Excerpt: ...).) Vehicle Code sections 17150 and 17151 do not fall within the Graves Amendment's saving clause. (49 U.S.C. § 30106, subd. (b); Goodson v. Perfect Fit Enterprises, Inc. (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 508, 514; Garcia v. Vanguard Car Rental USA, Inc. (11th Cir. 2008) 540 F.3d 1242, 1249; see also Vehicle Code section 16000 et seq.) Defendant is engaged in the 2 of 3 trade of renting or leasing motor vehicles, and plaintiff has not alleged negligence or ...

Excerpt: ...any's motion for summary judgment is DENIED. (Code Civ. Pro., § 437c, subd. (p)(2).) Defendant has failed to show that the pending dispute is “not one that is appropriate for declaratory relief.” (Gafcon, Inc. v. Ponsor & Associates (2002) 98 Cal.App.4th 1388, 1402.) Specifically, the undisputed evidence shows “both continuing contractual relationships and future consequences for the conduct of the relationship that depended on the court's...

Excerpt: ...gence in prosecution. (Code Civ. Proc., § 583.130.) The competing considerations to be evaluated in a motion to dismiss for delay in prosecution are the policies of discouraging stale claims and compelling reasonable diligence balanced against the strong public policy which seeks to dispose of litigation on the merits rather than on procedural grounds. (Van Keulen v. Cathay Pacific Airways, Ltd (2008) 162 Cal.App.4th 122, 131.) In considering a ...

Excerpt: ...r's evidentiary objections made within her separate statement in support of her opposition to defendants' motion for summary judgment because “[a]ll written objections to evidence must be served and filed separately from the other papers…in opposition to the motion.” (California Rules of Court, rule 3.1354(b).) Defendant Mary Helen Leet's motion for summary judgment and/or adjudication is DENIED, without prejudice. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c...

Excerpt: ...bor Code section 1102.5. (Manavian v. Department of Justice (2018) 28 Cal.App.5th 1127, 1141; Complaint, ¶¶ 14, 30, 32, 35, 46, 49.) Defendant's general and special demurrers to the second and third causes of action in plaintiff's complaint are SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subds. (e) & (f).) The alleged violation of the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act (“POBRA”) occurred after plaintiff's e...

Excerpt: ...requests for production nos. 1‐3, 5‐20, 24‐37, and 40‐79. (Ibid.) The Court also orders plaintiff to provide a privilege log as required by its responses to defendant's request for production, set one. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.240, subd. (c).) Plaintiff shall include all redacted documents in its privilege log. (Ibid.) Finally, the 2 of 2 Court orders plaintiff to produce responsive documents to request for production nos. 5, 6, 8, and 9...

Excerpt: ...on shall be scheduled and completed by no later than October 8, 2020. In all other respects, plaintiff's motion is denied. The motion does not “set forth specific facts showing good cause justifying the production” of the requested documents. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.450, subd. (b)(1).) Further, plaintiff failed to submit a separate statement with the motion, regarding his request to compel answers at a deposition. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule...

Excerpt: ...Civ. Proc. §§ 2030.260 subd. (a). 1010.6 subd. (4)(B).) The motion was filed prior to the date that the responses were due. Sutter health Sacramento Sierra Region's request for sanctions is GRANTED. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2023,010, subd. (h), 2033.280, subd. (b).) There is no substantial justification for plaintiff's filing this motion prior to the date the responses were due. Plaintiff shall pay defendant Sutter Health Sacramento Sierra Region...

Excerpt: ...efendant WUSD has provided adequate responses and proper objections to these discovery requests. Plaintiff's motion to compel further responses to special interrogatories, set two, from defendant WUSD is GRANTED IN PART. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.300.) While defendant WUSD's vague and overbroad objections are proper, a responding party must answer an interrogatory to the extent possible. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.220, subd. (b).) Accordingly, def...

Excerpt: ...tiz's request for judicial notice is GRANTED. (Evid. Code, §§ 452, 453.) Defendants' demurrer to plaintiffs' complaint is OVERRULED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subd. (e).) Plaintiffs' complaint was timely filed under the Government Tort Claims Act, given the applicability of Emergency Rule 9. (Gov. Code, § 945.6, subd. (a)(1); Emergency Rule 9.) Further, plaintiffs have alleged statutory authority establishing liability for the City of Woodl...

Excerpt: ...4th 189, 198–199; Complaint, ¶¶ 4‐7, 46‐49.) Defendant General Motors LLC's demurrer as to the third cause of action for fraudulent inducement‐concealment is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subd. (e).) Plaintiff has pled his fraud cause of action with sufficient particularity, given that he is asserting defendant's nondisclosure of information. (Alfaro v. Community Housing Improvement System & Planning Assn.,...

Excerpt: ...n to defendants' motion for summary judgment. (California Rules of Court, rule 3.1354(b).) However, the Court does not consider defendants' UMF 12 in ruling on the instant motion. (Reeves v. Safeway (2004) 121 Cal.App.4th 95, 105‐106.) Defendants Walgreen Co. and Irma Moreno's evidentiary objection no. 3 is OVERRULED. The Court does not reach defendants' other evidentiary objections as the evidence objected to is not germane to the disposition ...

Excerpt: ...(p)(1).) Triable issues of material fact exist as to the amount of money that defendant owes plaintiff and whether the amounts on plaintiff's statement of account were sent to defendant. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 337a; Trafton v. Youngblood (1968) 69 Cal.2d 17, 25; UMF 2‐4.) The Court does not consider the additional evidence attached to plaintiff's reply because it was not authenticated and plaintiff failed submit this evidence with its moving pa...

Excerpt: ... 438.) Plaintiff's third cause of action for fraudulent inducementconcealment is barred by the economic loss rule because plaintiff has failed to plead facts “demonstrat[ing] harm above and beyond a broken contractual promise.” (Food Safety Net Services v. Eco Safe Systems USA, Inc. (2012) 209 Cal.App.4th 1118, 1130; Complaint, ¶¶ 159‐ 179.) Absent allegations of affirmative misrepresentations, plaintiff's third cause of action does not s...

Excerpt: ...of the sixty‐day notice to quit (Exh. 1) is DENIED. (Evid. Code, § 452.) Plaintiff's objection to defendant's request for judicial notice of the sixty‐day notice to quit (Exh. 1) is SUSTAINED. (Evid. Code, §§ 452, 1200.) Plaintiff's request for judicial notice is GRANTED. (Evid. Code, § 452, subd. (d).) Defendant Krista Mitchell's motion for summary judgment is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (p)(1).) Defendant fails to establish...

Excerpt: ...tant motion. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (q).) Defendant Joanna Malson's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (p)(2).) Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies regarding his hostile work environment harassment cause of action against defendant Malson prior to initiating the instant action. (Gov. Code, § 12960, subd. (c); Cole v. Antelope Valley Union High School Dist. (1996) 47 Cal.App.4th ...

Excerpt: ...DENIED. (Code of Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (p)(2).) The summary judgment procedure, inasmuch as it denies the right of the adverse party to a trial, is drastic and should be used with caution. (Hyunh v. Ingersoll‐Rand (1993) 16 Cal.App.4th 825, 830.) Moreover, any doubts about the propriety of summary adjudication must be resolved in favor of the party opposing the motion. (See's Candy Shops, Inc. v. Superior Court (2012) 210 Cal.App.4th 889, ...

Excerpt: ... discovery above the 35 statutory amount is necessary in this action. On July 16, 2020, defendant served unverified responses to form interrogatories, set one. As defendant prepared answers to the form interrogatories the motion for protective order is MOOT. Defendant shall serve plaintiff with the verification for the form interrogatories on plaintiff by August 11, 2020. Defendant served some responses to the request for special interrogatories,...

Excerpt: ...one year statute of limitations began to run by October 19, 2016 when plaintiff Ms. Boulett discovered her injury and suspected the injury was caused by wrongdoing. (Sanchez v. South Hoover Hospital (1976) 18 Cal.3d 93, 102; Drexler v. Petersen (2016) 4 Cal.App.5th 1181, 1190; Sutter Defendants UMFs 11‐19 .) Even with a 90 day extension, there is no material issue of disputed fact that the statute of limitations to bring plaintiff's action expi...

Excerpt: ...ct of reasonable dispute by the parties and not a proper subject for judicial notice. (Ibid.) Defendants' demurrers to plaintiff's first amended complaint are SUSTAINED IN PART. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10.) Defendants Bentec HoldCo, Hermitage, Brinkley, and Greyrock demurrer as to plaintiffs' first cause of action (breach of contract) and second cause of action (breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing) are SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE ...

Excerpt: ....) (1981) 117 Cal.App.3d 1, 6‐7.) The first amended complaint does not include specific facts or allegations to support a claim for punitive damages against defendant as required. Additionally, an award of attorney's fees must be supported by either statutory authority or a contractual agreement. Plaintiff's causes of action against defendant are for negligence and breach of fiduciary duty. As this action against defendant is not based on a con...

Excerpt: ... 2 of 3 Plaintiff's first cause of action: Defendants' demurrer to plaintiff's first cause of action for enticement of minors is OVERRULED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subds. (e), (f).) Plaintiff's first cause of action, is not fatally ambiguous or uncertain. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subd. (f).) Plaintiff has pleaded that defendants provided smart phone, service plan, and gaming computer as “enticements” under the statute, over and above...

Excerpt: ....) Plaintiffs' motion for leave to file a first amended complaint is GRANTED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 473.) Trial courts are vested with the discretion to allow amendments to pleadings in furtherance of justice. (Code Civ.Proc., § 473.) That trial courts are to liberally permit such amendments, at any stage of the proceeding, has been established policy in this state since 1901. (Hirsa v. Superior Court (1981) 118 Cal.App.3d 486, 488–489.) The fa...

Excerpt: ...terial facts show that plaintiff cannot establish that defendant breached the contract/settlement agreement as a matter of law. (UMF 1‐130.) Plaintiff cannot establish a cause of action for breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing. “[a]bsent those limited cases where a breach of a consensual contract term is not claimed or alleged, the only justification for asserting a separate cause of action for breach of the implied covenant ...

Excerpt: ...rally prevents creditor from taking actions against property of the bankruptcy estate, the debtor and the debtor's property. The blanket injunction continues until a bankruptcy court order lifting the stay has been entered or the stay has been expired. (11 U.S.C. § 362; In re Mellor (9th Cir. 1984) 734 F.3d 1396, 1398.) Unless an exception to the stay applies, ‘[o]nce triggered by a debtor's bankruptcy petition, the automatic stay suspends any...

Excerpt: ... amendment is necessary and proper, and why the request for amendment was not made earlier. (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1324(b); Dec. of Thomas, ¶¶ 1‐3.) Additionally, the proposed amendment fails to state a valid cause of action. (California Cas. Gen. Ins. Co. v. Sup. Ct. (1985) 173 Cal.App.3d 274, 280‐281 (disapproved on other grounds by Kransco v. Am Empire Surplus Lines, Co. (2000) 23 Cal.4th 390; Dec. of Thomas, Exh. 1; Settlement Agr...

Excerpt: ...nt's, Alan J. Bornt's, and Mary Bornt's demurrer to all of plaintiff Timothy, Stewart & Lekos Seed Company's causes of action for failure to plead sufficiently alter‐ego liability is OVERRULED. Plaintiff has pleaded sufficiently underlying facts to establish the required prongs of alter‐ego liability. (Leek v. Cooper (2011) 194 Cal.App.4th 399, 411; Complaint, ¶¶ 8‐ 12.) Defendants' demurrer to plaintiff's first cause of action for breach...

Excerpt: ..., §§ 2023.010, 2023.030.) The Court also declines to award defendant reimbursement for the claimed no show/cancellation fee, as defendant has failed to provide sufficient legal or factual support for the request. The monetary sanctions requested by plaintiff do not apply to discovery motions. (Code of Civ. Proc., § 128.5, subd. (e).) Finally, the Court declines to impose sanctions against defendant for unsuccessfully bringing a motion to compe...

Excerpt: ...antive responses to form interrogatories numbers 2.6, 6.3‐6.7, 8.1‐8.8, 9.1, 9.2, 10.1‐10.3, 11.1, 11.2 and 12.1 by June 15, 2020. Defendant The Regents of the University of California's request for sanctions is GRANTED. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2023.030, 2030.300, subd. (d).) Plaintiff shall pay defendant $900 by June 15, 2020. Plaintiff Danielle Kassalty's motion for protective order is GRANTED IN PART. (Code Civ. Proc., 2030.090.) The spec...

Excerpt: ...good faith and fair dealing, fourth cause of action for bad faith – failure to properly investigate, fifth cause of action for negligence, thirteenth cause of action for fraud/deceit: concealment, fifteenth cause of action for assault, sixteenth cause of action for battery, and seventeenth cause of action for false imprisonment is OVERRULED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subd. (e).) Plaintiff has sufficiently alleged facts to support these cause...

Excerpt: ...s must show that as the director she specifically authorized, directed, or personally participated in the allegedly tortious conduct (United States Liab. Ins. Co. v. Haldinger‐Hayes, Inc. (1970) 1 Cal.3d 586, 595), or that she specifically knew or reasonably should have known that some hazardous condition or activity under her control could injure plaintiff, and that she negligently failed to take or order appropriate action to avoid the harm. ...

Excerpt: ... Exhs. C‐H.) The stipulation, paragraph 5, fails to cite any applicable Code of Civil Procedure and the provisions included in that paragraph appear to track Code of Civil Procedure section 2034.230, the initial disclosure not, section 2034.280 which provides for supplemental expert disclosure. It is also silent on the scope of the testimony of any supplemental expert. The focus of the stipulation concerns the re‐opening of discovery. (Dec. o...

Excerpt: ... judicial notice of the CHP report. Defendants have not identified which section of the Evidence Code would support taking judicial notice of the CHP report, and further, although existence of a document may be judicially noticeable, the truth of statements contained in the document and its proper interpretation are not subject to judicial notice if those matters are reasonably disputable. (See Fremont Indemnity Co. v. Fremont General Corp. (2007...

Excerpt: ... negligence and negligence per se against defendant Washington Unified School District as a public entity. (Govt. Code, §§ 815, 815.6; Educ. Code, § 44807; M.W. v. Panama Buena Vista Union Sch. Dist. (2003) 110 Cal.App.4th 508, 518; C.A. v. William S. Hart Union High Sch. Dist. (2012) 53 Cal.4th 861, 877; see also Forgnone v. Salvadore Union Elementary School Dist. (1940) 41 Cal.App.2d 423, 425‐426.) Defendant's demurrer is GRANTED WITH LEAV...

Excerpt: ...ore v. Dickey (2015) 239 Cal. App. 4th 959, 966.) Dignity Health has shown plaintiff Rodriguez cannot establish actual agency or ostensible agency existed between Dr. Kayali and Dignity Health or between Dr. Erlich and Dignity Health. (Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts, p. 2‐3; UMFs 1‐9, 15‐18; Supplemental Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts, p. 2‐4; Supplemental UMFs 60‐63; Civ. Code, §§ 2299, 2300; see als...

Excerpt: ...to have discovered it is ordinarily a question of fact for the jury. (Ortega v. Kmart Corp. (2001) 26 Cal.4th 1200, 1206‐1207; Bridgman v. Safeway Stores, Inc. (1960) 53 Cal.2d 443, 447.) If no hearing is requested, this tentative ruling is effective immediately. No formal order pursuant to California Rule of Court 3.1312 or further notice is required. ...

Excerpt: ...auses of action is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. (Code Civ. Proc., § 431.10, subd. (e).) 2 of 2 Plaintiff fails to state sufficient facts to state a cause of action for declaratory relief, breach of fiduciary duty, or negligence against defendant. (Nally v. Grace Community Church (1988) 47 Cal.3d 278, 293; Code Civ. Proc., § 1060; Lockheed Corp. v. Continental Ins. Co. (2005) 134 Cal.App.4th 187, 221.) If no hearing is requested, this tentativ...

Excerpt: ...��10, Exhs. C‐H.) The stipulation, paragraph 5, fails to cite any applicable Code of Civil Procedure and the provisions included in that paragraph appear to track Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.230, the initial disclosure not, section 2023.280 which provides for supplemental expert disclosure. It is also silent on the scope of the testimony of any supplemental expert. The focus of the stipulation concerns the re‐opening of discovery. (D...

Excerpt: ...paragraph 38 are SUSTAINED for lack of personal knowledge and hearsay. (Evid. Code, §§ 702, 1200.) FCA US LLC's objections to the Declaration of Steve Mikhov, paragraphs 8 and 27‐37 are OVERRULED. FCA US LLC's evidentiary objections to the Declaration of Sepehr Dghighianin, paragraphs 4‐6 are OVERRULED. FCA US LLC's evidentiary objections to the Declaration of Sepehr Dghighianin, paragraph 8 is SUSTAINED. (Evid. Code, §§ 400 et seq, 702, ...

Excerpt: ...orious and cause for its denial…”].) Plaintiff is also reminded that a proper proof of service of the moving papers must be filed no later than five court days before the hearing. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1013a, subd. (1); Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1300(c).) Defendant The Regents of the University of California's requests for judicial notice are GRANTED. (Evid. Code, § 452, subd. (d).) Plaintiff's motion to quash subpoena duces tecum as to U.C...

Excerpt: ... C. Alberson, Ph.D. is OVERRULED. Union Pacific and Brian Kline's evidentiary objections to Paxin's and defendant‐ crosscomplainant Granite Construction Company LLC's (“Granite”) evidence numbers 1 and 2 are SUSTAINED. (Evid. Code, § 1200.) Granite's objections 1‐9 to Union Pacific and Brian Kline's evidence are OVERRULED. Granite's motion for summary judgment or alternatively summary adjudication is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, su...

Excerpt: ...p. (2015) 240 Cal.App.4th 22, 27, fn. 2 [taking judicial notice of the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services' report].) Therefore, respondent fails to cite adequate legal authority permitting judicial notice of such a document. Petitioner Richard Lauckhart's request for judicial notice is GRANTED. (Evid. Code, §§ 452, 453.) Respondent County of Yolo's demurrer to petitioner Richard Lauckhart's verified petition for writ of mandate is OVERR...

Excerpt: ... § 452; Code Civ. Proc., § 430.30, subd. (a).) Defendant Clark Pacific Corporation's demurrer or alternatively, motion to consolidate is OVERRULED as to the demurrer and GRANTED as to the motion to consolidate. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 430.10, subd. (e), 1048.) The lead case will be CV CV 19‐644. A demurrer can be used only to challenge defects that appear on the face of the pleading under attack; or from matters outside the pleading that are j...

Excerpt: ...irst cause of action for fraud is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (f)(1).) There is a triable issue of material fact as to whether defendant knew and failed to disclose or intentionally misrepresented that the anchor tenant would not be able to perform under the lease agreement prior to the close of escrow. (Biakanja v. Irving (1958) 49 Cal.2d 647; Lingsch v. Savage (1963) 213 Cal. App. 2d 729, 735‐738; UMF nos. 1, 4,‐7, 9‐10, 14�...

Excerpt: ...030.290, subd. (a).) However, defendant Sutter Health's objection that “a privilege log is unnecessary with regard to answering interrogatories seeking the identification of documents” is OVERRULED. (Best Products, Inc. v. Superior Court (2004) 119 Cal.App.4th 1181, 1191.) Best Products, Inc. v. Superior Court held that the existence of a document containing privileged information is not privileged, and interrogatories may be used to discover...

Excerpt: ...ts of litigation are “merely incidental” to the cross‐complaint's causes of action. (Baral v. Schnitt (2016) 1 Cal.5th 376, 394.) Further, cross‐defendant does not establish that the seventh and eighth causes of action arise from the constitutional right of free speech in connection with an issue of public interest. (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16, subd. (e)(4); Nygard, Inc. v. Uusi‐Kerttula (2008) 159 Cal.App.4th 1027, 1042.) As this first...

Excerpt: ...r, her dog, and her home. (Cross‐complaint, ¶¶ 15, 21, 27, 28, 36, 37, 43, 44, 55.) The cross‐complaint does not allege that cross‐ complainant should be reimbursed or held harmless based on cross‐defendant Pacific Bell Telephone Company's alleged actions. (Lab. Code, § 3864.) Further, the Court denies crossdefendants' request to issue an order severing the cross‐complaint. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1048, subd. (b).) Cross‐ defendants h...

Excerpt: ...s the facts are not relevant to the motion. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (q).) Defendant The Regents of the University of California's objection to plaintiff Amy Ahl Wright's undisputed material fact number one is SUSTAINED. The Court declines to rule on the remainder of the objections as the facts are not relevant to the motion. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (q).) Plaintiff Amy Ahl Wright's motion for summary adjudication of the first cau...

Excerpt: ...alifornia Surety Investigations, Inc. (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 695, 704.) Further, plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that the arbitration agreement is substantively unconscionable, given defendant's agreement to be responsible for payment of all arbitration costs and fees. (Ng decl., ¶ 2; Carboni 2 of 2 v. Arrospide (1991) 2 Cal.App.4th 76, 83; Wherry v. Award, Inc. (2011) 192 Cal.App.4th 1242, 1248.) The notice of motion does not provide notice...

Excerpt: ...er, there is a triable issue of fact as to whether the Occupancy Agreement permits the member's immediate family members to occupy the unit, in lieu of the member. (UMF 3; Ms. Brewer's RJN, First Amended Complaint, Exhibit B, §§ 4.1, 5.1.) 2 of 2 Plaintiff Dos Pinos Housing Cooperative, Inc.'s request for judicial notice (“Dos Pinos's RJN”) is GRANTED. (Evid. Code, §§ 452, 453.) Defendant Charles Brewer's motion to set aside default is DE...