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...

Excerpt: ... second amended complaint (“SAC”) is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 438, subd. (c)(1)(B).) Defendant has failed to establish that plaintiffs' SAC does not state facts sufficient to constitute causes of action against defendant. (Ibid.) The first cause of action is not mooted by Casey Boosalis' removal as a director of Capay Valley Floriculture because plaintiffs also seek a determination as to whether defendant was properly removed as director....

Excerpt: ...ture of the misconduct (which must be deliberate and egregious, but may or may not violate a prior court order), the strong preference for adjudicating claims on the merits, the integrity of the court as an institution of justice, the effect of the misconduct on a fair resolution of the case, and the availability of other sanctions to cure the harm. (Slesinger, supra, at p. 764, citing Aoude v. Mobile Oil Corp. (1989) 892 F.2d 1115, 1118.) The al...

Excerpt: ...that all categories within the subject subpoena are confidential; however, defendant has met its burden of showing that documents pertaining to plaintiff's wage and hour complaints made to prior employers are relevant to the present matter. (Cal. Const., Art. I, § 1; Hill v. National Collegiate Athletic Assn. (1994) 7 Cal.4th 1, 35, 37 – 40; Williams v. Superior Court (2017) 3 Cal.5th 531, 552; Valley Bank of Nevada v. Superior Court (1975) 15...

Excerpt: ...City of Alhambra v. Superior Court (1980) 110 Cal.App.3d 513, 520; O'Connor v. McDonald's Restaurants (1990) 220 Cal.App.3d 25, 30; Felix v. Asai (1987) 192 Cal.App.3d 926, 932–933.) Plaintiff's motion to compel defendant's further responses to request for admissions, set one, is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.290.) The Court finds that defendant's responses to requests 18, 22 and 23 comply with the requirements of the Code of Civil Procedur...

Excerpt: ...5.) On balance, the Court concludes that non‐party Rebecca Kozlowski's (“Kozlowski”) privacy interest in her financial documents is outweighed by the sought documents' direct relevance and unavailability through less intrusive means. (SCC Acquisitions, Inc. v. Superior Court (2015) 243 Cal.App.4th 741, 754‐755; Barrett decl., ¶¶ 11, Exhibit 9.) However, the Court finds the requests overbroad as to time. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 2017.010...

Excerpt: ...e overruled. A landlord is not liable for injuries resulting from third party conduct over which he has no control. (Uccello v. Laudenslayer (1975) 44 Cal.App.3d 504, 512.) In determining whether a duty exists, the court analyzes multiple factors, including: social utility of the activity; risks of the activity; workability of a rule of care; persons involved and their relationship; financial considerations; moral considerations; prophylactic eff...

Excerpt: ...sanctions of dismissing the action or entering default judgment are justified. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.030, subd. (d); Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 796; Lopez v. Watchtower Bible & Tract Soc. of New York, Inc. (2016) 246 Cal.App.4th 566, 604 [discovery statutes evince an incremental approach, starting with monetary sanctions and ending with ultimate terminating sanction].) Defendant's request for evidentiary sanctions is GRANTED....

Excerpt: ... Court (1998) 61 Cal.App.4th 1431, 1438; Clement v. Allegre (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 1277, 1294; Obregon v. Superior Court (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 424, 431.) The Court also finds that defendant's separate statement fails to comply with the California Rules of Court. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1345; Mills v. U.S. Bank (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 871, 893.) The Court finds defendant failed to: (1) provide the text of plaintiff's original responses; (2) pr...

Excerpt: ...ITHOUT PREJUDICE. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 473, 576.) Defendant has not stated what allegations are proposed to be added and/or deleted and where, by paragraph and line number. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1324(a).) Further, defendant has failed to file a supporting declaration stating: (1) the effect of the amendment; (2) why the amendment is necessary and proper; (3) when the facts giving rise to the amended allegations were discovered; and (4) t...

Excerpt: ...1) when the facts giving rise to the amended allegations were discovered; and (2) the reasons why the request for amendment was not made earlier. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1324(b).) Further, plaintiff has failed to show justification for the long, unexcused delay in seeking amendment, and the proposed amendments would require the parties to conduct additional discovery. (Rainer v. Buena Community Memorial Hosp. (1971) 18 Cal.App.3d 240, 258 [�...

Excerpt: ...rt to determine “the validity of any election or appointment of any director” and therefore, plaintiffs cannot obtain relief under Corporations Code section 709. (Morrical v. Rogers (2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 438, 452, 457; FAC, ¶¶ 32‐44.) While the FAC also cites to other sections of Corporations Code, these statutes do not provide a basis for plaintiffs to obtain the requested relief. (Corp. Code, §§ 12360, 12362; FAC, ¶¶ 42‐44.) As t...

Excerpt: ...arch 9, 2020 is GRANTED IN PART. Plaintiff's request for issue sanctions is DENIED. A court may impose an issue sanction on a party who violates an order compelling discovery. However, the court's discretion must be exercised in a manner consistent with the basic purposes of such sanctions: to compel disclosure of discoverable information. Discovery sanctions cannot be imposed to punish the offending party 3 of 3 or to bestow an unwarranted “wi...

Excerpt: ...f action in defendant Thomas Rutaganira's (“Rutaganira”) cross‐complaint or (b) that Rutaganira's cross‐complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute causes of action against plaintiff. (Ibid.) The stipulation, by its terms, does not bar the present action. (Plaintiff's RJN, Exhibit 2.) Moreover, the cross‐complaint asserts different causes of action than the unlawful detainer case and seeks to resolve different issues than re...

Excerpt: ...8 to the Brazier declaration is OVERRULED. 3 of 4 • Objections nos. 1‐6 to the Teixeira declaration are OVERRULED. • Objections nos. 7‐13 to the Teixeira declaration are SUSTAINED. The Court does not reach Andersen's other evidentiary objections as the evidence objected to is not germane to the disposition of the instant motion. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (q).) Andersen's motion for summary adjudication is GRANTED. (Code Civ. Proc.,...

Excerpt: ...Proc., §§ 2023.010, 2023.020, 2030.290, 2031.300, 2033.280.) The Court finds that plaintiff did not misuse the discovery process, acted with substantial justification, and other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2023.010, 2023.020, 2030.290, subd. (c), 2031.300, subd. (c); DeSantis Decl., ¶¶ 2 – 4.) The Court also finds that plaintiff served a response in substantial compliance with Code of Civ...

Excerpt: ...008) 166 Cal.App.4th 871, 893.) Further, on balance, the Court concludes that non‐party Rebecca Kozlowski's privacy interest in her financial documents is outweighed by the sought documents' direct relevance and unavailability through less intrusive means. (SCC Acquisitions, Inc. v. Superior Court (2015) 243 Cal.App.4th 741, 754‐755; Barrett decl., ¶¶ 9‐12, Exhibits 8‐12.) However, the Court finds the requests overbroad as to time. (See...

Excerpt: ...WFB. (Code Civ. Proc., § 438, subd. (c)(1)(B); Drum v. San Fernando Valley Bar Ass'n (2010) 182 Cal.App.4th 247, 256‐ 257; Camacho v. Automobile Club of Southern California (2006) 142 Cal.App.4th 1394, 1399‐1403; Cel‐ Tech Commc'ns, Inc. v. L.A. Cellular Tel. Co. (1999) 20 Cal.4th 163, 180‐185; see also Le Francois v. Goel (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1094, 1108‐ 1109; TAC, ¶¶ 18‐40, 194.) Defendant Specialized Loan Servicing LLC's Motion in ...

Excerpt: ...te statement fails to: (1) provide the text of each response, answer, or objection; (2) provide a statement of the factual and legal reasons for compelling further responses, answers, or production as to each matter in dispute; (3) provide the text of all definitions, instructions, and other matters required to understand each discovery request and the responses to it; and, (4) set forth the text of other responses where the reasons a further res...

Excerpt: ...l resolution” of the discovery disputes prior to filing the instant motions. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2016.040, 2031.310, subd. (b)(2); Townsend v. Superior Court (1998) 61 Cal.App.4th 1431, 1438; Clement v. Allegre (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 1277, 1294; Obregon v. Superior Court (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 424, 431.) Plaintiff's request for sanctions is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2023.010, 2030.300, 2031.310.) Plaintiff was not successful in bringing ...

Excerpt: ...y of default when such a motion is brought within the time to file a responsive pleading or motion. (See Code Civ. Proc., §§ 412.20, subd. (a)(3), 585, 425.16; Kunysz v. Sandler (2007) 146 Cal.App.4th 1540, 1543 [noting that “the purpose of the anti‐SLAPP statute is to dismiss meritless lawsuits designed to chill the defendant's free speech rights at the earliest stage of the case.”]; see also Weitz v. Yankosky (1966) 63 Cal.2d 849, 854�...