Excerpt: ...t his address of record, and Plaintiff has not submitted any opposition. Further, the demurrer sufficiently demonstrates that Plaintiff's complaint, filed on April 19, 2019, does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action on any of the three theories asserted in the complaint for all the reasons discussed in the demurrer and supporting memorandum, which cites legal authority supporting Defendants' arguments. Without limitation of ...

Excerpt: ...x Property Trust, Inc., et al. (Case No. RG13689355). The Court is familiar with the procedural history and the facts in the prior lawsuit. The Court granted Defendants' unopposed Motion for Summary Judgment on September 13, 2018. On February 26, 2016, the Court denied Plaintiff's Motion to Set Aside the Summary Judgment Order. Plaintiff's claims against Defendants fail to state a cause of action because Defendants did not owe Plaintiff a duty of...

Excerpt: ...fs state that they recently discharged their attorney, Frank E. Mayo. Plaintiffs contend that they are completely unprepared for trial. Plaintiffs imply that they have not done any discovery due to Mr. Mayo's misconduct. Plaintiffs did not provide the Court with any competent evidence to support the serious claim of client abandonment by Mr. Mayo. The Court also reminds Plaintiffs that they were represented by Albert Boasberg for the first 15 mon...

Excerpt: ...onclusion based solely on the facts alleged in the Complaint and facts of which the Court is required to take judicial notice. Res judicata applies where the claim in the present action is identical to the claim litigated in the prior proceeding; there was a final judgment on the merits in the prior proceeding, and the party against whom the doctrine is being asserted is a party to the prior proceeding. (See, e.g., Consumer Advocacy Group Inc. v....

Excerpt: ...oticed motion and for good cause shown, may order that specified discovery be conducted notwithstanding this subdivision." The "good cause" required by the statute generally requires the plaintiff to show "that a defendant or witness possesses evidence needed by plaintiff to establish a prima facie case." (Lafayette Morehouse, Inc. v. Chronicle Publishing Co. (1995) 37 Cal.App.4th 855, 868.) "The showing should include some explanation of 'what a...

Excerpt: ...ion to Continue Trial in August 2019. Defendant has no right to file a Motion for Summary Judgment if its attorneys have not been diligent. The Court notes that Defendant was represented by Gordon & Rees at the outset of the case. Defendant made its initial appearance two years ago, in June 2017. The Erskine Law Group substituted into the case on November 14, 2017. The retention of new counsel does not entitle Defendant to any additional consider...

Excerpt: ..., 2019, the other three defendants/cross-defendants addressed in this motion (James L. Krasne, as Trustee of the Guilford Glazer Trust of 1984; Diane Pregerson Glazer, as Trustee of the Diane Pregerson Glazer Survivor's Trust; and Jeremy Blanchard), hereafter "Managers," served verified amended responses. (See Reply, p. 2; see also Decl. of Nicole L. Jones, Exhs. A and B; Decl. of Gregory Prongos, ¶ 8 and Exh. 4.) While Carson and Managers conte...

Excerpt: ...y in favor of his employer's workers' compensation insurance can be finalized. Defendants URS Midwest, Inc., United Road Services, Inc., Lisa D. Romero (both individually and doing business as "LDK Trucking"), and Jonathan Michael Murray oppose. For the reasons discussed below, the motion is DENIED. PROCEDURAL MATTERS Motion papers must be served and filed at least sixteen court days before the hearing. (Code of Civil Procedure ["CCP"] § 1005(b)...

Excerpt: ...rs Alliance (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th 449, 458-459. In the Second Cause of Action, Plaintiff Noginov alleges that Defendant Schlachter wrote letters to the Zoning Adjustment Board of the City of Berkeley accusing him of violating Penal Code § 631. Plaintiff also alleges that the members of the board read the letters, and that he has sustained damage to his reputation and also severe emotional distress as a result. Defendant Schlachter describes a d...

Excerpt: ...t file their Answer until April 30, 2019. The deadlines for responding to a validation or reverse validation action as provided in Code of Civil Procedure sections 861.1, 862 and 869 function as a statute of limitations, and if an interested party does not appear during the prescribed time, he or she loses the opportunity to challenge or support the government's action. (See City of San Diego v. San Diegans for Open Government (2016) 3 Cal.app.5t...

Excerpt: ...gues that no defendant is domiciled in Alameda County and that Whitlach's claims arose in Stanislaus County because he was employed there. Defendant Century 21 seeks to join Premier Valley's motion. The Complaint originally purported to seek damages and restitution on behalf of a plaintiff class, but the Court adopted a stipulated order on June 5 dismissing all claims except those seeking civil penalties under the Labor Code Private Attorneys Gen...

Excerpt: ...old showing that the challenged cause of action is one arising from a protected activity, i.e., an act in furtherance of a person's right of free speech in connection with a public issue. (See Code of Civil Procedure § 425.16(b)(1).) Second, if such a showing is made, the Court determines whether the plaintiff or cross-complainant has demonstrated a probability of prevailing on the claim. The plaintiff or cross- complainant demonstrates this by ...

Excerpt: ...the County of San Joaquin ("SJHA"). Plaintiff also seeks a protective order, and for expenses and sanctions in the sum of $4,110. STANDARD OF LAW "[T]he court, upon motion reasonably made by [a party] . . . may make an order quashing the subpoena entirely, modifying it, or directing compliance with it upon those terms or conditions as the court shall declare, including protective orders." (CCP § 1987.1(a).) "In addition, the court may make any o...

Excerpt: ...el for the parties. The Trial Setting Order states specifically that requests to continue the trial are disfavored and that the Court grants such requests only when exceptional circumstances exist. Defendants have not established the existence of any exceptional circumstances in this case. Defendants' request is based on Plaintiff's failure to provide verified responses to their initial discovery requests served on October 23, 2018. Plaintiffs we...

Excerpt: ... defendants as to whom the litigation was finally determined or (ii) the cause of action, claim, controversy, or any of the issues of fact or law, determined or concluded by the final determination against the same defendant or defendants as to whom the litigation was finally determined." C.C.P. § 391(b)(3) also defines a vexatious litigant as a person who in "propria persona, repeatedly files unmeritorious motions, pleadings, or other papers, c...

Excerpt: ...§ 664.6.) The parties in this case reached a settlement on February 19, 2018, which required that Defendants pay Plaintiff $30,000.00, consisting of an initial installments to Plaintiff and Plaintiff's counsel, Parviz Darabi, totaling $7,500 on or before May 5, 2018, and then $2,500 total installments a month for the following nine (9) months beginning June 5, 2018. Untimely payments incurred a $150 late fee. If Defendants failed to make any of ...

Excerpt: ...t. Plaintiff prevailed by obtaining a default judgment together with an award of attorney's fees. Plaintiff's further request for fees were incurred in protecting and enforcing the judgment. (See Code Civ. Proc. § 685.040; see also Jaffe v. Pacelli (2008) 165 Cal.App.4th 927, 938.) The Court will, however, reduce the fee award. First, the 28 hours of claimed time is unreasonably high in light of the actual complexity of the issues that were tend...

Excerpt: ...as the burden to demonstrate that the challenged claims against defendant arise "from any act of that person in furtherance of the person's right of petition or free speech ... in connection with a public issue." (C.C.P. § 425.16(b)(1).) Such protected acts are further defined in section 425.16(e). "If the defendant makes the required showing, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to demonstrate the merit of the claim by establishing a probability ...

Excerpt: ... amount of $1,000 for rental assistance for Plaintiff. (Declaration of Gia Austin-Carroll ("Austin Dec."), Ex. 1 at p. 6.) Plaintiff asserts that it is undisputed that the $1,000 was paid by the American Red Cross, and that Ms. Smith acknowledged receipt of the $1,000, and she later confirmed that the full $1,500 security deposit was paid. Plaintiff asserts that her tenancy terminated in October 4, 2016. Defendant Dellesia Onifade's ("Defendant")...

Excerpt: ...tcome in Ellison. ELLISON V. AUTOZONE, INC. Defendant has not established that the rule of comity should be applied to stay this action pending the outcome of Ellison. The rule of comity "is merely discretionary when applied to a potential conflict between state and federal courts." (Sumitomo Bank v. Davis (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th 1306, 1312.) Federal courts "do not apply their comity rule of priority to proceedings in personam." (Gregg v. Superior C...

Excerpt: ...36(a), the court "may" - but is not required to - strike allegations that are irrelevant, false or improper as reflected on the face of the challenged pleading or matters of which judicial notice is taken. Thus, "when a substantive defect is clear from the face of a complaint, such as a violation of the applicable statute of limitations or a purported claim of right which is legally invalid, a defendant may attack that portion of the cause of act...

Excerpt: ...36(a), the court "may" - but is not required to - strike allegations that are irrelevant, false or improper as reflected on the face of the challenged pleading or matters of which judicial notice is taken. Thus, "when a substantive defect is clear from the face of a complaint, such as a violation of the applicable statute of limitations or a purported claim of right which is legally invalid, a defendant may attack that portion of the cause of act...

Excerpt: ... Section 1290.6 states in relevant part that a "response shall be served and filed within 10 days after service of the petition" except where service is outside the state pursuant to C.C.P. § 1290.4(b)(2), which was not the case here. Section 1290 provides that the allegations of a petition are "admitted by a respondent duly served ... unless a response is duly served and filed." (C.C.P. § 1290.) As a response was not "duly served and filed" wi...

Excerpt: ... April 8, 2019 in accordance with C.C.P. §§ 1285.4 and 1290.4. The instant petition was filed and served 46 days after filing and service of the petition to confirm the award, which is well beyond the 10-day period (plus 5 for service by mail) required by C.C.P. § 1290.6 for a "response" to a petition to confirm an award. Section 1290 provides that the allegations of a petition are "admitted by a respondent duly served ... unless a response is...

Excerpt: ...n 21 Owners Association v. John Morrison, Inc., et al., Alameda County Superior Court, Case No. RG17879877. "When actions involving a common question of law or fact are pending before the court, it may order a joint hearing or trial of any or all the matters in issue in the actions; it may order all the actions consolidated and it may make such orders concerning proceedings therein as may tend to avoid unnecessary costs or delay." (CCP § 1048(a)...