Excerpt: ...r duplicative; (2) obtainable from some other source that is more convenient, less burdensome or less expensive; or, (3) unduly burdensome or expensive, taking into account the needs of the case, the amount in controversy, and the importance of the issues at stake in the litigation. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2019.030, subd. (a)(1), (2); Kelly v. New West Federal Savings (1996) 49 Cal.App.4th 659, 672; Murillo v. Superior Court (2006) 143 Cal.App.4th 7...

Excerpt: ...ing the instant motion. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2016.040, 2030.300, subd. (b)(1), 2031.310, subd. (b)(2), 2033.290, subd. (b)(1); Townsend v. Superior Court (1998) 61 Cal.App.4th 1431, 1435; Obregon v. Superior Court (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 424, 431–433; Holland decl., ¶¶ 5‐14, Exhibits 6‐10.) 2 of 2 Bridge Partners' request for sanctions is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.300, subd. (d), 2031.310, subd. (h), 2033.290, subd. (d).) Bridge...

Excerpt: ...v. Santa Fe Pacific Pipelines, Inc. (2014) 231 Cal.App.4th 134, 201‐202 [“The term ‘damages' refers to the monetary sum assessed by a court against a wrongdoer for the commission of a legal wrong of a private nature.”], emphasis in original; Watson Bowman Acme Corp. v. RGW Construction, Inc. (2016) 2 Cal.App.5th 279, 293 [“prejudgment interest is an element of damages, not a cost of litigation.”].) The notice of motion does not provid...

Excerpt: ...burden and expense.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.420, subd. (b); see also Poeschl v. Superior Court In and For Ventura County (1964) 229 Cal.App.2d 383, 385‐387 [“the existence of such advantages alone will ordinarily not constitute good cause for changing the normal timing of discovery or justify a conclusion that such timing will result in ‘annoyance, embarrassment or oppression.”]; see generally Radcliffe decl.) Further, defendant has ...

Excerpt: ...ision giving rise to the instant action is a disputed fact that the Court may not decide upon demurrer. (See Fremont Indemnity Co. v. Fremont General Corp. (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 97, 114 – 115.) The parties are DIRECTED TO APPEAR for the case management conference. Motion to Strike: Defendant's request for judicial notice is DENIED. (Evid. Code, §§ 452, subd. (c), 453; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1113, subd. (l); Post v. Prati (1979) 90 Cal.A...

Excerpt: ...he motion.”].) The Court does not reach plaintiff's objections to the declaration of Michael J. Perrotti, Ph.D. Defendants' 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 parent or guardian entitled to such custody constitutes an actionable tort.” (Surina v. Lucey (1985) ...

Excerpt: ...id. Code, §§ 452, 453.) The Court takes judicial notice of nos. 2‐7. (Evid. Code, § 452, subd. (d).) However, the Court declines to take judicial notice of no. 1 as the proffered document is irrelevant to the Court's determination of the instant motion. (People v. Rowland (1992) 4 Cal.4th 238, 268, fn. 6.) 2 of 3 Defendant and Flower of Life's objection to the declaration of Pete Stathis as to no. 10 is OVERRULED. The Court declines to rule ...

Excerpt: ... 2020; and (3) plaintiff Virgrow Organics, Inc.'s Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) filed with this Court October 27, 2020. (Evid. Code, §§ 452, subd. (d), 453.) The Court also takes judicial notice of RJN number (6) County of Yolo Ordinance No. 1502 filed August 6, 2018, representing Title 5, Chapter 20 of the Yolo County Code regarding marijuana cultivation in effect February 5, 2019. (RJN, Ex. C; Evid. Code, §§ 452, subd. (b), 453.) Def...

Excerpt: ...tinued noncompliance with the Court's prior orders to provide verified discovery responses to plaintiffs, and to pay monetary sanctions, warrants terminating sanctions. (Ibid.; Department of Fair Employment & Housing v. Ottovich (2014) 227 Cal.App.4th 706, 712 – 713; Schoech Decl., ¶¶ 4 – 12, 15 – 25, Ex. D.) Price's answer and cross‐complaint are hereby stricken and a judgment by default shall be entered against him. (Code Civ. Proc., ...

Excerpt: ... Doutherd's second through eighth causes of action (racial discrimination; fraud by employer UPS Freight (concealment and misrepresentation); employment discrimination by UPS Freight harassment and retaliation; additional specific acts of employment discrimination by UPSF, harassment and retaliation after filing 2017 complaint; employment discrimination, lack of accommodation by UPS Freight; medical discrimination and retaliation claims, employer...

Excerpt: ...9.) However, according to defendant's counsel, plaintiff Yuri Romanyuk (“Yuri”) failed to provide any response to the written discovery. (Mayer decl. ISO reply for Yuri written discovery, ¶ 4.) Further, plaintiff Svetlana Romanyuk (“Svetlana”) (1) only provided responses to defendant's form interrogatories and special interrogatories and (2) those responses were unverified. (Mayer decl. ISO reply for Svetlana written discovery, ¶ 4; Mel...

Excerpt: ..., Inc., Cache Creek Cultivators, Inc., and Cache Creek Cannabis, Inc., are bound by the arbitration provisions contained within the Shareholder Agreements. (SAC, Exhibits A, C.) The Court also finds that defendants Mohammed Adi and MJ Greenfield are estopped from denying they were aware of and benefitted from the Shareholder Agreements containing the arbitration provisions; thus, are also bound by said provisions. (Civ. Code, § 1589; Crowley Mar...

Excerpt: ...DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.480.) The Court finds that the instant motion to compel with regard to the subpoena for plaintiff's health/psych records served upon Advanced Psychiatric Associates is untimely as it was filed/served more than 60‐days after provision of Advanced Psychiatric Associates' response to said subpoena. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.480, subd. (b); see Board of Registered Nursing v. Superior Court of Orange County (2021) 5...

Excerpt: ... Proc., § 1085.) The Court finds that respondent has met its burden of proof under the catch‐all exception to the Public Records Act. (Govt. Code, § 6255, subd. (a); Times Mirror Co. v. Superior Court (1991) 53 Cal.3d 1325, 1388 ‐ 1389.) The Court finds that respondent has shown that the public interest served by not disclosing the videos clearly outweighs the public interest served by disclosure of the videos as follows: (1) Disclosure of ...

Excerpt: ...he controversy raised by the complaint in the instant action was governed by an arbitration agreement. (Radcliffe Decl., ¶ 5; Second Am. Compl., Exs. A, C.) The Court further finds that defendants' discovery requests, requests for site inspections, and deposition notices were premature and placed an undue burden upon plaintiffs; thus, should have been withdrawn, or at the very least postponed, pending the outcome of a motion to compel arbitratio...

Excerpt: ...n to amend is timely made and the granting of the motion will not prejudice the opposing party, it is error to refuse permission to amend and where the refusal also results in a party being deprived of the right to assert a meritorious cause of action or a meritorious defense, it is not only error but an abuse of discretion.” (Morgan v. Superior Court of Cal. In and For Los Angeles County (1959) 172 Cal.App.2d 527, 530.) While defendant City of...

Excerpt: ...to engage in the discovery process, warrants terminating sanctions. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.030, subd. (d)(3); Doppes v. Bentley Motors, Inc. (2009) 174 Cal.App.4th 967, 993 [terminating sanctions 3 of 3 are appropriate after repeated failures to provide discovery responses after being ordered to do so]; Wilcoxson Decl., ¶¶ 4 – 9.) The Court orders that this action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The Court notes defendants' counsel's statement...

Excerpt: ...AINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subds. (e), (f); Aubry v. Tri‐City Hospital Dist. (1992) 2 2 of 3 Cal.4th 962, 967.) The Court finds that the FAC fails to allege, verbatim, the essential terms of the written contract at issue. (See Rodenberry v. Rodenberry (1996) 44 Cal.App.4th 634, 654; Bowden v. Robinson (1977) 67 Cal.App.3d 705, 718; FAC, ¶¶ 4 – 6, 15 – 17.) The Court further finds that exhibit 1 to the FAC (the...

Excerpt: ...finds that on December 1, 2021, Anderson served a verification to its “further, further” responses to said interrogatories, which were originally served (unverified) on November 1, 2021. (Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 409; Brazier Decl., ¶ 16, Ex, 16; Garratt Decl., ¶ 6, Ex. B.) Sundt's motion to compel “further, further” responses to special interrogatories, set three,...

Excerpt: ...nder uninsured motorist arbitrations”].) The Court finds that applicant has not placed his mental health at issue by filing the present claim with respondent Farmers Insurance Exchange, and respondent acknowledges that it does not seek psychological or psychiatric records. (See Davis v. Superior Court (1992) 7 Cal.App.4th 1008, 1017.) Therefore, the Court limits the subject subpoenas to exclude any medical records related to applicant's mental ...

Excerpt: ... constitute a defense to the complaint. (Ibid; Compl., ¶¶ CC‐1, CC‐2.) Based upon defendant Martha Q. Baeza's admission in her answer, the Court also finds that the defect cannot be cured by amendment, and defendant has not met her burden of showing otherwise. (Pang v. Beverly Hosp., Inc. (2000) 79 Cal.App.4th 986, 989–990; Cooper v. Leslie Salt Co. (1969) 70 Cal.2d 627, 636; see Blank, supra, 39 Cal.3d at p. 318; Answer, ¶ 3(b).) The no...

Excerpt: ...ss he can demonstrate harm above and beyond a broken contractual promise.” (Robinson Helicopter Co., Inc. v. Dana Corp. (2004) 34 Cal.4th 979, 988.) “Conduct amounting to a breach of contract becomes tortious only when it also violates an independent duty arising from principles of tort law.” (Applied Equipment Corp. v. Litton Saudi Arabia Ltd. (1994) 7 Cal.4th 503, 515.) A “[p]laintiff cannot recover economic damages resulting from negli...

Excerpt: ... Assn. v. Hazelbaker (2016) 2 Cal.App.5th 252, 262 [a trial court has broad discretion to accept or reject late‐filed papers].) Respondent the Regents of the University of California's request for judicial notice is GRANTED. (Evid. Code, §§ 452, subds. (c), (d), 453.) Petitioner's motion for writ of mandate directed to respondent is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1085.) The Court finds that respondent has met its burden of proof under the catch...

Excerpt: ... that a licensed contractor was required to perform the “site work” identified in the contract at issue between plaintiff and defendant Valley Star Partners, LLC. (Bus. & Prof. Code, §§ 7000, 7026, 7028, 7031; FAC, Ex. A, and exhibit C attached thereto.) The Court also finds that based upon the allegations of the FAC, and the exhibits attached thereto, plaintiff sufficiently alleges that at least some of the “site work” for which plaint...

Excerpt: ...claimed damages. (Evid. Code, §§ 912, 980; Seahaus La Jolla Owners Assn. v. Superior Court (2014) 224 Cal.App.4th 754, 767; citing Lipton v. Superior Court (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 1599, 1611–1612 [the scope of discovery extends to any information that reasonably might lead to other evidence that would be admissible at trial].) As to plaintiff's motion quashing the use of documents in this litigation with Bates numbering WM 001419 through WM 001...