Excerpt: ...430.30(a); and Cryolife, Inc. v. Superior Court (2003) 110 Cal.App.4th 1145, 1152 (facts subject to judicial notice may disclose existence of defense). The Court hereby takes judicial notice of Plaintiff's initial Complaint and its order sustaining Defendant's Demurrer to the Second, Third and Fourth Causes of Action in the initial Complaint with leave to amend. See Evidence Code §§ 452 and 453. Plaintiff Monterrosa alleges that he is a Hispani...

Excerpt: ...ard alleges that she was seriously injured in an accident caused by Austin Harris. Plaintiff alleges that Kimberly Harris is liable to her under a negligent entrustment theory. Although not explicitly stated, the parties have clearly conveyed to the Court the view of Defendants that Plaintiff is exaggerating the extent of her injuries and the limitations on her ability to work and engage in other life activities. In response to Plaintiff's form i...

Excerpt: ...ighland Hospital to visit Naomi Schneider, the mother of Mira and Lia, on March 24, 2019. Plaintiffs do not allege that Germon was a patient or hospital employee. Instead, Plaintiffs simply allege on information and belief that Germon had been "in the hospital at some point prior to the attack." Plaintiffs claim that Defendant is liable for their injuries, including their severe emotional distress, because it did not take the measures necessary f...

Excerpt: ...mercial Code § 2725(2) is without basis. Judgment Debtor's argument is based on the answer given by the jury in response to question 6.g. of the Special Verdict. Judgment Debtor would have the Court draw an inference that the jury made a finding about when the claim for breach of express warranty arose based on its answer to question 6.g. There is no factual basis to draw this conclusion. The law states that the warranty claim accrued when it be...

Excerpt: ...his disability. Plaintiff apparently has suffered from epilepsy for many years. Defendant discovered Plaintiff's condition when he asked for time off from work to deal with his symptoms. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant initially reduced his weekly hours from 40 to 24, and then later terminated his employment. The Court continued the hearing on Defendant's motion from October 1, 2019 to December 3, 2019 because the parties presented directly conf...

Excerpt: ...ther the amount sought is reasonable. See Ketchum v. Moses (2001) 24 Cal.4th 1122, 1132-1133 (manner of calculating fees); and Robertson v. Fleetwood Travel Trailers of California, Inc. (2006) 144 Cal.App.4th 785, 817-818 (same). When the billing records were received in advance of the July 2019 hearing, the Court noted that Plaintiff made extensive redactions without seeking court approval under Rules of Court 2.550 and 2.551. Plaintiff now asks...

Excerpt: ...tion of Defendant's retained expert, Marco Schmidt, was scheduled to take place in Frankfurt, Germany, on November 22, 2019. Plaintiff's objection to the depositions of Kuhn and Eichhammer in Germany is sustained. Plaintiff argues that the notices are legally deficient because counsel for Defendant did not comply with the requirements for international discovery set forth in the Hague Convention or with German law. See CCP § 2027.010(c). The req...

Excerpt: ... merits of Moorpark's contentions. Also, the Court overrules Moorpark's procedural objections to Judgment Debtor Chunlei Leila Guo's opposition that he concedes he received eleven (11) court days before the hearing. See CCP § 1005(b) (opposition must be filed and served at least nine (9) court days before hearing). The Court has the discretion to consider late papers if the opposing party has not sustained undue prejudice. See Rule of Court 3.13...

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: ...nformally. Plaintiff has agreed to limit the scope of Request No. 7 to the period from 2013 to 2018. Defendant has agreed to produce those warranty manuals for the Chevy Cruze after Plaintiff agrees to the terms of a Protective Order. The Court refers to pages 8, 9 and 12 of the May 20, 2019 transcript. 2. The Motion to Compel Defendant to Serve a Further Response to Request No. 10 is GRANTED. Plaintiff has agreed to limit the scope of Request No...

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: ...s counsel should not have combined three separate sets of discovery requests in a single motion. This rule applies in particular to cases where the alleged transgression is the failure to provide an adequate response or a failure to comply with a discovery request as agreed. In addition, although the parties apparently believe that the Court should have a complete understanding of all of the discovery issues in the case, including prior violation...

Excerpt: ...assertion that they need not answer Form Interrogatory 216.1 for their denials of Plaintiff's material allegations because they filed a General Denial has merit. Defendants agreed to provide verified responses for their affirmative defenses. Defendants indicate that Plaintiff should have simply served specific contention interrogatories. The motion is granted because Defendants' legal position is without merit. Defendants stated in their Answer, ...

Excerpt: ...e First Amended Complaint. Defendant County answered the First Amended Complaint on September 2, 2015. On February 2, 2016, the Court granted the County's unopposed Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings without leave to amend. The County asserted that Plaintiff could not proceed because it had not complied with its obligation to present a government tort claim pursuant to Govt. Code § 911.2. The Court declined to consider Plaintiff's opposition f...

Excerpt: ...nal Infliction of Emotional Distress dated December 20, 2018. The original hearing dates was August 23, 2018. The hearing date was continued to October 30, 2018, after the Court granted Cross- Defendant's Ex Parte Application for Relief pursuant to CCP § 473(b). On October 30, 2018, the Court continued the hearing to December 13, 2018 due to the parties' failure to comply with their procedural obligations. The Court takes notice of its order of ...

Excerpt: ...019. The Motion to Compel is denied because Plaintiffs failed to file the motion within forty five (45) days of the response date. See CCP § 2030.300(c); and Vidal Sassoon, Inc. v. Superior Court (1983) 147 Cal.App.3d 681, 685. Plaintiffs' Motion to Compel was filed on May 21, 2019. Plaintiffs did not provide any evidence to show that Defendant granted counsel an extension of the 45-day deadline. Defendant's request that the Court order Plaintif...

Excerpt: ... his claims in the Third Amended Complaint. See CCP § 391.3(a); and Golin v. Allenby (2010) 190 Cal.App.4th 616, 640-641. The declarations of attorney C. Hay-Mie Cho and Defendant Smith, which contain numerous hearsay statements, are not sufficient to authenticate the many documents Defendants ask the Court to consider. The two-paragraph letter of Ann Stallcup, Parole Case Records Administrator, dated May 7, 2019, does not sufficiently buttress ...

Excerpt: ... capacity to sue for damages in California. See CCP § 430.10(b). The Demurrer is overruled because the Court is restricted to the facts set forth in the Complaint and facts that are the proper subject of judicial notice. See CCP § 430.30(a). The Court is required to accept Plaintiffs' well-pled factual allegations as true at the pleading stage, but not their contentions, deductions or conclusions of law or fact. See Aubry v. Tri-City Hosp. Dist...

Excerpt: ...t 3:00 p.m., in Department 517. On March 26, 2019, the Court continued the hearing on Plaintiff's Motion to Compel and ordered the parties to comply with their statutory obligation to make a reasonable and good faith attempt to resolve all of the disputed issues. See CCP §§ 2031.310(b)(2) and 2016.040 (facts disclosing that a reasonable and good faith attempt at an informal resolution was made must appear in the meet-and-confer declaration). Th...

Excerpt: ...eventh Cause of Action for Wrongful Termination in Violation of Public Policy and an Eighth Cause of Action for Unfair Business Practices. The EFI Dispute Resolution Process Agreement ("the Agreement") attached as Exhibit C to the Declaration of Beverly Rubin, EFI's Vice President of Human Resources, states clearly that neither side has the right to compel arbitration until they have attempted to resolve the dispute through mediation. The parties...

Excerpt: ...nt Merrill were guests at The Claremont at the time. Plaintiff's husband was allegedly in the couple's hotel room when the incident occurred. Plaintiff's Catalan Sheepdog suffered serious injuries. Plaintiff's own injuries were relatively minor. Plaintiff has estimated that she has incurred special damages in the sum of $7,462.65. On August 9, 2018, the Court denied Defendant's Motion for Good Faith Settlement without prejudice due to the lack of...

Excerpt: ...h in the text of Section 430.41(a)(1). Counsel does not comply simply by calling Plaintiffs and telling them that their First Amended Complaint fails to state any cause of action. The Court expects parties to comply strictly with the meet-and-confer obligation enacted by the Legislature. The Court is not surprised that Plaintiffs reflexively disagreed with counsel's evaluation of the First Amended Complaint. Defendants may file a second Demurrer ...

Excerpt: ...See CCP § 395(a). However, if there is more than one correct venue, Plaintiffs are entitled to select the one they prefer. Defendant's motion is denied because it did not rebut Plaintiffs' claim that it is a foreign corporation and that it has not designated a principal office in California in documents filed with the California Secretary of State. According to Easton v. Superior Court (1970) 12 Cal.App.3d 243, 246-247, cited by Plaintiffs, the ...

Excerpt: ...re had until August 30, 2018 to file and serve the First Amended Complaint. On November 13, 2018, Plaintiff filed an Application for an Extension of Time to File the First Amended Complaint. Plaintiff mentioned in the application that Defendant had previously granted him extensions on an informal basis. The Court denied the application on November 16, 2018. Plaintiff's late First Amended Complaint filed more than six months after the Court grante...

Excerpt: ...ber 19, 2016. Plaintiff Lai dismissed his claims without prejudice on August 11, 2017. In April 2017, Plaintiffs substituted Defendant Kam Hung Fong, Lisa Fong's former spouse, in the place of DOE 1. Plaintiffs then added Defendants Angela Fong and Bobby Fong in the place of DOE 2 and DOE 3, respectively, on December 26, 2017. Defendants have met their initial burden of making a prima facie showing that no triable issues of material fact exist an...