Excerpt: ...egarding failure to exh aust administrative remedies may be considered on demurrer].) Defendants' request for judicial notice [filed on February 26, 2024]. as to document 5 (Exhibit E), is DENIED. (Evid. Code, §§ 452, 453.) The proffered document is not relevant to the Court's d etermination of the demurrer or motion to strike. (People v. Rowland (1992) 4 Cal.4th 238, 268, fn. 6; see Malek Media Group LLC v. AXQG Corp. (2020) 58 Cal.App.5th 81...

Excerpt: ...§ 452, 453.) The proffered documents are not relevant to the Court's determination of this motion. (Rowland, supra, 4 Cal.4th at p. 268, fn. 6; see Malek, supra, 58 Cal.App.5th at p. 825; Lockyer, supra, 24 Cal.4th at p. 422.) The Court rules upon cross -defendants Ronal d and Linda Chuang's (“the Chuangs”) request for judicial notice as follows: • The Court GRANTS the Chaungs' request as to document 1. (Code. Civ. Proc., § 425.16, subd. ...

Excerpt: ......

Excerpt: ... of Jonathan Ruff, Richard Throp, and Ellisha Thorp agree that a protective order is proper to safeguard defendants' confidential information. (Plaintiffs' conditional nonopposition, p. 2.) However, plaintiffs request revisions to defendants' propos ed protective order. (See Kronenberg decl., ¶ 7, Exhibit 5.) The Court orders the following revisions to defendants' proposed protective order: 1. Addition of a sharing provision that mimics the sha...

Excerpt: ...., § 877.6.) The Court finds that Thermacor Process, Inc. (“Thermacor”) has failed to demonstrate that this settlement is so far “out of the ballpark” in relation to the Tech - Bilt factors “as to be inconsistent with the equitable objectives of the statute.” (Tech -Bilt, Inc. v. Woodward -Clyde & Associates (1985) 38 Cal.3d 488, 499- 500 [“Tech-Bilt”]; C ode Civ. Proc., § 877.6, subd. (d) [“The party asserting the lack of go...

Excerpt: ...Lauryn Stockert, is an indispensable party to this case, and why DWS is precluded from joining her in this case as a defendant. (Donabedian v. Mercury Ins. Co. (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 968, 994 [stating that a demurrer's limited purpose is “to test the legal sufficiency of a complaint”].) Defendant further fails to establish that this cause of action, as presently plead, fails as a matter of law. (Ibid.; Complaint ¶¶ 8, 13 -16.) Defendant's d...

Excerpt: ...es t for judicial notice as to all other documents is DENIED. (Evid. Code, §§ 452, 453.) The proffered documents are not relevant to the Court's determination of this motion. (People v. Rowland (1992) 4 Cal.4th 238, 268, fn. 6; see Malek Media Group LLC v. AXQG Corp. (2020) 58 Cal.App.5th 817, 825; People ex rel. Lockyer v. Shamrock Foods Co. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 415, 422 [a precondition to the taking of judicial notice in either its mandatory or ...

Excerpt: ... 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).) Cross -defendant's first amended request for j udicial notice is GRANTED IN PART. (Evid. Code, §§ 452, 453.) The Court takes judicial notice of Exhibits 1 -5 and 7 -8. (Evid. Code, § 452, subd. (d).) However, the Court declines to take j...

Excerpt: ...the docume nts. (Evid. Code, §§ 452, 453.) The proffered documents are not relevant to the Court's determination of this motion. (People v. Rowland (1992) 4 Cal.4th 238, 268, fn. 6 [Rowland]; see Malek Media Group LLC v. AXQG Corp. (2020) 58 Cal.App.5th 817, 825 [M alek]; People ex rel. Lockyer v. Shamrock Foods Co. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 415, 422 [Lockyer] [a precondition to the taking of judicial notice in either its mandatory or permissive form m...

Excerpt: ...(a), 395, subd. (a), 396b, subd. (a).) “Where an action is brought against both corporate and individual defendants, venue is proper for the action as a whole if it is correct as to any defendant.” (Buran Equip. Co. v. Superior Court (1987) 190 Ca l.App.3d 1662, 1666 [emphasis added].) “[T]ort claims against a corporation [may] . . . be tried in any county in which the ‘liability arises' as well as in the county where the corporation's pr...

Excerpt: ... (1992 ) 2 Cal.4th 962, 967.) The Court finds that the FAC fails to state facts sufficient to constitute this cause of action because plaintiff failed to file the requisite affidavit. (Civ. Code, § 1780, subd. (d).) The demurrer to the sixth cause of action (ne gligence) 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 as the basis for the sixth c...

Excerpt: ...that plaintiffs have failed to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action for all plaintiffs. (Lab. Code, § 226, subds. (f), (h); Johnson v. Clark (1936) 7 Cal.2d 529, 536 [a complaint is invulnerable to general demurrer if on any theory it states a cause of action]; see Del E. Webb Corp. v. Structural Materials Co. (1981) 123 Cal.App.3d 593, 604.) • Defendant's demurrer to the second cause of action for a violation of Labor Code s...

Excerpt: ...; see Malek Media Group LLC v. AXQG Corp. (2020) 58 Cal.App.5th 817, 825 [Malek]; People ex rel. Lockyer v. Shamrock Foods Co. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 415, 422 [Lockyer] [a precondition to the taking o judicial notice in either its mandatory or permissive orm must be relevant to a material issue].) Deendant South Tahoe Public Utility District's request or judicial notice is DENIED. (Evid. Code, §§ 452, 453.) The pro
¯ered documents are not relev...

Excerpt: ...., Zinn decl. [Þled January 12, 2024], ¶¶ 30-48; Tsivyan decl. [Þled January 26, 2024], ¶¶ 2-4.) If no hearing is requested, this tentative ruling is e
¯ective immediately. No formal order pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1312 or further notice is required. Defendant's motions to compel further responses to discovery Plainti
¯'s request for judicial notice in opposition to defendant's motions to compel further discovery respo...

Excerpt: ...to compel defendant City of Davis (“defendant”) to further respond to request for production of documents, set one, is GRANTED IN PART. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.310.) As to RFP nos. 1-8, and 14, the Court Þnds that defendant must produce the requested documents in its possession, custody, or control from 2009 to present. (See Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2031.210, subd. (a)(1), 2031.220.) As to RFP nos. 4-8, and 12, defendant has not provided a ve...

Excerpt: ...ods Co. (2000) 24 Cal.4th 415, 422 [a precondition to the taking of judicial notice in either its mandatory or permissive form must be relevant to a material issue].) The Court declines to rule on defendant's evidentiary objections to plainti
¯'s evidence as the evidence objected to is not germane to the disposition of defendant's motion for summary judgment. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (q).) Defendant's motion for summary judgment is GRANT...

Excerpt: ... LLC's urther response to demand or production numbers 1 & 2 is GRANTED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.310.) Deendant agreed to supplement its responses to requests 1 & 2, but plainti
¯ has not yet received them. (Smith decl., ¶ 13, Ex. 10, 12/11/23 e-mail exchange.) Deendant is DIRECTED to serve supplemental responses by February 7, 2024. • Plainti
¯'s motion to compel deendant's urther responses to demand or production numbers 3, 5, & 1...

Excerpt: ... document is genuine and accurate. [Citation]" ; Compl., 26.) Defendants' demurrer to plaintiffs' complaint as to defendant Cheryl walker, individually, is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. (Code Civ. Proc„ S 430.10, subd. (e); cal. Rules of court, rule 3.1320(g); see Buss v. J. O. Martin co. (1966) 241 cal. App. 2d 123, 133; Aubry v. Tri-City Hospital Dist. (1992) 2 Cal.4th 962, 967.) The Court finds that, based on the ShortForm Settlement Agreem...

Excerpt: ...ion. (Code Civ. Proc., 916, subd. (a); see Varian Medical Systems, Inc. v. Delfino (2005) 35 Cal.4th 180, 189— 190, 196 199.) The case management conference set for this date is hereby VACATED. If no hearing is requested, this tentative ruling is effective immediately. No formal order pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1312 or further notice is required. Moton to stay: Defendant request for judicial notice as to Item K is GRANTED. (E...

Excerpt: ... see Leek v. Cooper (2011) 194 Cal.App.4th 399, 417; Compl., 5, 9, 10, 13.) Defendants' motion asto the second cause of action for recovery under quantum meruit is DENIED. (Code Civ, Proc., S 438.) The Court finds that defendants have failed to provide any argument or legal authority that this cause of action is inconsistent with an oral [versus written] contract. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.113(a); see Quantum Cooking Concepts, Inc. v. LV Assoc...

Excerpt: ... 187, 193 [the nature of a motion is determined by the nature of the relief sought, not by the label attached to it].) All papers opposing a motion must be filed with the court and a copy served on each party at least 9 court days before the hearing, unless the court or judge has prescribed a shorter time. (Code Civ. Proc., S 1005, subd. (bj.) Plaintiffs' opposition was filed on November 14, 2023. Nine court days before the hearing date (November...

Excerpt: ...paration; thus, the Court taxes the claimed costs in the amount of $180.00. (Code Civ. Proc., S 1033.5, subds. (a)(l), (c)(2); Melnyk v. Robledo (1976) 54 Cal.App.3d 618, 624.) • Item 4— deposition costs ($26,141.39): The Court finds defendant has claimed fees that are unsupported by the documentation provided, or relates to fees for expert witness that are expressly not allowed; thus, the Court taxes the claimed costs in the amount of $15,77...

Excerpt: ...ition. (Cal. Rule of Court, rule 3.1300(d); see Juarez v. Wash Depot Holdings, Inc. (2018) 24 Cal.App.5th 1197, 1202; see also Rancho Mirage Country Club Homeowners Assn. v. Hazelbaker (2016) 2 Cal.App.5th 252, 262 [stating that "a trial court has broad discretion to accept or reject late-filed papers."].) The Court rules upon Yolo County's demurrer and motion to strike plaintiffs' second amended complaint ("SAC") as follows: Yolo County's demurr...

Excerpt: ...; see Leek v. Cooper (2011) 194 Cal.App.4th 399, 417; Compl., 5, 9, 10, 13.) Defendants' motion asto the second cause of action for recovery under quantum meruit is DENIED. (Code Civ, Proc., S 438.) The Court finds that defendants have failed to provide any argument or legal authority that this cause of action is inconsistent with an oral [versus written] contract. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.113(a); see Quantum Cooking Concepts, Inc. v. LV Asso...

Excerpt: ... Cal.App.4th 187, 193 [the nature of a motion is determined by the nature of the relief sought, not by the label attached to itl.) All papers opposing a motion must be filed with the court and a copy served on each party at least 9 court days before the hearing, unless the court or judge has prescribed a shorter time. (Code Civ. Proc., S 1005, subd. (b).) Plaintiffs' opposition was filed on November 14, 2023. Nine court days before the hearing da...

Excerpt: ...n plaintiff's response to the FROG and RPD. Defendant failed to provide any factual arguments or legal authority within its memorandum of points and authorities in support of this aspect of the motion, as required. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1113(b); Code Civ. Proc„ 52031.310, subd. he Court DENIES the motion as to the objections contained within plaintiff's supplemental responses to defendant's discovery requests, which were provided in resp...

Excerpt: ...earms dealer within California. (Opposition, pp. 2 & 8.) Further, this Court finds that, as owner of the "Group 2" firearms, Lorenzo can direct the disposition of these weapons to a licensed firearms dealer for subsequent sale. (See Henderson v. United States (2015) 575 U.S. 622, 530-631; see also Penal Code, SS 30800, subds. & (c) ["possession of any assault weapon... in violation of this chapter is a public nuisance"], emphasis added, 30605, 30...

Excerpt: ...e Civ. Proc., S 425.16, subd. (c)(l).) On September 27, 2021, this Court granted cross- defendants' special moton to strike. (Code Civ. Proc„ S 425.16.) On November 3, 2021, the Court awarded cross-defendants, as the prevailing defendants, $30,555.00 in attorney's fees and $466.85 in costs. (Code Civ. Proc„ S 425.15, subd. (c)(l).) Cross-complainants appealed both orders. On July 28, 2023, this Court received the remittitur from the Third Dis...

Excerpt: ...s ("Zipcar") objections to evidence nos. 1-3 are OVERRULED. The Court declines to rule on Zipcar's remaining objections as the evidence objected to is not relevant to deciding this moton. Civ. Proc., S 437c, subd. (q).) The Court declines to rule on plaintiff's objection to Officer Diaz's video and transcript as the evidence objected to is not relevant to deciding this motion. (Code Civ. Proc., S 437c, subd. (q).) Plaintiff's motion for summary a...

Excerpt: ...strikes the following language from the complaint as to City, only: • „ improperly controlled/enforced speed limits in the above-described roadway, thereby created a hazard and increasing the potential for catastrophic injury and death. (Compl., 38e.) • had other defects or conditions that contributed to the SUBJECT INCIDENT. (Compl., 38g.) The notice of motion provides notice of this Court's tentative ruling system; however, the notice cit...

Excerpt: ...h 1403, 1420." Further, "the court's discretion to deny a motion under the statute is limited to circumstances where it is clear that the mistake, inadvertence, or neglect was inexcusable, or where it is clear that the withdrawal or amendment would substantially prejudice the party who obtained the admission in maintaining that party's action or defense on the merits. (ld. at pp. 1420—1421.) The Court finds that defendant's admissions were the ...

Excerpt: ...15, 422 [a precondition to the taking of judicial notice in either its mandatory or permissive form must be relevant to a material issue].) The Court SUSTAINS IN PART defendants Regents of the university of California ("Regents") Tracy Grissom ("Grissom") and Mary Elizabeth Floyd's ("Floyd") (collectively "defendants") objections to evidence offered by plaintiff, number 1, on the basis that the third sentence in paragraph 12 of William M. Bowen's...

Excerpt: ...eprived 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.) First, the Court finds that plaintiff did not unreasonably delay in seeking to amend the complaint. (Cf. Fisher v. Larsen (1982) 138 Cal.App.3d 627, 649; Tsivyan decl., "1 4-7.) Second, the Court acknowledges that "t...

Excerpt: ...tion of the motion. The Court rules upon defendants' objection to the declaration of Jenaya Calderilla, D.O., as follows: • The Court declines to rule on defendants' objections numbers 5 through 7 12 — 15]. The Court finds that the evidence objected to is not relevant to the disposition of this moton. • The Court OVERRULES defendants' objections numbers 1 through 4, 8 and 9 1, 4— 11, 16, 17]. (Evid. Code, S 801.) • The Court SUSTAINS de...

Excerpt: ...; PLCM Group v. Drexler (20W) 22 cal.4th 1084, 1095; Christian Research Institute v. Alnor (2008) 155 cal.App.4th 1315, 1320 1322; City of Colton v. Singletary (2012) 206 Cal.App.4th 751, 784; see Quantum Ctnking Concepts, Inc. v. LV Associates, Inc. (2011) 197 Cal.App.4th 927, 934; citing Chavez v. Netflix, Inc. (2008) 162 Cal.App.4th 43, 52; Lipow Decl., 3, 4, 8, Exhibit 1; Lipow Decl. ISO reply, "1 2 — 5.) However, the Court finds that plain...

Excerpt: ...rt, rule 3.1113(b); see Quantum Ctnking Concepts, Inc. v. LV Inc. (2011) 197 Cal.App.4th 927, 934; citing Chavez v. Netflix, Inc. (2008) 162 Cal.App.4th 43, 52 [where motion is supported by a deficient memorandum, the trial court is justified in denying the moton on grounds].) The Court also notes that this motion was not timely filed based upon the original hearing date of this motion. (Code Civ. Proc., S 1005, subd. (b) [all moving papers must ...

Excerpt: ...three-phased trial as described in petitioner's moving papers will be conducive to expedition, economy and the ends of justice, the convenience of the witnesses, and the overall efficiency of the handling of this litigation will be promoted. The notice of motion does not provide notice of this Court's tentative ruling system as required by Local Rule 11.2(b). Counsel for moving party, or the moving party if unrepresented by counsel, is ordered to...

Excerpt: ...on the same cause of action." (Code Civ. Proc., S 430.10, subd. (c).) However, there are different primary rights asserted in Ruff I (Case No. 0.1-2021-1246) and Ruff II (Case No. 01-2022-1762). (Quiroz v. seventh Ave. center (2006) 140 cal.App.4th 1256, 1278-1279; Bush v. superior court (1992) 10 cal.App.4th 1374, 1384.) While Ruff I asserts injuries to decedent's heirs, Ruff II pleads injuries to decedent. (See Quiroz, supra, 140 Cal.App.4th at...

Excerpt: ... Cal.App.5th 1076, 1089 ["New evidence is generally not permitted with reply papers." l.) Defendant's special motion to strike is GRANTED IN PART. (Code Civ. Proc„ S 425.16.) "Litigation of an ant-SLAPP motion involves a two-step process. First, the moving defendant bears the burden of establishing that the challenged allegations or claims arise from protected activity in which the defendant has engaged." (Bonni v. St. Joseph Health System (202...

Excerpt: ...shifts to the responding party to justify the objection. (Kirkland v. Superior Court (2002) 95 Cal.App.4th 92, 98.) The Court finds that plaintiff John Eldon Studarus has failed to meet his burden of justifying the objections to the discovery sought. (Ibid.) Plaintiff is directed to file further responses to defendant's requests for inspection (set one) nos. 1-15, with responsive documents, by October 13, 2023. Defendant's request for sanctions i...

Excerpt: ..., 349; Schifando v. City of Los Angeles (2003) 31 Cal.4th 1074, 1081 ["plaintiff has the burden of proving that an amendment would cure the defect"]; Cooper v. Leslie Salt Co. (1969) 70 Cal.2d 627, 636 ["It]he burden of proving such reasonable possibility is squarely on the plaintff"]; see Sarkisian Decl., 2—11, Exhibits A, G, H.) The Court finds that plaintiff has failed to allege facts sufficient to constitute this cause of action. (Gov. Code...

Excerpt: ...d not consider the evidence to in making its ruling. Defendants Schilling Robotics, LLC ("Schilling") and FMC Technologies, Inc.'s ("FMC") objections to plaintiffs' evidence as to the declaration of Roy K. Suh nos. 17- 21 are SUSTAINED. The Court declines to rule on the other objections because the Court did not consider the evidence objected to in making its ruling. This Court does not consider the evidence submitted with plaintiffs Veronica Gar...

Excerpt: ...vacates its order denying the petition for writ of administrative mandamus and enters a new judgment granting the petition and (2) remands the matter back to the University for further proceedings consistent with the opinion by the Third District Court of Appeal. (See remittitur to trial court clerk, filed December 28, 2022; Hampton v. Superior Court in and for Los Angeles County (1952) 38 Cal.2d 552, 655—656 ["The trial court is empowered to a...

Excerpt: ... reasonable and necessary to the conduct of the litigation. (Code Civ. Proc., S 1033.5, subds. (c)(2) & (3); Nelson v. Anderson (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 111, 131.) The costs were incurred to collect, review and documents in response to petitioners' Public Records Request — so that petitioners could prepare the administrative record. (See Coalition for Adequate Review v. City and County of San Francisco (2014) 229 Cal.App.4th 1043, 1055 [a petition...

Excerpt: ...of action for products liability - design defect — is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND. (Code Civ. Proc., S 430.10, subd. (d); Aubry v. Tri-City Hospital Dist. (1992) 2 Cal.4th 952, 967.) The Court finds that plaintiffs have failed to allege the requisite elements of this claim; thus, the FACfails to allege facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against Braun for products liability — design defect. (Code Civ. Proc., S 430.10, subd. (d)...

Excerpt: ...rt case number 34-2020- • on July 14, 2020, in case No. CV-2020-948, Nazia and Malik filed a complaint for financial elder abuse, civil suit for fraud, and forgery against defendants Shazia, Mohsan, Sadia Naseem ("Sadia"), and Ahsan (collectively "defendants"). This complaint was also filed on behalf of Zafar Iqbal. • On January 8, 2021, the Sacramento Superior Court transferred the 00280149 case to this Court. Upon receipt, this Court labele...

Excerpt: ...quests for production of documents, set one, is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., SS 2030.290, 2031.300, 2033.280.) "A separate statement is not required...[w]hen no response has been provided to the request for discovery..." (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1345(b).) But, here, plaintiff did provide responses to the discovery and therefore, defendant must file a moton to compel further discovery with a separate statement. (See cal. Rules of court, rule 3.13...

Excerpt: ....4th 415, 422.) Defendant Covenant Care Courtyard's motion to strike is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., SS 435- 437.) Standing requirements will vary from statute to statute based upon the intent of the Legislature and the purpose for which the particular statute was enacted. (Blumhorst v. Jewish Family Services of Los Angeles (2005) 126 Cal.App.4th 993, 1000.) We turn to section 1430, subdivision (b). (Nevarrez v. San Marino Skilled Nursing & Wellness...

Excerpt: ...Ie Civ. Prcyc., S 2030.300; see Sole Energy Co. v. Petrominerals Corp. (2W5) 128 Cal.App.4th 187, 193 [the trial court may construe a pleading labeled as one type of motion to be a different type of motion].) The Court finds that this motion was not timely filed. (Code Civ. Pru., SS 1013, subd. (a) [service is complete at the time of the but any period of notice and any right or duty to do any act or make any response within any or on a date cert...

Excerpt: ...l., 4 — 11, Exhibits A— F.) Zero Net Energy Alliance, Inc. shall prov-de a verified response to plaintiffs discovery request, without objections, by July 1, 2023. 2 of 3 Plaintiff's request for sanctons is GRANTED IN PART in the amount of $720M. (Code Civ. Proc., SS 2023.030, subd. (a), 2031.3[n, subd. (c); Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1348; Pleau-Fuller Decl., '1 11.) The Court declines to award sanctions for time not yet incurred. If no hear...

Excerpt: ...Dist. (1992) 2 Cal.4th 962, 967; Jones v. Awad (2019) 39 Cal.App.5th 1200, 1207 [the elements of a cause of action for premises liability are the same as those for negligencel.) The Court finds that plaintiffs' complaint fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action for premises liability. (Donnell v. California Western School of Law (1988) 200 Cal.App.3d 715, 725 — 726; See Rakestraw v. California Physicians' Serv. (2000) 81 ...

Excerpt: ...eged facts to state this cause of action. (Davis v. (1943) 61 Cal.App.2d 788, 794; citing Burkett v. Griffith (1891) 90 Cal. 532, 541; Am. Compl„ 11 — 13, 49— 53; Exhibits. E— G.) The motion as to plaintiff's sixth cause of action for intentional interference with contractual relationship is GRANTED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND. (Code Civ. Proc., S 438, subd. see Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 cal.3d 311, 318.) The court finds that defendant Scott T...

Excerpt: ...or committing fraud and forgery in court waiver fee by lying under penalty or [sic.] perjury under oath in court as follows: Defendant/respondent's motion to deem plaintiffs/pebtoners to be vexatious litigants is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., S 391.) The Court finds that defendant/respondent has failed to establish the requisite elements for this Court to deem plaintiff/petitoners to be vexatious litigants. (Ibid.; Morton v. Wagner (2007) 156 cal.App...

Excerpt: ...N PART. (9 U.S.C. S 1, et seq.; Code Civ. Proc., S 1281.2.) The Court finds that plaintiff Martinez Narez's individual PAGA claims are subject to the executed arbitration agreement(s) within plaintiff's employment file. (Stenson Decl., '1 8, Exhibits 1 — 6; Op., p. 2, II. 3—4.) However, the Court finds that the California Supreme Court, in the case of Adolph v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (Case No. S274671), is presently reviewing the issue of wh...

Excerpt: ...is Court exercises its discretion to allow the costs of travel to the hearing on December 15, 2022. (Code Civ. Proc., S 1033.5, subd. (c)(4).) A prevailing party is entitled "as a matter of right" to recover costs in any acton or proceeding unless a statute expressly provides otherwise. (Segal v. ASICS America Corp. (2022) 12 Cal.5th 651, 658, quotation marks in original; Code Civ. Proc., S 1032, subd. (b).) Section 1033.5 sets forth the types of...

Excerpt: ...nfer process was insufficient shall not be grounds to overrule or sustain a demurrer." l.) Respondent's demurrer to the second, sixth and seventh causes of action on the ground that Randall Wilson is an indispensable party is OVERRULED. (Code Civ. Proc., SS 389, 430.10, subd. (d).) The Court finds that while petitioner Bradford G. Crandall. Sr.'s petition does contain allegations that Mr. Wilson may be a joint tortfeasor, respondent has failed to...

Excerpt: ...App.4th 742, 749, citing McAllister v. County of Monterey (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 253, 280.) The Court rules upon defendant Larry French's demurrer to [and motion to strike] plaintiff's complaint as follows: Defendant's demurrer to plaintiff's complaint based upon the statute of limitations set forth in Code of Civil Procedure section 366.2(a) and lack of standing as a result thereof is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., S 430.10, subd. The Court finds tha...

Excerpt: ...on Inc. dba KDC Construction and defendant McCandless & Associates Inc. have each filed a joinder in defendants Valley Star Partners, LLC, Mitch Engstrom, and Mark Engstrom's motion to require vexatious litigant plaintiff to furnish security. Plaintiff Howard Herships acknowledges in his opposition that Cirks and McCandless have joined in the moton. (See plaintiff's opposition, p. 2.) Plaintiff does not dispute that Cirks and McCandless can join ...

Excerpt: ...ber 19 is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., S 2031.310.) The Court finds that the terms "employment practices", "policies", "procedures" and "discussed" are vague ambiguous and overbroad and does not specifically describe each individual item sought or by reasonably particularizing each category of item sought. (Code Civ. Proc., S 2031.030, subd. (c)(2); Calcor Space Facility, Inc. v. Superior Court (1997) 53 Cal.App.4th 216, 222; see Dauis Decl. [filed ...

Excerpt: ...." l.) Petitioners challenge respondents County of Yolo and Yolo County Board of Supervisors' (collectively, "the County") January 11, 2022 certification of the Environment Impact Report ("EIR") for the Teichert Shiner Mining and Reclamation Project ("Project") and approval of the Project. Petitioners assert that the EIR relied upon for approval of the Project fails to satisfy the requirements of California Environmental Quality Act ("CECA"). (Pu...

Excerpt: ...vil Procedure secton 664.6. (Settlement agreement, '1 17.) Plaintiff and defendants have both invited this Court to enter final judgment in this matter. (Plaintiff's motion, p.6; defendants' opposition, p. 5.) The paramount rule governing the interpretation of contracts is to give effect to the mutual intention of the parties as it existed at the time of contracting, so far as it is ascertainable and lawful [citation]. (City of Chino v. Jackson (...

Excerpt: ...rer is SUSTAINED IN PART, as noted. (Code Civ. Proc., S 430.10.) 1. Defendants' joint demurrer on the ground that plaintiff lacks capacity to sue is OVERRULED AS MOOT. (Code Civ. Proc„ S 430.10, subd. (b), 377.32; Ruff decl., 1-6, Ex. A.) 2. Defendants' joint demurrer on the ground that Ruff II is a duplicative action is SUSTAINED IN PART WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND, as noted. (Code CIV. Proc., S 430.10, subd. Defendants' joint demurrer to plaintiff...

Excerpt: ...lic Health ("CDPH") is GRANTED. (Code Civ. Proc., S 1987.1.) The Court finds that CDPH has no authority to disclose any of the requested documents to plaintiffs, and that plaintiffs must request the documents in the possession of CDPH through the Freedom of Information Act. (45 C.F.R. S 2.1, et seq., 45 C.F.R. S 5.1, et seq.; see In re Complex Blood Bank Litigation (1991) 812 F.Supp. 160, 151 [documents may only be produced in private litigation ...

Excerpt: ...' demurrer on the ground that cross-complainant Sherwood Harbor Marina, LLC lacks capacity to sue is OVERRULED. A special demurrer to cross-complaint may be filed on the ground that the person who filed the pleading does not have the legal capacity to sue. (Code Civ. Proc„ S 430.10, subd. (b).) But capacity to sue is not a required element of any of the cross-complainant's causes of action and thus, the purported lack of capacity to sue is not ...

Excerpt: ...g defendant's enforcement of the express arbitration provision found in the Retail Installment Sale Contract – Simple Finance Charge (“Sales Contract”) between plaintiff and Hanlees Chrysler Dodge Jeep Ram Kia (“Hanlees”). (Felisilda, supra, 53 Cal.App.5th 486, 495 – 499; Azemoon Decl., Exhibit A.) The Court finds that based upon the plain language of the Sales Contract, plaintiff expressly agreed to arbitrate her claims against a non...

Excerpt: ...agement conference. City of West Sacramento, Jesse Moore and County of Yolo's demurrer: The Court rules upon defendants City of West Sacramento, Jesse Moore and County of Yolo's (“defendants”) demurrer to plaintiff Gaven Zunie Mager's complaint as follows: The Court SUSTAINS WITH LEAVE TO AMEND defendants' demurrer to the third cause of action for negligence against defendant Moore. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subd. (e).) Plaintiff fails to ...

Excerpt: ...r production nos. 16-18 (manuals and agreements) is GRANTED IN PART. RFP no. 16 is too broad in scope and is construed as all warranty claims policy and procedure manuals that would apply to the subject vehicle from 2020 to the present. General Motors LLC is directed to produce a privilege log identifying documents withheld on the grounds privilege or work product. Plaintiff's motion to compel further response to requests for production nos. 19-2...

Excerpt: ...complaint, and all references to said Exhibits and/or “Attachments” in said complaint. Anti‐SLAPP Special Motion to Strike: The Court SUSTAINS defendants' evidentiary objections to the documents attached as Exhibit A to plaintiff's opposition. (Evid. Code, §§ 403, subd. (a)(3), 1200, 1400; See Sambrano v. City of San Diego (2001) 94 Cal.App.4th 225, 237.) The Court notes that even if the Court considered plaintiff's late‐filed request f...

Excerpt: ... (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1300(c) [proof of service of the moving papers must be filed no later than five court days before the hearing]; Code Civ. Proc., § 1005, subd. (b) [all moving papers must be filed and served 16 court days prior to the hearing, with an additional 5 court days required for mail service].) The Court also finds that petitioner has failed to provide a sworn declaration supporting the attorney's fees allegedly incurred. (...

Excerpt: ...16‐18 (manuals and agreements) is GRANTED IN PART. RFP no. 16 is too broad in scope and is construed as all warranty claims policy and procedure manuals that would apply to the subject vehicle from 2016 to the present. Plaintiff's motion to compel further response to requests for production nos. 19‐29 (policies and procedures, training materials) is GRANTED. Plaintiff's motion to compel further response to request for production no. 30 (techn...

Excerpt: ... proof because the consideration exception to the recreational use immunity statue applies. (Civ. Code, § 846, subd. (d)(2); Gordon v. Havasu Palms, Inc. (2001) 93 Cal.App.4th 244, 255; citing Ornelas v. Randolph (1993) 4 Cal.4th 1095, 1100; Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Superior Court (2017) 10 Cal.App.5th 563, 586 [payment of any consideration for permission to enter property for a recreational purpose abrogates the immunity under section 846 ...

Excerpt: ...nd plaintiff Mark Wang, specifically the Engagement of Legal Services agreement (“Agreement”). (Pinnacle Museum Tower Assn. v. Pinnacle Market Development (US), LLC (2012) 55 Cal.4th 223, 236 [Pinnacle]; Compl., ¶ 7, Exhibit 1, ¶ 16.) The Court further finds that plaintiff Kevin Wang, in his capacity as a managing member/owner of Wang Brothers, is a party to the Agreement. (Compl., ¶¶ 1 – 3, 7, Exhibit 1, ¶ 16, Exhibit 4, pp. 5 – 6, ...

Excerpt: ...e first, fourth and sixth causes of action within the complaint is GRANTED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subds. (f)(1), (p)(2).) The Court finds that defendant has established that plaintiff was not subject to an adverse employment action within the one‐year limitations period before she filed her DFEH complaint on November 2, 2017. (Former Gov. Code, § 12960, subd. (d), amended by stats. 2019, c. 709 (A.B.9), § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 2020; Gov. Code,...