Excerpt: ...iff's counsel have graciously given Defendant's attorney extensions of time so that she can locate him. Defendant's attorneys even retained a private investigator. Defendant's attorneys say that there is a high probability that Defendant no longer lives in Oakland or even the United States. Defendant's unexplained absence from the jurisdiction is not a justification for his failure to comply with discovery obligations. The Court anticipates that ...

Excerpt: ...to file its Motion for Summary Judgment so that it can be heard at least thirty (30) days before the trial. There was no compelling reason to wait. Plaintiff then responded by making a late request to file a First Amended Complaint. The Court does not find that good cause has been shown pursuant to Rule of Court 3.1332. Defendant 24 Hour Fitness USA, Inc.'s assertion that it has a "statutory right" to file a Motion for Summary Judgment against th...

Excerpt: ...ion practice since the action was commenced on January 22, 2018. The jury trial date is February 3, 2020. Plaintiffs have sued Defendant for the loss of certain items of clothing and damage to other clothing items entrusted to Defendant for cleaning. Defendant advises the Court that Plaintiffs provided counsel with an inventory of their losses which total $26,738.47. Plaintiffs have no other claims against Defendant in this action. Based on its r...

Excerpt: ...eir attorney, Mark Ellis, decided that he no longer wanted to represent Defendants. Counsel made a last-minute request to continue the trial that the Court believes should have been denied. There is currently no trial date. Defendants' motion is denied for substantive and procedural reasons. The Court initially observes that Defendants did not file a declaration to indicate that they made a reasonable and good faith attempt to resolve the dispute...

Excerpt: ...D., and The Hospital Committee for The Livermore-Pleasanton Areas also filed Demurrers to Plaintiff's Complaint. After Defendants' Demurrers were sustained with leave to amend on July 13, 2017, Plaintiff filed his First Amended Complaint on July 27, 2017. Plaintiff Sisodia presented at the emergency room at ValleyCare with severe abdominal pain at about 6:00 a.m., on November 20, 2015. ValleyCare is located at 5555 W. Las Positas Blvd., in Pleasa...

Excerpt: ...Directors, contends that Defendants have done certain things that violate various Dublin laws, Association rules and provisions of the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions of the Association. Defendants contend that Plaintiff's allegations are false and the claims are without merit. Defendants believe that Plaintiff sued them because they have made claims of construction defects. The Court cannot grant Defendants' motion because...

Excerpt: ...ject of Plaintiff's claims. The non-compete agreements that Medidata Solutions, Inc. employees signed provide that they shall be construed by the laws of the State of New York. The non-compete agreements that Sparta Systems, Inc. employees signed indicate that they shall be construed by the laws of the State of New Jersey. Since this case was filed on July 17, 2017, Plaintiff and Defendants have cited only California cases and statutes in their m...

Excerpt: ...n this Court. Plaintiff Weintraub purchased a 2011 Kia Optima from an unidentified dealership on June 20, 2011. The Court did not carefully review the 55-page Complaint filed by a different firm against Kia Motors America, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California entitled, Greg Wallis, et al. v. Kia Motors America, Inc., et al. Plaintiff attached the Wallis complaint to the First Amended Complaint. The Wallis complai...

Excerpt: ...ants that are the subject of Plaintiff's claims. The non-compete agreements that Medidata Solutions, Inc. employees signed provide that they shall be construed by the laws of the State of New York. The non-compete agreements that Sparta Systems, Inc. employees signed indicate that they shall be construed by the laws of the State of New Jersey. Since this case was filed on July 17, 2017, Plaintiff and Defendants have cited only California cases an...

Excerpt: ...ject matter of this lawsuit or reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff's request for an award of sanctions against Defendant 24 Hour Fitness USA, Inc. and its attorneys of record in the sum of $3,060.00 is GRANTED IN PART. Although Defendant unreasonably refused to cooperate with counsel in his efforts to take Ms. Peterson's deposition, the amount requested is excessive under the circumstances. The Court i...

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: ...Jiang had no actual or constructive knowledge of the cause of her shoulder pain until her physician made a diagnosis months later. Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is granted because they have made the required prima facie showing that no triable issues of material fact remain regarding Plaintiffs' delayed discovery of their claim. See Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 850. Defendants have shown that no reasonable ju...

Excerpt: ...0(a), is DENIED. The Court reviewed the parties' written submissions. Plaintiff correctly argues that the Motion to Compel must be denied because Defendants did not file it within 45 days of the date when the responses were served. See CCP § 2031.310(c). The Court does not have the authority to waive the 45-day requirement for Defendants. Plaintiff is also correct when she notes that counsel for Defendants did not comply with her meet-and-confer...

Excerpt: ... the instant motion. Defendant also did not pay the monetary sanction in the sum of $900.00 by the May 23, 2019 deadline. The Court hereby awards Plaintiff his reasonably incurred attorney's fees and costs in the sum of $1,200.00. See CCP § 2023.030(a). Plaintiff's request for an award of $2,320.00 is not reasonable in view of the straightforward nature of the motion. Defendant shall pay the additional sanction no later than July 17, 2019. The C...

Excerpt: ...er Olesen by Dr. Strassberg. In addition, Plaintiff shall have the right to make an audio recording of the examination. See CCP § 2032.530(a). The Court declines to dictate the manner of examination by Dr. Fayer. Plaintiff has not shown any compelling reason why the administering of the MMPI test by Dr. Fayer would constitute an infringement of her constitutional or statutory rights. As Defendants note, if Plaintiff does not want to subject hers...

Excerpt: ...g his alleged professional negligence. See Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 850. Despite having an opportunity to do so, Plaintiff failed to present any competent expert evidence to rebut Defendant's prima facie showing. See Osborne v. Irwin Memorial Blood Bank (1992) 5 Cal.App.4th 234, 273. Counsel for Defendant shall promptly prepare the Proposed Order for the Court's consideration. See Rule of Court 3.1312. NOTICE: Effe...

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: ...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: ...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: ...t on January 9, 2019. Plaintiff was 64 years old when the Complaint was filed. He is African American. Plaintiff alleges that he worked at the Bear's Lair in Berkeley from August 28, 2017 until he was terminated on February 23, 2018. Compass Group USA, Inc., doing business as Chartwells Food Service, provides student dining service to the University of California pursuant to contract. Plaintiff worked as a bartender and waiter at the Bear's Lair....

Excerpt: ...itial Complaint against her former client, Noreen Cardinale, and her former co-counsel, Martha Louise Caron, on January 20, 2015. The case was scheduled for trial on November 28, 2016, but that trial date was vacated on October 31, 2016 because the settlement judge requested it and because Plaintiff Bush filed a late Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings as to the Cross-Complaint of Noreen Cardinale. Cross-Complainant had filed her First Amended C...

Excerpt: ...oward v. County of San Diego (2010) 184 Cal.App.4th 1422, 1428. Defendant 24 Hour Fitness USA, Inc. has not shown that it will be unduly prejudiced by the late request for leave to amend. See Magpali v. Farmers Group, Inc. (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 471, 486-488. The trial date is September 9, 2019. Defendant has not shown that it will not have time to conduct the discovery necessary to respond to Plaintiff's prayer for an award of punitive damages. F...

Excerpt: ...iff's right to recruit current and former Medidata Solutions employees who signed non-compete agreements; (2) declaratory relief regarding plaintiff's obligation and right to defend and indemnify its employees who previously worked for Medidata Solutions; (3) declaratory relief regarding enforceability of the Medidata Solutions non-compete agreements; (4) declaratory relief regarding plaintiff's rights when Medidata Solutions threatens to enforce...

Excerpt: ...ave filed a Notice of Related Case pursuant to Rule of Court 3.300(b). The Court was only made aware of Defendant Wong's earlier lawsuit against the Homeowners Association when it reviewed Plaintiff's papers in support of the Motion for Summary Judgment. The parties need not file the Notice of Related Case at this juncture as the Court has already dealt with several motions and set a trial date of September 23, 2019. The Motion for Summary Judgme...

Excerpt: ... is specifically named in the Complaint only as to the First Cause of Action for Negligence I and the Second Cause of Action for Products Liability. Defendant has now moved for summary judgment. DEFENDANT'S BURDEN OF PRODUCTION Defendant did not meet its initial burden of production. (See Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 848-855; Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (p)(2).) Defendant targeted the threshold exposure subelement ...