plaintiff's further argument that the initial, objections-only response were tantamount to no response because these were unverified is also incorrect; objections only need be signed by counsel. (Code Civ. Proc., S 203...

Excerpt: ...anted. Responses shall be provided within fifteen (15) days. The request for monetary discovery sanctions is denied without prejudice. The Court finds that a good faith argument regarding the private and/or confidential nature of the discovery sought renders the imposition of discovery sanctions unjust. That said, this is the second motion to compel that Plaintiff's were required to bring and discovery is designed to be self-executing. Repeated d...