Excerpt: ... Robertson v. Fleetwood Travel Trailers of California, Inc. (2006) 144 Cal.App.4th 785, 817-818. It is well established that the trial judge is called upon first to evaluate the hourly billing rates of all attorneys and support personnel who worked on the matter. See Ketchum, supra, 24 Cal.4th at 1128 (after evidentiary hearing the Marin judge called upon his experience both in practice and on the bench to determine the reasonable rate for the Sa...

Excerpt: ...ward of punitive damages are set forth in the Exemplary Damages Attachment. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant's employees and management level executives engaged in malicious, fraudulent and oppressive conduct when they refused to allow him and his aunt Barbara to enter his late mother's apartment to collect her personal property. Plaintiff's mother Doris Bridgewater passed away in October 2015. The conduct alleged in the Second Amended Complaint ...

Excerpt: ...ncy Ambulance Service, Inc. (2008) 160 Cal.App.4th 388, 403 ("health care provider" includes licensed paramedics). Plaintiff alleges in the Complaint that his injury occurred on February 15, 2018. In his opposition, Plaintiff states that Defendant may not rely upon the statute of limitations under the doctrine of equitable estoppel. Plaintiff's argument is based on extrinsic facts set forth in counsel's declaration and exhibits attached to the de...

Excerpt: ...reason for the termination is a pretext. Plaintiff filed his action against Tesla on January 7, 2020. Plaintiff has also named Tesla employee Caleb Moore in the Seventh Cause of Action for Defamation. The Court reviews the parties' evidence to determine whether a valid agreement to arbitrate exists and whether there are reasons why the agreement is unenforceable. See Ramos v. Westlake Services LLC (2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 674, 685 (court must begin...

Excerpt: ...use he has not identified any contractual benefit that was denied him due to Defendant's conduct. See 1231 Euclid Homeowners Ass'n v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. (2006) 135 Cal.App.4th 1008, 1021. Indeed, Plaintiff does not even allege the existence of a valid contract between him and Defendant or explain what Defendant was obligated to do for him. 2. Defendant's demurrer to Plaintiff's Second Cause of Action for Violation of Civil Code § 2937 is...

Excerpt: ...tion is denied because it is essentially a deficient Motion for Reconsideration of the February 20th order. To file a Motion for Reconsideration, Defendants are required to identify some new facts or circumstances that they previously failed to present despite the exercise of reasonable diligence. See CCP § 1008(a); and Baldwin v. Home Sav. of America (1997) 59 Cal.App.4th 1192, 1198; and Gilberd v. AC Transit (1995) 32 Cal.App.4th 1494, 1500. D...

Excerpt: ...ss-Defendants' demurrer to the First and Second Causes of Action because they improperly request that the Court take judicial notice of four agreements executed by RingCentral and Bright Pattern in 2018. The Court overruled the demurrer to Cross-Complainant's fraud claims because Cross-Defendants failed to identify the allegations that undermine Cross-Complainant's claim of reasonable reliance. Cross-Defendants' Request for Judicial Notice pursua...

Excerpt: ...o comply with their obligation to plead their claims in a concise manner. See CCP § 425.10(a)(1). The Court refers counsel to its order of November 22, 2019 denying the parties' motion to seal the Complaint and Cross-Complaint. If counsel had made a motion to strike the First Amended Cross-Complaint for its excessive length, the Court would have been inclined to grant it. Counsel for Cross-Defendants instead use the inclusion of evidentiary fact...

Excerpt: ... as an exhibit to the Third Amended Complaint, particularly because it does not add anything of substance to the asserted claims. Plaintiff's argument that the report contains evidentiary admissions of Defendant's wrongful conduct is noted. The Court previously advised the parties that it does not want the parties to recite every evidentiary fact in their pleadings. Plaintiff is not required to prove her claim in the Third Amended Complaint. The ...

Excerpt: ...laintiff contends that the Sullivans owe the company for work performed on their property in Pleasanton by its subsidiary, Renovation Realty Northern California, pursuant to a contract executed on or about January 30, 2016. The Sullivans filed their Cross-Complaint on July 11, 2018. The operative First Amended Cross- Complaint was filed on August 28, 2019. Renovation Realty, Inc. answered the First Amended Cross-Complaint on September 30, 2019. T...

Excerpt: ...demurrer to the Second Amended Complaint on September 18, 2019. Plaintiff filed her Third Amended Complaint on October 1, 2019. Counsel for Plaintiff provided the Court with a copy of the pleading with his Request for Judicial Notice. Defendant's first argument is that Plaintiff's Third Amended Complaint is devoid of any facts supporting any of the ten (10) causes of action. This argument is without merit. Plaintiff has complied with her obligati...

Excerpt: ...ding requirements. See CCP § 425.10; and Doe v. City of Los Angeles (2007) 42 Cal.4th 531, 550-552 (plaintiff should plead ultimate facts and not evidentiary facts); and C.A. v. William S. Hart Union High School Dist. (2012) 53 Cal.4th 861, 872 (same). The Court declines to review the voluminous pleadings and orders issued by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in the Jana W. Olson case. Defendant's motion is denied because it is based on facts that are n...

Excerpt: ...ed Defendant's attorneys with the promised verified responses on February 26, 2020. Mr. Patten also states that he did not assert any objections to the discovery requests as the right to object has been waived. Plaintiff's counsel's apparent belief that the motion is moot is not correct. See Rule of Court 3.1348(a); and Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 408-409. Mr. Patten promised to ser...

Excerpt: ...f the Fair Credit Reporting Act; (5) Negligence; (6) Breach of Contract; (7) Breach of the Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing; and (8) Violation of Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 et seq.; and (9) Declaratory Relief. Defendant acquired the mortgage loan that Plaintiff and his former wife, Deneice Hutcherson (aka Deniece Hutcherson) had with Bank of America on August 8, 2013. The couple's property is located at 886 Comanche Court, in the C...

Excerpt: ... properly pled. See FPI Development, Inc. v. Nakashima (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 367, 384. It is the Court's experience that virtually no defendant or cross-defendant complies with the requirements set forth in Nakashima. Defendant is hereby ordered to file an Amended Answer to the Complaint and set forth facts that it believes support each affirmative defense. The Court is required to accept the facts as true if Plaintiff were to file a second demur...

Excerpt: ...aw Phangureh conspired to steal their several rental properties identified on page 5 of the Complaint. The Court will not attempt to summarize all the facts recited by the two sides, except to note that each side offers a completely different account of what occurred and the motivations behind the parties' actions. The Court recently held a Case Management Conference and set the matter for trial. Although it agrees with Defendants' contention tha...

Excerpt: ...nt Bank of the West's V.P. Gail Wilson "told" Plaintiff that if she continued to make her mortgage payments, Defendant would allow Plaintiff two years to bring her business to profitability. This purported forbearance agreement was an oral agreement, but "confirmed in writing by email as well". Defendant allegedly breached this agreement by instituting nonjudicial foreclosure proceedings on October 30, 2019. Plaintiff's cause of action for "inten...

Excerpt: ...Services LLC (2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 674, 685 (court is tasked with determining the parties' mutual intent); and Ruiz v. Moss Bros. Auto Group, Inc. (2014) 232 Cal.App.4th 836, 842 (trial court may weigh conflicting evidence to determine whether arbitration agreement exists). Defendants must show that Plaintiff agreed to submit his claims to arbitration under the preponderance of the evidence standard. Id. (trial court correctly denied motion to c...

Excerpt: ...tled "Fraud (Negligent/Intentional Misrepresentations)," pursuant to CCP § 430.10(e) and (f), is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. The Court completely agrees with Defendants' assertion that Plaintiff has not come close to complying with his obligation to plead specific facts bearing upon each element of his fraud claim. See Lazar v. Superior Court (1996) 12 Cal.4th 631, 645 (allegations must identify the speaker, the dates of the statements, scien...

Excerpt: ...tion. See CCP §§ 2016.040 and 2030.300(b). Counsel are advised that their meet-and-confer efforts should go beyond merely sending letters stating their respective positions. See Townsend v. Superior Court (1998) 61 Cal.App.4th 1431, 1439; and Obregon v. Superior Court (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 424, 428. The Court has the discretionary authority to impose a monetary sanction on attorneys who fail to comply with their meet-and- confer obligations reg...

Excerpt: ..., 2020, only seven (7) court days before the hearing. See CCP § 1005(b). The late opposition papers were sent to Defendant's attorney by overnight delivery on Saturday, February 1, 2020. The Court notes that Plaintiffs' counsel filed his papers in opposition to Defendant's first Motion to Quash only three (3) court days before the hearing. The late opposition was noted in the December 19, 2019 order. The fact that the Court considered the opposi...

Excerpt: ...hanna and Bounprakob to Comply with Deposition Notice. The Court also imposed monetary sanctions against Defendants in the aggregate sum of $3,000.00. The Court takes judicial notice of the three discovery orders. Plaintiff has filed this Motion for Terminating Sanctions based upon Defendants' asserted willful failure to obey any of the orders. Plaintiff contends that Defendants paid only $1,000.00 of the $3,000.00 awarded. Defendants' failure to...

Excerpt: ...mplaint and Plaintiff's evidence, the Court declines to issue the requested injunction because he has not shown that a reasonable probability exists that he will prevail on the merits of his claims. See Costa Mesa City Employees' Ass'n v. City of Costa Mesa (2012) 209 Cal.App.4th 298, 309 (court lacks discretion to grant an injunction if no reasonable probability of success is shown); and San Francisco Newspaper Printing Co., Inc. v. Superior Cou...

Excerpt: ...ortions of the First Amended Complaint on October 31, 2018. On December 10, 2018, the Court set the matter for a jury trial commencing on July 6, 2020. Plaintiff Bonner alleges that Defendant breached the terms of the insurance agreement when it denied his first-party loss claim. Plaintiff alleges that on April 2, 2016, an unknown individual forcibly took his 2015 Mercedes Benz CLS63 while he was parked on the street in Oakland. Plaintiff, who wo...

Excerpt: ...itution by buying the vehicle back from him or providing an acceptable replacement. As the moving party, Defendant Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC bears the initial burden of producing sufficient admissible evidence to make a prima facie showing that no triable issues as to any material facts exist and that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. See Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 850. "A prima facie showing is one that is...