Excerpt: ...Amended Complaint in consolidated Case No. RG19-0044357 is DENIED. Those two cases have been consolidated for all purposes, and therefore it makes no difference whatsoever whether the claims are asserted in a cross- complaint or in the present First Amended Complaint. The motion is DENIED as to Item No. 2 in the Notice of Motion. MB adequately alleges facts that, if true, may support a finding that GZ is the alter ego of Skye. Whether those facts...

Excerpt: ...Specifically, Plaintiff consulted with Palmer concerning a "Repurchase Notice" Plaintiff received from Color Spot Holdings Inc. ("CSH"), in which CSH indicated its intent to exercise its contractual right to purchase all of Plaintiff's shares of stock in CSH. After consulting with Palmer, Plaintiff and CSH entered a Stock Redemption Agreement and a Subordinated Promissory Note, both dated October 14, 2011, which together formed an integrated agre...

Excerpt: ...ught pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 410.30(a), Anand fails to submit admissible evidence demonstrating that all named defendants, including Anand, are subject to jurisdiction in the courts of India and that the claims asserted in this case are not barred by any statute of limitations there. (See, e.g., Aghaian v. Minassian (2015) 234 Cal.App.4th 427, 431.) To the extent this motion is based on the convenience of witnesses pursuant to...

Excerpt: ...and § 820 as the statutory basis for their negligence claims against NH, AC, and Brar. Defendants contend that as a matter of law, they owe no duty under either § 815.2 or § 820 to nonstudents. Based on the facts alleged in the Complaint, the Court cannot make that determination in this case. Plaintiffs allege they were assaulted by Defendants D.S. and T.S. on the grounds of James Logan High School while there to report bullying Plaintiff Esme...

Excerpt: ...bited subletting or assigning the premises without first obtaining MB's prior written consent, (2) prohibited using the premises to illegally cultivate controlled substances, and (3) required GZ to pay for electricity and waste management services. The demurrer to the Second Cause of Action for Common Counts is SUSTAINED, WITH LEAVE TO AMEND to allege facts demonstrating why GZ owes MB $350,000, and how that amount was determined. The demurrer to...

Excerpt: ...rmation from its opponent prior to subpoenaing those documents from a nonparty. None of the federal district court cases cited on page 4-5 of Twitter's opposition brief are binding on California state courts. However, this motion is denied without prejudice because Plaintiff has not made a prima facie showing in support of her claim that parties' settlement agreement has been breached, as required by, e.g., Glassdoor Inc. v. Superior Court (2017)...

Excerpt: ...scharging Reyes from liability. Because Reyes' alleged liability to Plaintiff arose on July 8, 2019, nearly a year prior to Reyes' bankruptcy filing, Plaintiff's claims in this case fall within the scope of the bankruptcy court's discharge order. (See In re Gibson (Bank. N.D. Tex. 2002) 308 B.R. 763, 766-768.) The bankruptcy court's discharge order therefore discharged Reyes from any liability for Plaintiff's claims and precludes Plaintiff from p...

Excerpt: ...es arising from or related to this Agreement or to the Resident's residency, care or services at the Community whether made against Owner or Morningstar or any other individual or entity". Plaintiff's claims asserted in this case fall within the scope of that agreement. Plaintiff raises several arguments as to why she believes her claims asserted in this case cannot be compelled to arbitration. First, she argues that the Agreement does not contai...

Excerpt: ...d while carrying construction materials for his employer, United Mechanical Inc. ("UMI"), in "Modular D", a structure adjacent to the construction site that UMI used for office space while working on WT's construction project for Stanford. (See WT's Separate Statement Fact ("SSF") Nos. 5-7 and 10-11 and the evidence cited in support.) The prime contract between WT and Stanford, in section 1.1, defined "Site" as the real property on which the proj...

Excerpt: ...laintiff alleges that he asked for information concerning (1) whether the property had undergone recent repairs, and (2) "a request for disclosure of all material facts or defects." Plaintiff does not allege that Caliber failed to disclose the recent repairs the property had undergone. Plaintiff does allege that Caliber failed to disclose that the property has previously had severe water intrusion, but he does not allege that Caliber was or shoul...

Excerpt: ...r action she filed on December 27, 2021. However, there are no facts appearing on the face of the Complaint indicating that Yang's unlawful detainer complaint had any effect on Plaintiff's decision to vacate the premises (nor, for that matter, does the Complaint contain any allegations indicating that Plaintiffs were even aware of the unlawful detainer complaint or or any prior 3 day notice to quit when they vacated the premises on December 31, 2...

Excerpt: ...ons of the proposed Third Amended Complaint reveals (at least) the following differences in the pleadings. First, Exhibit E contains a Second Cause of Action for Battery; Exhibit F does not. Second, the paragraph numbering from paragraph 30 onwards is significantly different. Third, the cause of action for Violation of PAGA (which is the Thirteenth Cause of Action in Exhibit E and the Twelfth Cause of Action in Exhibit F) contain different text, ...

Excerpt: ...t, as well as to Plaintiff's claim for punitive damages. Defendants' motion is GRANTED as to Plaintiff's First Cause of Action for Disability Discrimination. In order to establish a prima facie case of disability discrimination, Plaintiff must show (1) that he suffers from a disability, (2) he is capable of performing the essential functions of his job with or without a reasonable accommodation; and (3) he was subjected to an adverse employment a...

Excerpt: ...to recover for injury to his land caused by a person not authorized to occupy the premises. (See Smith v. Cap Concrete Inc. (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 769, 774.) Tinsley alleges he owns the subject property and Glaude occupies it without any right to do so. (See Second Amended Complaint, paragraphs 6, 10-13, and 21.) In addition, these causes of action are not timebarred by any statute of limitations, because Tinsley has alleged a continuing trespass ...

Excerpt: ..., leading to an infestation of cockroaches. Whether those allegations are true cannot be determined in ruling on this demurrer. However, BSR has not adequately alleged how they have suffered any cognizable damage as a result of the Tenants' conduct. For example, has BSR had to incur any extra costs to address the alleged cockroach infestation? Has BSR lost any tenants due to the cockroach infestation? BSR is given leave to amend to clearly allege...

Excerpt: ...ails. Plaintiffs' motion to compel further production of documents In Response to Request No. 22 is GRANTED. PHH stated in its opposition that the Plaintiffs are trying "to force the search and production of e-mails for the 400 users identified in PHH's comments log over a three-year period between 2017 and 2020 that were not involved in reviewing and denying the September 2018 Loan Modification Agreement. These 400 users do not have any connecti...

Excerpt: ... ruling on this motion. WT contracted with Stanford to construct a building for the Stanford School of Medicine. (See WT's Separate Statement Fact ("SSF") No. 2 and the evidence cited in support.) WT, in turn, contracted with Plaintiff's employer, United Mechanical Inc. ("UMI") to perform mechanical and plumbing work on the project. (See SSF No. 3 and the evidence cited in support.) The subcontract between WT and UMI provided that UMI shall have ...

Excerpt: ...e suffered by Plaintiffs. (See Rezke's Separate Statement of Facts ("SSF") Nos. 6-7, 9, 11-12, 14, 28-29, 32, and 36; Plaintiffs' response; and the evidence cited in support. See particularly the declaration of Plaintiff Derrick Gaines at paragraphs 4-10, the declaration of Plaintiff Jennifer Gaines at paragraphs 3-14, and the declaration of David Levin at paragraph 2. See also Stoiber v. Honeychuck (1980) 101 Cal.App.3d 903, 922, holding that th...

Excerpt: ...aintiffs. As to Plaintiffs' First Cause of Action for "Race Discrimination - Disparate Treatment", BART's motion is GRANTED as to each of the four Plaintiffs (Nebiyat Arega, Terry Carney, Darian Caston, and Erik Freeman.) For the purposes of this motion, the Court will assume that Plaintiffs have established a prima facie case of race discrimination, because they are members of a protected class and did not receive a promotion to the Cash Handler...

Excerpt: ...owledges, that is NOT a basis to overrule a demurrer. (See Code of Civil Procedure section 430.41(a)(4).) Plaintiffs cite cases holding that a person or entity providing security services for a business operator, like ANS, owes a duty of care to the business's customers to protect them while they are on the business premises. (See, e.g., Marois v. Royal Investigation & Patrol Inc. (1984) 162 Cal.App.3d 193, 200.) That duty may extend to land adja...

Excerpt: ...ganeh's cancellation of instrument cause of action in his First Amended Cross- Complaint in Case No. RG19-017769. This consolidated action involves, in significant part, a dispute over ownership of real property located at 2524 65th Avenue, Oakland, which Ochoa purchased in 2003. (See RYeganeh's Separate Statement of Facts ("SSF") No. 1 and the evidence cited in support.) On April 30, 2012, the subject property was sold at a trustee's sale. Altho...

Excerpt: ... CACI No. 325 and the cases cited in support.) The Court rejects Flatiron's argument that the Second Cause of Action is based on the same conduct as the First Cause of Action for Breach of Contract. Second Amended Complaint paragraph 43 alleges that Flatiron breached the implied covenant by "repeatedly asserting unsupported claims for additional compensation to which it was not entitled." That allegation does not appear anywhere in the First Caus...

Excerpt: ...had a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for the adverse employment action taken against the plaintiff. If the employer does so, the burden shifts back to the plaintiff to present evidence that the employer's proffered reason for the adverse employment action is a pretext for discrimination. (See, e.g., Guz v. Bechtel National Inc. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 317, 354-356.) To establish a prima facie case of employment discrimination, Plaintiff must pres...

Excerpt: ...ntion of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (RICO) (18 U.SC. § 1962)", the Sixth Cause of Action for "Aiding and Abetting the Primary Contravention of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (RICO) (18 U.SC. § 1962)", the Seventh Cause of Action for "the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (RICO) (18 U.SC. § 1962) (Respondeat Superior/Derivative Liability)", and the Eighth Cause of Action for "Con...

Excerpt: ...e its contractual right to purchase all of Plaintiff's shares of stock in CSH. After consulting with Palmer, Plaintiff and CSH entered a Stock Redemption Agreement and a Subordinated Promissory Note, both dated October 14, 2011, which together formed an integrated agreement. Under this integrated agreement, Plaintiff agreed to sell all her shares of CSH stock to CSH in exchange for a promissory note in the amount of $3,061.250.28. The note was du...