Excerpt: ...is repeated exposure to toxic chemicals in gasoline and diesel fuel, including Benzene. Defendants other than Chevron are foreign corporations that do not maintain their principal place of business in Alameda County. Defendant Chevron's principal place of business is in Contra Costa County. Plaintiff picked up fuel for delivery at locations in Contra Costa County and San Joaquin County. Plaintiff Donna Danley, the spouse of Plaintiff Bernon Danle...

Excerpt: ...ither his son, Sterling B. Smith II, nor Ms. Jones, are named as plaintiffs in this case. In view of this unambiguous concession, the Court declines to order Plaintiff to redact references to them. Defendant's motion to strike is granted as to Plaintiff's claim for an award of punitive damages. As Defendant is a healthcare provider as defined by MICRA, Plaintiff is required to file a motion for leave to include such a claim in this case. See CCP ...

Excerpt: ... or class claims against Aya Healthcare in this action. Defendant filed its Answer in January 2019. Defendant is a nationwide healthcare staffing company headquartered in San Diego, California. Defendant assigns its Registered Nurses, Licensed Vocational Nurses and Certified Nursing Assistants to facilities on temporary assignments throughout the United States. The case was reassigned to Department 517 on February 20, 2019, after Plaintiff's requ...

Excerpt: .... v. Affiliated Psychiatric Medical Clinic, Inc. (1989) 48 Cal.3d 583, 588 (claim is co-extensive with claim of simple negligence). The Court agrees with Defendant's contention that Plaintiff's Second Cause of Action, as currently pled, is duplicative of Plaintiff's First Cause of Action. See Rodrigues v. Campbell Industries (1978) 87 Cal.App.3d 494, 501 (court may strike duplicative causes of action that add nothing to what is already pled). Pla...

Excerpt: ...provision cited by Plaintiff's attorney prohibits landlords from reporting or threatening to report individuals to immigration authorities. The First Amended Complaint includes no allegations concerning the immigration status of anyone involved in the case. Plaintiff is hereby granted leave to allege a claim for retaliation under a different provision of section 1942.5. 2. Defendants' demurrer to Plaintiff's Tenth Cause of Action for Constructive...

Excerpt: ...eks an order that would result in the transfer of the Berko case to this Court for consolidation (trial only) or, in the alternative, an order requiring the parties in the Berko case move that Court to transfer this case to Contra Costa County for consolidation (trial only). The motion to transfer and consolidate is denied for procedural and substantive reasons. First, Plaintiff failed to file and serve the motion at least 16 court days prior to ...

Excerpt: ... or class claims against Aya Healthcare in this action. Defendant filed its Answer in January 2019. Defendant is a nationwide healthcare staffing company headquartered in San Diego, California. Defendant assigns its Registered Nurses, Licensed Vocational Nurses and Certified Nursing Assistants to facilities on temporary assignments throughout the United States. The case was reassigned to Department 517 on February 20, 2019, after Plaintiff's requ...

Excerpt: ...pointment at Victorian Edge Salon, located at 1814 Third Street. Plaintiff testified that she left the salon through the main entrance and exit on Third Street, and took a right turn on the sidewalk toward N Street and another right turn on Third Street. As the moving party, Defendant is required to present sufficient evidence to show that one or more elements of Plaintiff's Fifth Cause of Action cannot be established. See CCP § 437c(p)(2). Defe...

Excerpt: ...at Defendants Polaris Industries, Inc., Volvo Penta of the Americas, LLC and Larson Marine, Inc. are liable because the boat failed to conform to the conditions of the express and implied warranties for the performance of the vessel. Plaintiff alleges generally that the boat failed to perform in the manner that a reasonable consumer would expect it to perform. Plaintiff alleges that he took the boat to Larson Marine, Inc. and the authorized repai...

Excerpt: ...ded Complaint. The Court sustained both earlier filed demurrers with leave to amend. The Court agrees with Defendant's contention that Plaintiff still has not complied with his obligation to plead specific facts supporting each element of the Fourth and Fifth Causes of Action. See Lazar v. Superior Court (1996) 12 Cal.4th 631, 645; and Tarmann v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (1991) 2 Cal.App.4th 153, 157. The Court, however, does not believe th...

Excerpt: ...ublease Agreement, pursuant to CCP § 430.10(e), is OVERRULED. Although the Court generally considers only the facts alleged in the First Amended Complaint, it is permitted to review exhibits attached to the pleading. See Stella v. Asset Mgmt. Consultants, Inc. (2017) 8 Cal.App.5th 181, 193-194; and Moran v. Prime Healthcare Mgmt., Inc. (2016) 3 Cal.App.5th 1131, 1145-1146. The Court has reviewed section 15 of the Sublease Agreement (Exhibit A) a...

Excerpt: ...that Plaintiff's motion for attorney's fees was timely filed on April 2, 2021. See Rules of Court 3.1702(b)(1) and 8.104(a)(1)(C). In this case, the Alameda County Superior Court clerk did not serve Plaintiff's attorneys with notice that the Court entered the judgment on October 5, 2020. Attorney Tara Cooper does not appear on the clerk's mailing list. Attorney Eduardo Martorell does appear on the mailing list, but the address used by the clerk w...

Excerpt: ...fs also attached two-hundred-and-ninety-five (295) pages of exhibits, including the lease agreements, to the Complaint. On April 23, 2021, Defendants filed their Verified Answer to the Verified Complaint and the subject Cross- Complaint for Fraud and Breach of the Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing. The claims in the Cross-Complaint are based on the statements made by Cross-Defendants' representatives Rich Robbins and Chris Barlow du...

Excerpt: ...September 25, 2019. See Labor Code § 2699. Plaintiff alleges in the Complaint that Defendant engages in the following practices that violate the Labor Code: (1) Defendant fails to authorize and permit its non-exempt security officers to take meal and rest breaks; (2) Defendant fails to pay its non-exempt security officers at a premium rate for working through their meal and rest breaks; (3) Defendant fails to provide its non-exempt security offi...

Excerpt: ...September 25, 2019. See Labor Code § 2699. Plaintiff alleges in the Complaint that Defendant engages in the following practices that violate the Labor Code: (1) Defendant fails to authorize and permit its non-exempt security officers to take meal and rest breaks; (2) Defendant fails to pay its non-exempt security officers at a premium rate for working through their meal and rest breaks; (3) Defendant fails to provide its non-exempt security offi...

Excerpt: ...any time prior to trial. See Le Francois v. Goel (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1094, 1108. Cross-Defendant's motion is not an untimely and defective motion for reconsideration of the Court's ruling of May 27, 2020. The Court specifically granted Cross-Defendant leave to make the request when it denied its earlier motion. Based on its review of the parties' written submissions, the Court declines to grant Cross-Defendant leave to proceed with its second motio...

Excerpt: ...ll documents related to the company's preparation of its proposal to the City for the Residential Recycling ("RR") contract in 2015. The parties advise that the City began the process of soliciting proposals from companies interested in providing recycling and waste collection services in 2012. The objection of CWS that the request is overbroad and seeks information that is not relevant to the subject matter of this action is overruled. The infor...

Excerpt: ...aware that the parties are scheduled to participate in a mandatory settlement conference in Department 301 on July 2, 2021. Growers Properties No. 30 had until August 14, 2019 to file the Cross-Complaint as a matter of right. See CCP § 428.50(a) (cross-complaint due at the same time that a party answers the complaint or cross-complaint of a party). The reasons for counsel's decision not to file the Cross-Complaint at that time do not support a f...

Excerpt: ...f it is able to prove that a statute authorizes such an award and that the amount requested is reasonable. See Robertson v. Fleetwood Travel Trailers of California, Inc. (2006) 144 Cal.App.4th 785, 817-818. Moorpark has established its entitlement to make a request for reimbursement of its reasonably incurred attorney's and paralegal's fees and costs in this case. In the declarations of attorney LeRoy and paralegal Lichtenberger dated July 13, 20...

Excerpt: ...torney Yudien did not prepare and submit a declaration that complies with the requirements set forth in Rule of Court 3.1324(b). Mr. Yudien's submission of a redline version of the existing First Amended Complaint and the proposed Second Amended Complaint is not sufficient. Plaintiff's motion is substantively deficient because the proposed additional cause of action and allegations are not necessary. Plaintiff's attorney acknowledges that he does...

Excerpt: ...torney Yudien did not prepare and submit a declaration that complies with the requirements set forth in Rule of Court 3.1324(b). Mr. Yudien's submission of a redline version of the existing First Amended Complaint and the proposed Second Amended Complaint is not sufficient. Plaintiff's motion is substantively deficient because the proposed additional cause of action and allegations are not necessary. Plaintiff's attorney acknowledges that he does...

Excerpt: ...ailer worker employed by Defendant from 2016 until 2020. Plaintiff alleges in paragraph 1 of the Complaint that he is representing the State of California and "other current and former employees at a retail store location" who were employed from April 24, 2019 until the date when judgment is entered. Plaintiff initially requested that the case be deemed complex and assigned to Department 23. On October 6, 2020, Plaintiff's request that the Court ...

Excerpt: ...21, and by Defendant in support of its reply to Plaintiff's opposition on April 16, 2021. The Court may grant Defendant's motion to seal if it expressly finds that facts exist that establish: (1) There exists an overriding interest that overcomes the right of public access to the record; (2) The overriding interest supports sealing the record; (3) A substantial probability exists that the overriding interest will be prejudiced if the record is no...

Excerpt: ...at Homesite Services, Inc. owed Cross-Complainants a duty to defend and indemnify them in this personal injury action arising out of an accident occurring on a construction site. The Court ordered counsel for Cross-Complainant to submit a revised proposed order for its consideration. Cross-Complainant did submit a proposed order, but counsel apparently did not give opposing counsel an opportunity to approve it as to form as required by Rule of Co...

Excerpt: ...emurrer to the First Cause of Action for Promissory Fraud and Second Cause of Action for Cancellation of Written Instrument with leave to amend. The Court overruled Defendants' demurrer to the Third, Fourth and Fifth Causes of Action. Plaintiff did not file the First Amended Complaint until March 17, 2021. Plaintiff and Defendants submitted two stipulations seeking additional time for Plaintiff to comply with the Court's order of January 12, 2021...

Excerpt: ...ailer worker employed by Defendant from 2016 until 2020. Plaintiff alleges in paragraph 1 of the Complaint that he is representing the State of California and "other current and former employees at a retail store location" who were employed from April 24, 2019 until the date when judgment is entered. Plaintiff initially requested that the case be deemed complex and assigned to Department 23. On October 6, 2020, Plaintiff's request that the Court ...

Excerpt: ...ies. The lease agreement at issue was signed on September 21, 2015. Brookfield Properties Retail, Inc. acquired Rouse Properties in 2016. The Court's ruling on the demurrer of Brookfield Properties Retail, Inc. is not based on the argument that it is not the successor-in-interest of Rouse Properties. 2. Defendant's demurrer to Plaintiff's First Cause of Action for Anticipatory Breach of Contract, Second Cause of Action for Breach of the Implied C...

Excerpt: ...ED. According to the First Amended Complaint, Plaintiffs all reside or resided in the apartment building owned by Defendant Abdulrahim located at 1691 164th Avenue, in San Leandro, starting in or around 2010. Plaintiffs allege that Defendant Abdulrahim and his property manager, Kae Real Estate Services, have breached their common law and statutory obligations by allowing unsafe conditions to persist without taking corrective action. Plaintiffs' l...

Excerpt: ... allegedly sustained in the accident and the appropriateness of the treatment she received for that injury. The examination of Plaintiff by Dr. Prager, which will likely take two hours or less, is not duplicative of Plaintiff's earlier examination. Dr. Prager intends to examine Plaintiff to evaluate her claim that she continues to suffer from Complex Regional Pain Syndrome in the area of her left lower extremity years after the accident on August...

Excerpt: ... with Defendant's contention that form interrogatory no. 2.7 should not have been propounded in view of the nature of the case. 2. Plaintiffs' motion to compel Defendant to serve a further response to form interrogatory no. 3.7 is denied. The Court agrees with Defendant's contention that form interrogatory no. 3.7 should not have been propounded in view of the nature of the case. The Court is familiar with the facts and issues in this case. Plain...

Excerpt: ...only Defendant Anil Sikka in the original Complaint. On September 24, 2020, Plaintiffs filed the operative First Amended Complaint prior to Defendant filing his Answer. Plaintiffs added Defendant Prime Properties (USA), Inc. to the First Amended Complaint. Plaintiffs also asserted a separate breach of contract cause of action against Prime Properties (USA), Inc., as well as claims that Defendant Sikka is liable for the breach of Prime Properties ...

Excerpt: ...ourt is not inclined to review the 33-page single-spaced agreement to determine whether the Complaint is sufficient, particularly if the parties only refer to its contents generally. Defendants' assertion that Plaintiff was required to recite the terms of the agreement verbatim or attach a copy of the sublease agreement is rejected. Plaintiff is only required to allege facts describing the legal effect of the subject agreement. See Miles v. Deuts...

Excerpt: ...nce the May 10, 2017 accident. The scope of the examination was also based on Plaintiff's representation that she would not be making a claim for mental and emotional distress above and beyond that usually associated with her physical injuries. See CCP § 2032.320((c)(1). As indicated by Defendant in great detail, Plaintiff appeared to disclaim the representations made by counsel prior to Dr. Strassburg's examination after he completed the examin...

Excerpt: ...nce the May 10, 2017 accident. The scope of the examination was also based on Plaintiff's representation that she would not be making a claim for mental and emotional distress above and beyond that usually associated with her physical injuries. See CCP § 2032.320((c)(1). As indicated by Defendant in great detail, Plaintiff appeared to disclaim the representations made by counsel prior to Dr. Strassburg's examination after he completed the examin...

Excerpt: ...ity line of credit with a credit limit of $200,000 from National City Bank. Prior to the default of the Pentons, the right to make claims on the debt was sold to USMR Fund 10 LP. When the Pentons defaulted on their payments, they owed the sum of $182,561.62. The lender's lien interest in the Pentons' property on Machado Court, in Hayward, was extinguished when the senior lienholder caused the property to be sold at a trustee's sale. Plaintiff sub...

Excerpt: ...rrer to Plaintiff's fraud claims with leave to amend. The Court agrees with Defendant's contention that Plaintiff still has not complied with his obligation to plead specific facts supporting each element of the Fourth and Fifth Causes of Action. See Lazar v. Superior Court (1996) 12 Cal.4th 631, 645; and Tarmann v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. (1991) 2 Cal.App.4th 153, 157. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Crofton, the real estate agent for se...

Excerpt: ...ntation that her neurological deficit had resolved since the May 10, 2017 accident. The scope of the examination was also based on Plaintiff's representation that she would not be making a claim for mental and emotional distress above and beyond that usually associated with her physical injuries. See CCP § 2032.320((c)(1). As indicated by Defendant in great detail, Plaintiff appeared to disclaim the representations made by counsel prior to Dr. S...

Excerpt: ...ing causes of action: (1) Negligence; (2) Elder Abuse/Neglect; and (3) Violation of Nursing Home Resident's Rights. Albertina's daughter Sylvia has asserted a claim for Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress. Sylvia claims she suffered emotional distress when she saw her mother's injuries. Although the parties dispute whether Plaintiff Albertina Morelos is in fact 94 years old, the Court has no difficulty setting this issue to the side. Plain...

Excerpt: ...evelopers. Defendant Bhandari was also made a manager of SPSD Developers by a vote of the members in accordance with the terms of the operating agreement. Defendant Bhandari's company, Sumitra Properties, LLC, entered into an agreement on June 28, 2017 to sell property located at 3411 Capitol Avenue, in Fremont, to SPSD Developers, LLC. The contracting parties contemplated the commercial development of the property. The sale of the property, howe...

Excerpt: ...ts and for Unfair Competition on March 4, 2021. On March 18, 2021, the Court granted Plaintiff's unopposed ex parte application for a temporary restraining order and issued an order to show cause re: preliminary injunction. The Court ordered the parties to submit their written briefs and supporting declarations in advance of the hearing on April 13, 2021. The Court has reviewed the parties' written submissions. Plaintiff's request for a prelimina...

Excerpt: ...cember 31, 2020. Simply Re-Creating Enterprises, Inc. was required to submit an affidavit of the custodian of records that complies with the requirements set forth in Evidence Code § 1561. See CCP § 2020.430(a)(2). Although the company apparently provided the code-compliant affidavit on March 11, 2021, more than two weeks after being served with the motion to compel, the Court nevertheless has the authority to grant the motion to compel and awa...

Excerpt: ...d because Plaintiff did not attach a meet-and-confer declaration that complies with the requirements set forth in the Civil Discovery Act. See CCP § 2016.040(a). The declaration must set forth facts that indicate that the parties made a reasonable and good faith attempt to resolve all of the disputed issues. In this case, the Court takes notice of Plaintiff Robertson's request that attorney Shirdel participate in a meet-and-confer discussion. At...

Excerpt: ...lack v. FCI Lender Services, Inc., et al. (Case No. RG18913562). The Flacks allege that their property was sold at a trustee's sale after the Court in that case denied their motion for preliminary injunction. Lapham alleges that the property was lost because the Flacks ignored his advice. Cross-Defendants' demurrer is sustained because they have adequately shown that the litigation privilege bars Cross-Complainant's Second Cause of Action for Abu...

Excerpt: ...rte application for leave to file a late opposition to Defendants' motion for sanctions. The Court has reviewed and considered Plaintiff's opposition. See Rule of Court 3.1300(d). Although Plaintiff has not complied with the Court's orders requiring that she serve supplemental responses to Defendants' form interrogatories and requests for production of documents by the November 3, 2020 deadline or at any time thereafter, the Court concludes that ...

Excerpt: ... at 6044 Stevenson Blvd., in Fremont. The Wayland, LLC purchased the property in 2016. In 2017, the Art Center fell behind in its monthly rent payments. Qiang Wu, the principal of the Art Center and former husband of Jing Zhao, discussed with Guy Fong, the principal of The Wayland, LLC, a proposal wherein Wu would deliver a valuable item of Chinese art to Fong as security for the Art Center's obligation to pay rent through January 2018. The parti...

Excerpt: ... support their contention that the Complaint was not timely filed. See CCP §§ 340.5 and 364(d). The Court, however, gave Defendants an opportunity to correct the errors and submit a second motion for summary judgment. The Court then granted Defendants' second motion on October 29, 2020. Plaintiffs should not have to reimburse Defendants' original $500 filing fee under the circumstances. Plaintiffs' objection to the $828.34 claimed by Defendants...

Excerpt: ..., filed on September 17, 2020, she alleges that Living Spaces Furniture, LLC is vicariously liable to her for the actions of Vargas because it was his employer. Counsel for Plaintiff subsequently learned that Vargas did not work for Living Spaces Furniture, and that Of Service Transportation was his employer. On November 24, 2020, Plaintiff amended the Complaint to join Of Service Transportation in the place of "DOE 1" and Alpha Road Carriers, In...

Excerpt: ...cation requesting that the Court continue the hearing at least two months due to the fact that he did not receive the moving papers until January 4, 2021. Counsel for Defendant did not sign the application or his supporting declaration. The Court denied the application on January 19, 2021. When the Court reviewed the motion to compel in advance of the hearing, it determined that it was facially deficient because Plaintiff did not attach a meet-an...

Excerpt: ...sed the property in November 2019, she approached Cross-Defendant and advised her that she would have to vacate the unit because the City determined that it was an unauthorized unit. After some negotiations, Cross-Complainant and Cross-Defendant executed a Mutual Termination of Tenancy and Move Out Agreement ("the Agreement") in December 2019. In exchange for the payment of appropriate compensation, Cross-Defendant agreed to vacate the unit volun...

Excerpt: ... of contract on August 17, 2018. On April 30, 2019, the Court set the case for a jury trial on March 23, 2020. Fact discovery therefore closed thirty days before March 23, 2020. See CCP § 2024.020(a). Defendants thereafter completed its discovery and filed a Motion for Summary Judgment with a hearing date of February 20, 2020. The hearing on the Motion for Summary Judgment was continued, however, because Defendants requested the Court to analyze...