Excerpt: ...ey Boosalis, Mara Getz, and Eric Parise's first amended complaint seeks relief for conversion of the same property identified in plaintiff First Centaur's conversion cause of action for Case No. CV‐2018‐ 1444. (Compare defendant's RJN, no. 3, ¶¶ 59‐61 and defendant's RJN, no. 5, ¶¶ 61‐66, 68.) Moreover, defendant's cross‐complaints filed in each case seek nearly identical factual and legal determinations, only against different part...

Excerpt: ...'s discovery requests and pay monetary sanctions warrants terminating sanctions. (Department of Fair Employment & Housing v. Ottovich (2014) 227 Cal.App.4th 706, 712 – 713.) Defendant's answer is stricken and a judgment by default against defendant Stcyr shall be entered. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.030, subd. (d)(1), (4).) Plaintiffs' request for monetary sanctions is GRANTED, in the amount of $740.00 against defendant Stcyr. By continuing to di...

Excerpt: ... § 1281.2, 1284.) The case of Felisilda v. FCA US LLC ((2020) 53 Cal.App.5th 486) is binding on this Court. The Court thus finds that plaintiff is estopped from repudiating defendant's enforcement of the express arbitration provision found in the Retail Installment Sales Contract (“Contract”) between plaintiffs and Hoblit Chrysler Jeep Dodge. (Felisilda, supra, 53 Cal.App.5th 486, 495 – 499; Universal Decl., Ex. A.) The Court finds that ba...

Excerpt: ...he Court finds that plaintiff Hossam Buzgheia failed to record his mechanic's lien pertaining to the work of improvement he performed on defendants' property within the requisite statutory time frame; thus, has waived his right to bring the instant action. (Civ. Code, §§ 8180, subd. (a), 8412, subds. (a)(1), (a)(3); Howard S. Wright Construction Co. v. BBIC Investors (2006) 136 Cal.App.4th 228, 237, 240; See Stanislaus Lumber Co. v. Pike (1942)...

Excerpt: ...roducts, Inc. (2008) 165 Cal.App.4th 1568, 1586–1587.) The Court finds that defendant did not act with diligence in obtaining a hearing to compel plaintiff's compliance. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2024.050, subd. (b)(2).) Specifically, plaintiff produced the subject spreadsheet, CTGA‐0002507, on August 17, 2020 and the corresponding privilege log on October 19, 2020. (Campbell decl., ¶¶ 8, 10.) Defendant waited until July 9, 2021 to request an un...

Excerpt: ...re due on or before June 11, 2021. (Schoech Decl., ¶ 6.) Plaintiffs' request for monetary sanctions is GRANTED, in the amount of $900.00 against defendant. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2023.010, 2023.020, 2033.280, subd. (c); Schoech Decl., ¶ 9.) Defendant shall pay these sanctions by October 3, 2021. Motion for terminating sanctions or an order to show cause re contempt against defendant: Plaintiffs' request for judicial notice is GRANTED. (Evid. Co...

Excerpt: ...Proc., § 1211; Koehler v. Superior Court (2010) 181 Cal.App.4th 1153, 1169 [stating that “indirect contempt requires there be an initiating affidavit, and without one any contempt order is void.”].) Contempt requires “(1) a valid order, (2) knowledge of the order, (3) ability to comply with the order, and (4) willful failure to comply with the order.” (In re Ivey (2000) 85 Cal.App.4th 793, 798; see also Lyon v. Superior Court of Los Ange...

Excerpt: ...tions to plaintiff's evidence as the evidence objected to is not germane to the disposition of defendant's motion for summary adjudication. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (q).) Defendant's motion for summary adjudication as to the first cause of action (breach of contract) is GRANTED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (p)(2).) Defendant has shown that there was not “an actual withholding of benefits due” and therefore, there can be no breach...

Excerpt: ...f has demonstrated that $86,152.50 of the sought attorneys' fees are attributable to time spent proving the identified RFAs. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.420, subd. (a); Garcia v. Hyster Co. (1994) 28 Cal.App.4th 724, 763‐737; Vlasak supp. decl., ¶¶ 5‐8, Exhibit F.) Plaintiff is not entitled to recover for time spent drafting the instant motion because section 2033.420(a) limits the award of expenses to “reasonable expenses incurred in�...

Excerpt: ...oyee arising out of their contractual relationship.” (Jarboe, supra, 53 Cal.App.5th at p. 556, citation and internal quotation marks omitted.) “Instead, it is a dispute between an employer and the state, which alleges directly or through its agents—either the Labor and Workforce Development Agency or aggrieved employees—that the employer has violated the Labor Code.” (Id. at p. 556, citation, brackets, and internal quotation marks omitt...

Excerpt: ...d noncompliance with the Court's prior orders to provide responses to plaintiff's discovery requests and pay monetary sanctions warrants terminating sanctions. (Department of Fair Employment & Housing v. Ottovich (2014) 227 Cal.App.4th 706, 712 – 713.) Defendant's answer is stricken and a judgment by default against defendant shall be entered. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.030, subd. (d)(1), (4).) Plaintiff's request for monetary sanctions is GRANT...

Excerpt: ...ndoza Decl., ¶ 4, Ex. A.) Defendant/cross‐complainant's motion to compel defendant Anytime Fitness, LLC's further responses to special interrogatories, set two, is DENIED AS MOOT. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.300.) Defendant Anytime served second supplemental responses to special interrogatories, set two, numbers 34 – 40, on July 15, 2021. (Mendoza Decl., ¶ 4, Ex. A.) The Court declines to rule upon the adequacy of defendant Franchise's or def...

Excerpt: ...ts for the PMK deposition ($1,140.39) is DENIED. The Court finds that these are allowable costs, defendant has demonstrated that these costs were incurred and necessary to the conduct of the litigation, and plaintiff has failed to demonstrate anything to the contrary. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1033.5, subds. (a)(3), (c)(3) & (4).) 3. The motion to tax costs for duplicative deposition transcript and for the room cancellation charge ($3,614.75) is GRANT...

Excerpt: ...aint are duplicative, and are actually a single cause of action sounding in negligence. (Code Civ. Proc., § 128, subd. (a); Schimmel v. Levin (2012) 195 Cal.App.4th 81, 87 [“Every court has the inherent power, in furtherance of justice, to regulate the proceedings of a trial before it; to effect an orderly disposition of the issues presented; and to control the conduct of all persons in any manner connected therewith. [Citations.] The exercise...

Excerpt: ... and Ms. Nugent ($300.00) reasonable. (PLCM Group v. Drexler (2000) 22 Cal.4th 1084, 1095; Jackson v. Yarbray (2009) 179 Cal.App.4th 75, 93; Heritage Pacific Financial, LLC v. Monroy (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 972, 1009 [“The court may rely on its own knowledge and familiarity with the legal market in setting a reasonable hourly rate.”]; Sommer decl., ¶¶ 12‐15.) Defendants' requested hours and costs spent on the special motion to strike and t...

Excerpt: ... first amended complaint (“FAC”), the Court finds that Civil Code section 895 et seq. (commonly known as the Right to Repair Act) is inapplicable to the instant action. (Acqua Vista Homeowners Assn. v. MWI, Inc. (2017) 7 Cal.App.5th 1129, 1134, 1141 ‐ 1142; see also McMillin Albany LLC v. Superior Court (2018) 4 Cal.5th 241, 246 – 247; FAC, ¶¶ 4, 11‐14, 22, 32.) Specifically, plaintiff has not sued the builder of her home, and plainti...

Excerpt: ...laintiff has failed demonstrate that the sought attorneys' fees are attributable only to time spent proving the identified RFAs. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.420, subd. (a); Garcia v. Hyster Co. (1994) 28 Cal.App.4th 724, 763‐ 737 [“Nothing in the bare‐bones showing made below, or in the lower court's award, reflects that any consideration was given to the fact that Hyster Company's trial preparation might extend beyond those areas covered...

Excerpt: ...ry to the conduct of the litigation. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1033.5, subd. (a)(3), (c)(3) & (4); Nelson v. Anderson (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 111, 131; Segal v. Asics America Corporation (2020) 50 Cal.App.5th 659, 668.) Plaintiff has voluntarily withdrawn $958.40 of these costs. 2. The motion to tax deposition costs as to room rental for taking depositions ($5,500.00) is DENIED. Plaintiff has demonstrated that the amended cost of $3,115.00 was reasonabl...

Excerpt: ...iffs have sufficiently pled allegations in the first amended complaint to support a prayer for punitive damages. (Civ. Code, § 3294; Taylor v. Superior Court (1979) 24 Cal.3rd 890, 895 – 896, 899; Pfeifer v. John Crane, Inc. (2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 1270, 1299; Compl., second cause of action‐general negligence, ¶ GN‐1.) The notice of motion provides notice of this Court's tentative ruling system; however, the notice cites to previous Local ...

Excerpt: ...endant County of Yolo. (Guzman v. County of Monterey (2009) 46 Cal.4th 887, 897; Gov. Code, § 815, et seq.) The Court also finds that the claims against defendant County of Yolo have not been pled with the requisite specificity. (Susman v. City of Los Angeles (1969) 269 Cal.App.2d 803, 809; Mittenhuber v. City of Redondo Beach (1983)142 Cal.App.3d 1, 5 – 7; Gov. Code, § 835.) Plaintiffs may amend their complaint consistent with this order by ...

Excerpt: ...s failed to provide legal authority that Mr. Pompey's alleged conduct falls outside the scope of “unsafe working conditions” under Labor Code section 6310. (See also Lab. Code, § 6306, subd. (a).) Defendant Roudybush, Inc.'s motion to strike plaintiff's complaint is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 435, 436.) Plaintiff's complaint contains adequate allegations to maintain a punitive damage claim against defendant Roudybush, Inc. (Civ. Code, §...

Excerpt: ...lton's initial deposition is good cause to allow a second one to be taken. (Associated Brewers Distributing Co. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (1967) 65 Cal. 2d 583, 588.) The deposition shall occur on or before July 16, 2021. Defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 438.) The Court finds that plaintiffs' complaint and the Declaration of Restrictions Affecting Willowbank Addition no. 6, subdivision...

Excerpt: ...that NGEC has failed to show good cause for responsive documents after 2016. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2031.310, subd. (b)(1), 2017.020, subd. (a); FACC, ¶ 30.) Therefore, the Court limits the timeframe of subject requests from 2014 to 2016. In all other respects, the Court finds that NGEC is entitled to the sought documents. Based on the allegations in the FACC, the subject discovery is relevant to defendants' determination of damages. (Code Civ. ...

Excerpt: ...ministrative remedies regarding this cause of action by not filing an administrative complaint with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing (“DFEH”) that included a charge of sexual harassment, or conduct corresponding thereto, within one year of the date the alleged unlawful practice occurred. (Former Gov. Code, § 12960, subd. (d), amended by stats. 2019, c. 709 (A.B.9), § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 2020; Wills v. Superior Court (2011) 195 Cal....

Excerpt: ...or judgment on the pleadings is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 438.) The Court finds that plaintiff Manzar Qayyum's allegation in the complaint that a partnership existed is a question of fact that cannot be determined upon motion for judgment on the pleadings. (Billups v. Tiernan (1970) 11 Cal.App.3d 372, 379; see Spier v. Lang (1935) 4 Cal.2d 711, 716; Compl., ¶ 10.) Defendants' motion to bifurcate is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 598, 1048, su...