Excerpt: ...endant's motion for costs is GRANTED IN PART, as follows: 1. The motion as to deposition costs ($6,848.20) is GRANTED IN PART. The Court finds that only of these costs are expressly allowed and were reasonably necessary to the conduct of the litigation. (Code Civ. Proc., SS 1032, 1033.5. subds. Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1700; see Melnyk v. Robledo (1975) 64 Cal.App.3d 618, 624.) 2. The motion as to prc„cess server costs ($1,950.00) is GRANTED...

Excerpt: ...ivil Procedure sections 1010.6 or 1013 and 1170.8. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1347(a).) This Court notes, however, that plaintiff filed a substantive, written response on May 11, 2023, that does not assert deficient notice. Regarding the opposition: If a party seeks to have a written opposition considered in advance of the hearing, the written opposition must be served and filed on or before the court day before the hearing. (Cal. Rules of Cour...

Excerpt: ...)(2).) However, the Court finds that defendant has failed to meet its burden of proof on the remaining claimed costs in this category. (See Melnyk v. Robledo (1976) 64 Cal.App.3d 618, 624.) Defendant's opposition to the instant motion fails to cite to the specific documents attached to defendant's memorandum of costs (“Memo) supporting the costs claimed, and the documents attached to the Memo fail to make any reference to the item(s) within the...

Excerpt: ...e of Peggy and Joe DeUlloa's Marital Trust's motion for entry of interlocutory judgment of partition and appointment of referee is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 872.710 et seq.) A co‐owner of property has an absolute right to partition unless barred by a valid waiver. (Orien v. Lutz (2017) 16 Cal.App.5th 957, 962.) The right of partition may be waived by contract, either express or implied. (LEG Investments v. Boxler (2010) 183 Cal.App.4th 484, ...

Excerpt: ...panel, the panel issued a report in which it found that petitioner violated the UC Davis Policy on Student Conduct & Discipline during an examination in a course she took during the Summer 2021 quarter. (Ibid.) On February 22, 2022, the director of the UC Davis Office of Student Support and Judicial Affairs issued a letter to petitioner indicating that the director was imposing sanctions on petitioner based upon a review of the hearing report. (I...

Excerpt: ...intiff's first cause of action [wrongful/constructive termination] within the verified first amended complaint (“FAC”) is SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subd. (e); see Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318.) The Court finds that this cause of action: (1) was solely brought against former defendant United Parcel Service (“UPS”); and, (2) cannot be maintained against Estrada as an individual/nonemployer d...

Excerpt: ...oup LLC v. AXQG Corp. (2020) 58 Cal.App.5th 817, 825.) The Court declines to rule on plaintiff's evidentiary objections to the declarations of Ed Medina, Ron Hayes, Renee Croswell and Brody Lorda, as the Court did not rely upon the paragraphs and corresponding exhibits challenged in determining the instant motion. The Court SUSTAINS plaintiff's objection to defendants' memorandum of points and authorities (“MPA”) on the ground that it exceeds...

Excerpt: ...tion by plaintiff is the legal equivalent of a judgment in plaintiff's favor. (Goodstein v. Bank of San Pedro (1994) 27 Cal.App.4th 899, 907, emphasis added.) Goodstein v. Bank of San Pedro does not establish a time limit to file a motion for attorneys' fees based upon a compromise agreement reached by the parties. The Court's file does not contain any entry of judgment, dismissal, or proof of service that notice of entry of judgment was served o...

Excerpt: ...he alternative summary adjudication. (Evid. Code, §§ 702, subd. (a), 800, 1200.) It is unnecessary for the Court to reach defendant's evidentiary objections in support of reply. (Evid. Code, §§ 1200, 403, 702.) Defendant's motion for summary adjudication as to the first cause of action (enticement of minors) is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (p)(2).) “[T]he unlawful taking or withholding of a minor child from the custody of the pa...

Excerpt: ...ank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318.) The Court finds that this cause of action: (1) was solely brought against former defendant United Parcel Service (“UPS”); and, (2) cannot be maintained against Estrada as an individual/nonemployer defendant. (Gov. Code, § 12926, 12940, subds. (a), (h); Lab. Code, §§ 98.6, 132a, 1102.5 and 6310; Jones v. Lodge at Torrey Pines Partnership (2008) 42 Cal.4th 1158, 1162 – 1164 [individuals cannot be p...

Excerpt: ...ck Roofing, LLC v. Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America (2019) 413 F.Supp.3d 1122, 1129; McAllister Bros., Inc. v. A & S Trans. Corp., (1980) 621 F.2d 519, 524; Harris v. TAP Worldwide, LLC (2016) 248 Cal.App.4th 373, 380 – 381; see e.g., Pinnacle Museum Tower Assn. v. Pinnacle Market Development (US), LLC (2012) 55 Cal.4th 223, 226 [Pinnacle] [the fact that a person may have either chosen not to read or take the time to understand ...

Excerpt: ...)(2); Gov. Code, § 12940, subds. (a), (h).) Government Code section 12940(a) makes it unlawful for an employer to discharge a person because of their physical or mental disability. (Judicial Council Of California Civil Jury Instruction [“CACI”] 2540.) Section 12940(h) makes it unlawful for an employer to discriminate against a person because that person has opposed a practice forbidden under section 12940. (CACI 2505.) “An employer has tre...

Excerpt: ...ding express warranties. Section 1793.2(d)(2) applies when the manufacturer “is unable to service or repair” the vehicle. Plaintiff's first cause of action alleges that defendant failed to comply with section 1793.2(d)(2). (FAC, ¶¶ 16, 18, 20‐26.) Defendant argues, however, that section 1793.2(d)(2) does not apply because the subject vehicle was not a “new motor vehicle” under section 1793.22(e)(2). (Id., ¶ 7 [“On May 30, 2013, Pla...

Excerpt: ...lligible and fails to state facts sufficient to constitute any clearly identified cause of action. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.30, subds. (a), (e), (f); see also Cal. Rules of Court, rule 2.112.) If there is a reasonable possibility that the defect can be cured by amendment, it is an abuse of discretion not to grant leave to amend. (Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318.) The burden of proving such reasonable possibility is squarely on the plain...

Excerpt: ...reject late‐filed papers.”].) Defendant Costco Wholesale Membership, Inc.'s motion for attorneys' fees and costs is GRANTED IN PART. (Code Civ. Proc., § 473, subd. (b).) The Court finds the proffered hourly rates reasonable. (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.”]; Shepard decl., ¶¶ ...

Excerpt: ...rial, the Court finds that there is no contract upon which plaintiff may recover attorney's fees. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 1032, subd. (a)(4), 1033.5, subd. (a)(10); 1717; See Friends of Spring Street v. Nevada City (2019) 33 Cal.App.5th 1092, 1104 [in determining whether a party is a prevailing party who can recover costs, the trial court determines whether the party succeeded at a practical level by realizing its litigation objectives and whether...

Excerpt: ...to the conduct of the litigation. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1033.5. subds. (c)(2) – (3).) 2. The motion to strike and/or tax costs as to deposition costs ($26,891.90) is GRANTED IN PART. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1033.5. subd. (a)(3)(A).) The Court finds that plaintiff has failed to meet his burden that the late cancellation fee ($570.00), pertaining to the deposition of plaintiff's expert Paul Herbert, was reasonable and necessary to the conduct of the ...

Excerpt: ...ure on her discovery verification is invalid. (See, e.g., Cal. Rules of Court, rule 2.257; Hunt decl., ¶ 7, Exhibit C.) Further, defendant's response to request for production, no. 1, substantially complies with Code of Civil Procedure sections 2031.210(a) and 2031.220. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.310, subds. (a), (b)(1); Hunt decl., ¶ 7, Exhibit C.) Although plaintiff has shown good cause justifying the discovery sought by the demand, plaintiff ...

Excerpt: ...¶ 9.) Defendant failed to make all payments pursuant to the Court's December 29, 2021, order dismissing, without prejudice, the instant action and retaining jurisdiction pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure 664.6, which was based upon the stipulation for settlement and entry of judgment (“Stipulation”) between the parties filed on December 27, 2021. (Mahfouz II Decl., ¶¶ 5 – 7, 9, Exhibit A.) However, as the parties did not exp...

Excerpt: ... to the motion.”].) The Court does not reach plaintiff's objections to the declaration of Michael J. Perrotti, Ph.D. Also, the Court declines to rule on plaintiff's evidentiary objections to the video footage submitted by defendants Kenneth Paulson and Barbara Paulson (“defendants”). (Defendants' Compendium of Evidence [“COE”], Exhibit F.) Such evidence is not germane to the disposition of the instant motion. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, ...

Excerpt: ...intiff has satisfied the requirements for mandatory relief under section 473(b). (Martin Potts & Associates, Inc., supra, 244 Cal.App.4th at p. 443; Withee decl.) Specifically, plaintiff's motion was accompanied by an attorney's affidavit attesting to his mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or 2 of 2 neglect, which caused plaintiff's case to be dismissed. (Code Civ. Proc., § 473, subd. (b); see, e.g., Withee decl., ¶¶ 2, 13.) It is irrelevant whe...

Excerpt: ... party at trial. (See Friends of Spring Street v. Nevada City (2019) 33 Cal.App.5th 1092, 1104 [in determining whether a party is a prevailing party who can recover costs, the trial court determines whether the party succeeded at a practical level by realizing its litigation objectives and whether the action yielded the primary relief sought in the case]; Statement of Decision, p. 17 (“SOD”).) 1. The motion to tax deposition costs ($6,311.75)...

Excerpt: ...ek Media Group LLC v. AXQG Corp. (2020) 58 Cal.App.5th 817, 825 [“Any matter to be judicially noticed must be relevant to a material issue.”].) Plaintiff Sierra Northern Railway's objections to defendants' request for judicial notice are DENIED AS MOOT, given this Court's ruling on defendants' request for judicial notice. Defendants' demurrer to the complaint is OVERRULED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subds. (a), (e).) Defendants demur to pla...

Excerpt: ....) The Court shall grant a motion for a physical or mental examination under Section 2032.310 only for good cause shown. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2032.320, subd. (a).) Sun Growers has shown good cause for the proposed defense examination. Plaintiff has placed her mental state in controversy by claiming severe emotional distress. (Complaint, ¶ 33; see Vinson v. Superior Court (1987) 43 Cal.3d 833, 839.) With regard to the standard diagnostic testing ...

Excerpt: ...demurrer to the complaint as to the first cause of action (violation of Civil Code section 2923.6(c)) is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subd. (e).) Civil Code section 2923.6(c) prohibits a mortgage servicer or beneficiary from recording a notice of default or notice of sale, or conducting a trustee's sale “while the complete first lien loan modification application is pending.” However, plaintiff's complaint does ...

Excerpt: ...f has failed to show “a reasonable and good faith attempt at an informal resolution” of the discovery dispute prior to filing the instant motion. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2016.040, 2031.310, subd. (b)(2); Townsend v. Superior Court (1998) 61 Cal.App.4th 1431, 1438; Clement v. Alegre (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 1277, 1294; Obregon v. Superior Court (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 424, 431.) The Court finds that plaintiff's meet and confer efforts were insuffic...

Excerpt: ...as these documents are irrelevant to the Court's determination of the instant motion. (People v. Rowland (1992) 4 Cal.4th 238, 268, fn. 6.) The Court construes Bridge Partners' motion to sever complaint‐in‐intervention as a motion to bifurcate and GRANTS said motion. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1048, subd. (b); see Morehart v. County of Santa Barbara (1994) 7 Cal.4th 725, 738, fn. 3 [“Code of Civil Procedure section 1048 no longer authorizes sever...

Excerpt: ... include: filing, motion and jury fees (§ 1033.5, subd. (a)(1)) and service of process by a public officer, registered process server, or other means (§ 1033.5, subd. (a)(4)). If service is by a registered process server, the recoverable cost is the amount actually incurred in effecting service…unless those charges are successfully challenged by a party to the action. (§ 1033.5, subd. (a)(4)(B).) An award of costs shall be subject to the fol...

Excerpt: ...isclosure of information which is not relevant to the subject matter of the action and will not lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. (Coy v. Superior Court (1962) 58 Cal.2d 210, 220; Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. v. Superior Court for Los Angles Co. (1968) 263 Cal.App.2d 12, 19 [if interrogatories are so framed as to require the disclosure of relevant as well as irrelevant matter, the trial court in the exercise of its discretion ma...

Excerpt: ...il Procedure section 1008 is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1008, subd. (a).) The Court finds that plaintiff has failed to provide any “new or different facts, circumstances, or law” upon which relief can be granted. (Ibid.; See In re Marriage of Herr (2009) 174 Cal.App.4th 1463, 1468 [facts of which a party seeking reconsideration was aware of at the time of the original ruling are 2 of 2 not “new or different facts,” as would support a tr...

Excerpt: ...to the hearing, with an additional 2 court days required for electronic service].) The Court also finds that plaintiff has failed to show “a reasonable and good faith attempt at an informal resolution” of the discovery dispute prior to filing the instant motion. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2016.040, 2030.300, subd. (b)(1); Townsend v. Superior Court (1998) 61 Cal.App.4th 1431, 1438; Clement v. Allegre (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 1277, 1294; Obregon v. ...

Excerpt: ...pp.3d 596, 600.) Courts have held that because of insufficient notice served upon a tenant, an unlawful detainer complaint failed to state a cause of action. (Baugh v. Consumers Associates, Limited (1966) 241 Cal.App.2d 672, 675 [the defect was failure to state amount of rent owed].) Plaintiff sets forth that defendant Mohammad Iqbal filed for chapter 7 bankruptcy on April 8, 2021, effectuating an automatic stay against existing creditors. (Plain...

Excerpt: ...transactions or occurrences as the cause[s] of action which the plaintiff alleges in his complaint.” (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 426.10, subd. (c), 428.10, subd. (b); Heshejin v. Rostami (2020) 54 Cal.App.5th 984, 993‐994; Young decl., ¶ 1, Exhibit A.) However, El Macero has not shown that its causes of action against plaintiff were “in existence at the time of service of the answer.” (Heshejin, supra, 54 Cal.App.5th at p. 993; see also Crock...

Excerpt: ...gency as such is a statement of ultimate fact.” (Skopp v. Weaver (1976) 16 Cal.3d 432, 439.) Consequently further allegations explaining how this fact of agency originated become unnecessary. (Id.) Plaintiffs have set forth allegations of agency that are sufficient to withstand demurrer. (See complaint, ¶¶ 14, 17, 21, 22.) However, respondeat superior is a theory of vicarious liability, not an independent cause of action. (See Hilts v. Solano...

Excerpt: ...idge Partners”) request for judicial notice is DENIED. (Evid. Code, §§ 452, 453.) The proffered documents are irrelevant to the Court's determination of the instant motion. (People v. Rowland (1992) 4 Cal.4th 238, 268, fn. 6.) Proposed intervenors' motion for leave to intervene is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 387.) For both mandatory and permissive intervention, the party seeking to intervene must make a timely application to the court. (Code...

Excerpt: ...rate treatment. (Gov. Code, § 12940, subd. (a); Guz v. Bechtel Nat., Inc. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 317, 354; Del E. Webb Corp. v. Structural Materials Co. (1981) 123 Cal.App.3d 593, 604 [the sole issue raised by a general demurrer is whether the facts pleaded state a valid cause of action – not whether they are true; thus, no matter how unlikely or improbable, plaintiff's allegations must be accepted as true for the purpose of ruling on the demurrer]...

Excerpt: ... Proc., § 2025.410, subd. (c); Underwood decl., ¶¶ 21‐22, Exhibits 15‐16.) Bridge Partners' motion for protective order is GRANTED IN PART. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.420, subd. (b).) The Court finds that Bridge Partners has established good cause for a protective order, which allows parties and their counsel to appear via Zoom (or similar method). (Ibid.) However, the Court limits to the sought protective order to only non‐deponent indiv...

Excerpt: ... Code, §§ 452, 453.) The proffered documents are irrelevant to the Court's determination of the instant motion. (Rowland, supra, 4 Cal.4th at p. 268, fn. 6.) Plaintiffs' motion for summary adjudication as to the first cause of action (elder abuse) is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (p)(1).) Plaintiffs have failed to establish that defendants took Kaneezan Iqbal's property for wrongful use, with the intent to defraud, or by undue influe...

Excerpt: ...via P. Boehme should not be held in contempt, filed May 26, 2022. (Evid. Code, §§ 452, subd. (d), 455, subd. (a).) The Court shall afford each party reasonable opportunity before the cause is submitted for decision by the Court to present to the Court information relevant to (1) the propriety of taking judicial notice of the matter and (2) the tenor of the matter to be noticed. (Evid. Code, § 455, subd. (a).) Defendant Doris Wacker's request f...

Excerpt: ...ere reasonably necessary to the conduct of the litigation. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1033.5. subds. (c)(2) – (4).) 2. The motion to strike/tax costs as to court reporter fees ($15,051.59) is GRANTED IN PART. The Court finds that while the court reporter's appearance fee at court proceedings is a recoverable cost, the transcripts from those proceedings were not “ordered by the court.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1033.5, subds. (a)(9), (11); Gov. Code, �...

Excerpt: ...ion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, lack of standing by plaintiff as follows: The Court construes the issue of the name of/who is the proper plaintiff [standing], including Jack Duran's representation thereof, as a motion for reconsideration of plaintiff D‐Q University Board of Trustees' motion for preliminary injunction, which the Court DENIES. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1008, subd. (a); Sole Energy Co. v. Petrominerals Corp. (20...

Excerpt: ...e of action alleges that, notwithstanding the express warranties provided to him, defendant violated this provision. (Complaint, ¶¶ 7, 14, 19‐20.) However, defendant asserts that plaintiff's claim for breach of express warranty fails because the subject vehicle was not a “new motor vehicle” as required. (See Civ. Code, §§ 1793.2, subd. (d)(2), 17.22, subd. (e)(2); Complaint, ¶ 7 [“On May 30, 2013, Plaintiff purchased a used 2011 Hyun...

Excerpt: ...ermination of the instant motion. (People v. Rowland (1992) 4 Cal.4th 238, 268, fn. 6 [“Rowland”].) Defendants' request for judicial notice in support of reply is DENIED because this document is irrelevant to the Court's determination of the instant motion. (Rowland, supra, 4 Cal.4th at p. 268, fn. 6.) Defendants' motion to expunge lis pendens is GRANTED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 405.31.) Expungement of the lis pendens is mandated “if the plead...

Excerpt: ...), 2016.040; Townsend v. Superior Court (1998) 61 Cal.App.4th 1431, 1435; Obregon v. Superior Court (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 424, 431–433; Underwood decl., ¶¶ 5‐14, Exhibits 6‐ 8; Cohen decl., ¶¶ 4‐8.) Denial is without prejudice, however, to permit further informal meet and confer efforts aimed at resolving the matter. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2016.040; Obregon, supra, 67 Cal.App.4th at pp. 433–436.) Plaintiff's requests for sanctions are...

Excerpt: ...les of Court, rule 3.1354(b); See Reid v. Google, Inc. (2010) 50 Cal.4th 512, 531–532.) The Court declines to rule on defendant's evidentiary objections to the Declaration of Aish Khalil, objections 1 and 2, as the evidence objected to is not germane to the disposition of defendant's motion for summary judgment. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (q).) The Court OVERRULES defendant's objections to the Declaration and Second Declaration of Purnima...

Excerpt: ...de verifications to support his substantive responses to the subject discovery by no later than May 13, 2022. As defendant Hernandez provided timely, hybrid responses (containing objections and substantive responses) to the subject discovery, defendant has not waived his objections. (Food 4 Less Supermarkets, Inc. v. Superior Court (1995) 40 Cal.App.4th 651, 657‐ 658 [“Food 4 Less”].) Regarding plaintiff's request for further responses, pla...

Excerpt: ... 453.) Plaintiff's application for right to attach order as to Flower of Life is GRANTED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 484.010 et seq.) Plaintiff has satisfied the applicable requirements. (See Code Civ. Proc., §§ 483.010, 484.020, 484.090.) First, the claim upon which the attachment is based is one upon which an attachment may be issued. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 483.010, 484.090, subd. (a)(1).) Plaintiff's conversion cause of action against Flower of Li...

Excerpt: ...c., § 128, subd. (a)(5); People ex rel. Dept. of Corporations v. SpeeDee Oil Change Systems, Inc. (1999) 20 Cal.4th 1135, 1145–1146.) Defendant does not have standing to bring the present motion to disqualify. (Great Lakes Construction, Inc. v. Burman (2010) 186 Cal.App.4th 1347, 1356– 1357; cf. Blue Water Sunset, LLC v. Markowitz (2011) 192 Cal.App.4th 477, 485‐486 & 481.) While a non‐client party may bring a motion to disqualify “whe...

Excerpt: .... (b); Sibley decl., ¶ 14.) Further, plaintiff has provided sufficient justification for propounding 39 special interrogatories on defendant Sibley. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.040, subd. (b), 2030.030; see Usher v. White (2021) 64 Cal.App.5th 883, 896–897.) Defendants' motion for protective order regarding requests for admissions and form interrogatories is GRANTED IN PART. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.080.) With the exception of requests for ad...

Excerpt: ...AGUILAR 219 through AGUILAR 238. This Court SUSTAINS defendant David Drake's (“Drake”) objections to videos AGUILAR 219 through 223 and AGUILAR 225 as late evidence not authorized by this Court's order of February 4, 2022. This Court considers only videos AGUILAR 224 and AGUILAR 226 which had previously been submitted as attachments to the declarations of Yasmine Salmeron and Raymond Ruano, both filed with the Court January 21, 2022, in suppo...