Excerpt: ...t the parties based on the Court's review of the papers prior to the hearing date and should not be construed as a tentative ruling: The Court intends to SUSTAIN the unopposed demurrer without leave to amend. Plaintiff has failed to plead facts demonstrating or excusing compliance with the claimpresentation requirements of the Government Claims Act and thus has failed to state a cause of action. (State of California v. Superior Court (2004) 32 Ca...

Excerpt: ...ED as to the second and third grounds. (The Court notes that Defendants withdrew the first ground for the motion regarding the lack of verification, as the amended responses served on July 29, 2019, were verified.) As to the second ground, the Court finds that all objections were waived based on (1) Plaintiff's failure to serve timely responses (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (a)) and (2) evidence that Defendants, in allowing Plaintiff addit...

Excerpt: ...bruary 4, 2019 Tentative rulings: The motion to compel regarding form interrogatories is GRANTED. Sanctions in the amount of $945 are awarded as requested. The motion to compel regarding special interrogatories is GRANTED. Sanctions are awarded in the amount of $1,200. The motion to compel regarding production of documents is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, as set forth below. Analysis On March 19, 2019, the Court granted WinnCompanies relief...

Excerpt: ...iled to comply with California Rules of Court, rule 3.1110, subdivision (f)(3), governing the format of exhibits. Its counsel—Mark D. Lonergan, Mary Kate Sullivan, and Laszlo Ladi of Severson & Werson— have been warned twice previously about the Court's expectation of compliance with this rule. (See the tentative rulings for the May 4, 2018, hearing regarding Wells Fargo's demurrer to the first amended complaint and the January 4, 2019, heari...

Excerpt: ...ive ruling: The Court intends to DENY the motion for summary judgment for two reasons. First, Defendants failed to file evidence supporting their argument and separate statement of undisputed material facts that Plaintiff did not file his complaint within the applicable limitations period; the version of exhibit 4 to the Lewis declaration that was filed on January 25, 2019, stops at page 003. Second, Defendants presented no argument regarding Pla...

Excerpt: ...tive rulings: The demurrers are SUSTAINED in part and OVERRULED in part, as set forth below. To the extent they are sustained, Plaintiff is granted 20 days' leave to amend. The motion to strike is DENIED as moot given the ruling on the demurrers. Analysis Defendants demur to all twenty‐ two causes of action in Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint (hereafter SAC), which was filed on September 4, 2018. The first cause of action alleges breach of ...

Excerpt: ...e collection matter. Plaintiff's case was essentially uncontested. The Court finds that the amount of time spent on the motion for summary judgment was not justified and the hourly rate of $425 exceeds the hourly rate customarily charged in this county. In addition, the fees requested are not in line with the fee schedule in local rule 3.09.1 that the Court is to consider in exercising its discretion in determining the reasonableness of the fees ...

Excerpt: ...vision (a). Accordingly, the hearing on the demurrer will be CONTINUED to the next available civil law and motion date of March 8, 2019, at 8:30 a.m. in order to allow additional time for the parties to meet and confer as required by statute. If resolution of the issues raised in the demurrer is achieved Tentative Rulings: Department 4 Friday, March 8, 2019 Civil Law and Motion Calendar 8:30 a.m. If you wish to appear for oral argument, you must ...

Excerpt: ...tion without prejudice due to failure to comply with local rule 2.04.1 requiring a request for an informal discovery conference prior to filing the instant motion. The parties are not expected to notify the Court or each other of an intention to appear on March 1, 2019. The Court acknowledges Plaintiff's notice of its intention to submit the matter without appearance pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1304, subdivision (c). ...

Excerpt: ... established that a valid arbitration agreement is in place between the parties to this litigation and that the claims in this lawsuit fall within the scope of the agreement. The agreement is neither procedurally nor substantively unconscionable. Tentative Rulings: Department 4 Friday, March 1, 2019 Civil Law and Motion Calendar 8:30 a.m. If you wish to appear for oral argument, you must so notify the Court and all other parties by 4:00 p.m. one ...

Excerpt: ...t that the requests for monetary sanctions against Plaintiffs included in the motions are DENIED. The sanctions requests are denied because there is insufficient evidence that Plaintiffs themselves—as opposed to their counsel, Mark T. Gallagher—are responsible for the failures to respond to the discovery requests. As Defendant acknowledges, Mr. Gallagher was ordered inactive by the State Bar of California effective January 18, 2019. (See, e.g...

Excerpt: ...n (a). Specifically, the statute requires the meet‐and‐confer process to occur in person or by telephone at least five days before the date the responsive pleading is due. Counsel's declaration describes only a voice message left for Petitioner's counsel and a letter sent to Petitioner's counsel, both on December 21, 2018, the same date the instant demurrer was filed. The hearing on the demurrer will be CONTINUED to the next available date of...

Excerpt: ...mpliance with the meet‐ andconfer requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 439, subdivision (a). The hearing on the motion will be CONTINUED to the next available civil law and motion date of March 29, 2019, at 8:30 a.m. in order to allow additional time for the parties to meet and confer as required by statute. If resolution of the issues raised in the motion is achieved through the meet‐and‐confer process, Plaintiff's counsel shall...

Excerpt: ...ises from Plaintiff's allegations that he was terminated from his employment with Defendant due to his age and that Defendant intentionally interfered with his ability to obtain other employment by providing a negative review of his work when he had had outstanding performance reviews during his more than nine years working for Defendant. Plaintiff alleges that his purported termination for a rude e‐mail exchange with one of Defendant's clients...

Excerpt: ...entative rulings: The hearing on the “Demurrers” will be CONTINUED to March 15, 2019, at 8:30 a.m., as set forth below. The motion to strike is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Analysis The operative complaint is the second amended complaint (hereafter SAC), which alleges 22 causes of action. The SAC was filed on September 4, 2018, pursuant to a stipulation and order filed on August 28, 2018. The August 28, 2018, stipulation and order also provided ...

Excerpt: ...o notify the Court and all other parties by 4:00 p.m. one court day before the hearing, pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1308. The phone number for Department 4 is (209) 533‐6524. The tentative ruling will become the ruling of the Court if the Court has not directed oral argument by its tentative ruling and notice of intent to appear has not been given. Page 5 of 6 on the Court's review of the papers prior to the hearing date and s...

Excerpt: ...ts complaint, alleging a single cause of action for common counts. On May 11, 2018, Defendant filed a document titled “Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plainitiff's [sic] Complaint and/or in the Alternative, Counterclaim for Damages” (hereafter Answer). The Answer is 31 pages long. It includes, among other things, a general denial of the allegations in the complaint, more than three pages of affirmative defenses, legal argument about the re...

Excerpt: ...ct, and Defendant was deemed to be the prevailing party, entitled to costs in an amount to be determined. Notice of entry of judgment was filed on March 20, 2018; the attached proof of service reflects that notice was mailed to Plaintiff's counsel by first‐class U.S. mail on March 19, 2018. On April 4, 2018, Plaintiff filed a notice of intention to move for a new trial. Plaintiff was required to have filed his notice of intention to move for a ...

Excerpt: ...cribes damages at item 11g of the form complaint but does not allege how, when, where, or by whom the damages were caused other than that they were “due to blow and being knocked down.” Moreover, although Plaintiff has sued a public entity, he has not alleged compliance with or excuse from compliance with the applicable governmentclaim statutes at item 9 of the form complaint. Comment Defendant failed to comply with California Rules of Court,...

Excerpt: ...el notified Plaintiffs of the continuance of the hearing from July 6, 2018. Finally, the proposed order lodged in the court file does not specify the date of the next case management conference. (Id., rule 3.1362, subd. (e).) ...

Excerpt: ...ition filed: October 6, 2017 Pleading: Demurrer to Plaintiff's first amended complaint Demurring parties: Defendants 80 Oak Hills Apartments, L.P.; 80 Columbia Village Townhomes, L.P.; 60 Forest View Senior Housing, L.P.; and Highridge Costa Investors, L.L.C. Demurrer filed: October 27, 2017 Motion: Strike Plaintiff's first amended complaint in its entirety and/or portions thereof Moving parties: Defendants 80 Oak Hills Apartments, L.P.; 80 Colum...

Excerpt: ...cealment 3. Third cause of action: Negligent misrepresentation 4. Fifth cause of action: Civil conspiracy 5. Seventh cause of action: Declaratory relief The demurrer is overruled as to the fourth cause of action for negligence. Analysis The first amended complaint (FAC) fails to allege facts to support any contractual relationship between Omega Sonora, LLC, and B&B. In addition the FAC does not attach a copy of the contract or set forth the terms...

Excerpt: ... 2018, at 8:30 a.m. in order to allow additional time for the parties to meet and confer as required by statute. If resolution of the issues raised in the demurrer is achieved through the meet‐and‐confer process, Cross‐ Defendant's counsel shall promptly inform the Court and request that the demurrer be dropped from calendar. (See local rule 3.02.1.) If resolution is not so achieved, Cross‐Defendant's counsel shall, no later than August 3...

Excerpt: ..., subdivision (a). The declaration reflects that Cross‐Defendant's counsel left a voice mail message and sent an e‐mail message on the afternoon of Friday, June 22, 2018, seeking to meet and confer and then, not having heard back, filed the demurrer on Monday, June 25, 2018. (6/25/18 Levy decl. ¶¶ 9‐11.) A declaration filed in support of the opposition to the demurrer confirms this timeline and adds that Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC's coun...

Excerpt: ...In opposing the motion, Defendants argue that deposing Mr. Neuman was “reasonably necessary” in their trial preparation and that their payment of his fee was required by Government Code section 68092.5, subdivision (a). Defendants cite two cases as purported authority for the Court's exercise of its discretion to allow this cost. The cited passage of Stiles v. Estate of Ryan (1985) 173 Cal.App.3d 1057 is not on point, as the Stiles court was ...