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: ...cted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of attorney's fees and costs unjust.” (Ibid.; Castro v. Superior Court (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 1010, 1018.) Based on the evidence before the Court, the Court does not find that plaintiffs acted with substantial justification or that the imposition of attorneys' fees and costs would be unjust. (Taylor decl., ¶ 2, Exhibit A.) Accordingly, defendants are entitled t...

Excerpt: ...6.040, 2025.450, 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 respondent's meet and confer efforts were insufficient to meet the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 2016.040. (See Townsend, supra, at p. 1439 [a reasonable and good faith attempt at informal resolution entails...

Excerpt: ...e specifically described notice conditions. (Kwok v. Bergren (1982) 130 Cal.App.3d 596, 600.) Title 24 Code of Federal Regulations part 5.2005 requires a covered housing provider to provide to each of its tenants the notice of occupancy rights under the Violence Against Women Act (“VAWA”) and certification form with any notification of eviction. (24 C.F.R. § 5.2005(a)(2)(iii).) A notice to pay rent or quit served by a covered housing provide...

Excerpt: ...ribed notice conditions. (Kwok v. Bergren (1982) 130 Cal.App.3d 596, 600.) Where forfeiture of the tenant's lease for non‐ payment of rent is one of the objectives of the action, the exact amount of rent claimed to be due must be stated in the notice to pay rent or quit. (Baugh v. Consumers Associates, Limited (1966) 241 Cal.App.2d 672, 674.) Where notice is insufficient, a complaint fails to state a cause of action. (See Baugh v. Consumers Ass...

Excerpt: ...interrogatories].) The Court finds that defendant has established a reasonable, good faith attempt to resolve informally this discovery dispute. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2031.310, subd. (b)(2); 2016.040; Ichinaga decl., ¶¶ 18‐20. Exs. 5, 6, 8, 9.) The Court finds defendant's motion to compel further responses is timely. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.310, subd. (c); Ichinaga decl., ¶18.) 2 of 3 Defendant's motion to compel further response to reque...

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: ...tained within the City's response to plaintiff's separate statement of undisputed material facts in opposition to the motion for summary judgment because “[a]ll written objections to evidence must be served and filed separately from the other papers…in opposition to the motion.” (California Rules of Court, rule 3.1354(b); Hodjat v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 1, 7 – 8.) The Court declines to rule on the Ci...

Excerpt: ...production has met his burden of showing good cause simply by a fact‐specific showing of relevance. (Kirkland v. Superior Court (2002) 95 Cal.App.4th 92, 98.) Once good cause is shown, the burden shifts to the responding party to justify his objection. (Ibid.) Defendant in this case seeks three months of communications directly relevant to plaintiff's attempts to seek and obtain employment before his suspension, plaintiff's intent to resign his...

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: ...ce's continued and renewed motion for attorney's fees. (Save Open Spaces Santa Monica Mountains v. Superior Court (2000) 84 Cal.App.4th 235, 250 – 256 [Save Open Spaces]; Barth Decl., ¶¶ 6 – 9, Exhibits 6 – 10.) However, the Court also finds a compelling interest in petitioner's right of associational privacy, and protection of the attorney‐client and work‐product privileges. (Cal. Const., art. I, §§1 – 3; Save Open Spaces, supra,...

Excerpt: ...d. (c)(1)(A).) Plaintiff's complaint states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, and defendant Christopher A. Hubert's answer does not state facts sufficient to constitute a defense to the complaint. (Ibid.; H. Russell Taylor's Fire Prevention Service, Inc. v. Coca Cola Bottling Corp. (1979) 99 Cal.App.3d 711, 726‐727; CACI No. 372; Higgins v. Wortell (1861) 18 Cal. 330, 333; Connecticut Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Most (1940) 39 Cal.App...

Excerpt: ...thin their separate statement of disputed material facts in opposition to Shopcore's motion for summary judgment; or, (2) defendant Jason Marsh's (“Marsh”) evidentiary objections made within his response to Shopcore's separate statement of undisputed material facts in support of motion for summary judgment because “[a]ll written objections to evidence must be served and filed separately from the other papers…in opposition to the motion.�...

Excerpt: ...rby as the evidence objected to is not germane to the disposition of the instant motion. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (q).) Pruco's objections to the declarations of Dr. Timothy J. Wiegand and Dr. Mario San Bartolome are OVERRULED. Pruco's motion for summary adjudication as to issues nos. 1 and 2 is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (p)(2).) “The rule in insurance cases is that a material misrepresentation or concealment in an insura...

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: ...before this Court. (See Decision After Hearing on Appeal, issued March 8, 2022.) Respondent's motion to strike appellant's memorandum of costs in its entirety is denied. Appellant concedes a clerical error in the tabulation of costs and stipulates that the correct tabulation is that service of process costs were $455.56 and the total costs claimed are thus $590.56. Thus, the Court grants respondent's request to tax the amount claimed in error: $5...

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: ...., LLC v. Monroy (2013) 215 Cal.App 4th 972, 1004 [Heritage].) The Court may rely on its own knowledge and familiarity with the legal market in setting a reasonable hourly rate. (Id., at p. 1009; Serrano v. Priest (1977) 20 Cal.3d 25, 49.) In the Court's experience, the local rates for this type of work ranges from $350.00 to $450.00 per hour. In making its calculation, a court should also consider the experience, skill, and reputation of the att...

Excerpt: ...writing, of the intent to take defendants' defaults, including failing to provide a date by which a responsive pleading needed to be filed. (See Lasalle v. Vogel (2019) 36 Cal.App.5th 127, 135, 141 [all parties shall cooperate in bringing the action to trial or other disposition, quiet speed and unreasonable deadlines do not qualify as “cooperation” and cannot be accepted by the courts]; Barreno Decl., ¶¶ 3 – 4.) The notice of motion does...

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: ...laintiff The People of the State of California has provided competent evidence that defendant, Flowmaster, and Driven have all shared a corporate officer – Thomas W. Tomlinson. (In re Automobile Antitrust Cases I and II (2005) 135 Cal.App.4th 100, 110–111 [citations omitted]; Centerpoint E. v. Superior Court (2007) 157 Cal.App.4th 1101, 1120 [citations omitted]; Ray v. Alad Corp. (1977) 19 Cal.3d 22, 28 – 29 [a 2 of 3 corporation acquiring ...

Excerpt: ...may move for an order compelling production and notice of that motion to compel shall be given to all parties and the deponent. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.480, subds. (a), (c), emphasis added.) A written notice and all moving papers supporting a motion to compel an answer to a deposition question or to compel production of a document or tangible thing from a 2 of 5 nonparty deponent must be personally served on the nonparty deponent unless the non...

Excerpt: ...tion to defendant's MJOP, (6) defendant's reply (in support of its MJOP), (7) this Court's ruling granting defendant's MJOP with leave to amend, (8) plaintiff's third amended complaint, (9) plaintiff's notice of motion and motion for sanctions pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 128.7, (10) declaration of attorney Adam Ambrozy in support of defendant's motion for sanctions pursuant to section 128.7, (11) defendant's request for judicial n...

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: ... (2003) 108 Cal.App.4th 154, 157 – 158 [a second offer to compromise extinguishes the first offer for purposes of Code of Civil Procedure section 998]; March 17, 2022, Judgment; Houvener Decl., Exhibit C.] The Court thus awards defendant post‐offer expert costs in the amount of $39,027.00. (Houvener Decl., Exhibit D.) The notice of motion does not provide notice of this Court's tentative ruling system as required by Local Rule 11.2(b). Counse...

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: ...nd filed separately from the other papers…in opposition to the motion.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1354(b); See Reid v. Google, Inc. (2010) 50 Cal.4th 512, 531–532.) The Court notes that it can only grant summary adjudication “if it completely disposes of a cause of action, an affirmative defense, a claim for damages, or an issue of duty.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (f)(1); see Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th...

Excerpt: ...enforceable only if the lessor strictly complies with the specifically described notice conditions. (Kwok v. Bergren (1982) 130 Cal.App.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.) Plaintiff's unlawful detainer complaint relies upon a 3‐day notice to pay rent or qu...

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: ...rmane to the disposition of the instant motion. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (q).) Defendant's objections to evidence contained within plaintiff's opposition no. 5 is OVERRULED. The Court declines to rule on all other evidentiary objections as the evidence 3 of 4 objected to is not germane to the disposition of the instant motion. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (q).) Defendant's motion for summary adjudication as to issue no. 1 (general neg...

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: ...r the fourth cause of action for negligence, are measured exclusively under Civil Code section 3343. (See Civ. Code, § 3333; Santa Barbara Pistachio Ranch v. Chowchilla Water Dist. (2001) 88 Cal.App.4th 439, 446–447; cf. Fragale v. Faulkner (2003) 110 Cal.App.4th 229, 236‐237 [finding the application of Civil Code section 3343 to limit the plaintiffs' damages, when the plaintiffs brought an action based on a broker's misrepresentation]; SAC,...

Excerpt: ...s DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 685.010, 685.020, subd. (a).) “Only final judgments bear postjudgment interest.” (Hyundai Motor America v. Superior Court (2015) 235 Cal.App.4th 418, 424.) “A judgment is the final determination of the rights of the parties in an action or proceeding.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 577; see also Doudell v. Shoo (1911) 159 Cal. 448, 453 [“A judgment is final when it terminates the litigation between the parties on...

Excerpt: ...ng party]; see Friends of Spring Street v. Nevada City (2019) 33 Cal.App.5th 1092, 1104 [in determining whether a party is a prevailing party 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]; DeSaulles v. Community Hospital of Monterey Peninsula (2016) 62 Cal.4th 1140, 1157 [the rule is that a partial recovery, a...

Excerpt: ...ages and (2nd) that prejudice to either party is speculative. Thus, bifurcation would not serve judicial economy and efficiency or the interests of justice. SDH's unopposed request to bifurcate the issue of punitive damages, precluding presentation of evidence on SDH's profits or financial condition until after plaintiff has obtained a finding of malice, oppression, or fraud on the part of SDH, is GRANTED. (Civ. Code, § 3295, subd. (d).) If no h...

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: ...Civ. Proc., § 430.10; See Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318.) The Court finds that plaintiff has failed to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against BNT. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subd. (e).) The Court finds that there are no allegations in the FAC that BNT has any adverse claim against the title of the subject property, and no amendment can cure this deficiency. (See Orcilla v. Big Sur, Inc. (2016) 244 Cal.App.4t...

Excerpt: ...f any party desires to obtain discovery by a mental examination, the party shall obtain leave of court. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2032.310, subd. (a), emphasis added.) 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).) SDH has shown good cause for the proposed mental examination. Plaintiff has placed his mental state in controversy by the alle...

Excerpt: ... permitted number of pages. 4 of 4 Defendants Zero Net Energy Alliance, Inc. (“ZNEA”), Richard Schorske, and Sharon Tobar's request for judicial notice is DENIED. (Evid. Code, §§ 452, 453.) Defendants failed to make their request for judicial notice in a separate document as required. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1113(l).) Defendants' demurrer to plaintiff's second amended complaint (“SAC”) as to the third cause of action (alter ego lia...

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: ...ornia (1998) 63 Cal.App.4th 1108, 1119.) SDH's objection to the declaration of plaintiff, at 8:1‐3 (Din decl., ¶ 30), is OVERRULED. (Evid. Code, § 803.) SHD's objections to the declaration of attorney M. Bradley Wishek, at 5:23‐27 (Wishek decl., ¶ 8), are SUSTAINED. (Evid. Code, §§ 403, 702, 803.) SHD's objections to the declaration of attorney M. Bradley Wishek, at 5:27‐29 (Wishek decl., ¶ 8), are SUSTAINED. (Evid. Code, §§ 403, 70...

Excerpt: ...ed time entries attached as Exhibit A to the declaration of Tessa McGuire. (Evid. Code, §§ 402, 403; McGuire Decl., Exhibit A; see declarations of Boutin, McNairy, McGlone, Miller, Cowan and Jackson.) However, the Court finds that only those time entries that identify fees “incurred in the request for” the Stipulated Judgment (“Judgment”) are relevant. (Evid. Code, §§ 210, 350; Judgment, ¶ 4.) Regarding those time entries that do not...

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...

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: ...rst, plaintiff's motion does not include a copy of the proposed amended pleading. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1324(a)(1).) Second, plaintiff 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)(2)‐(3).) Third, plaintiff has failed to file a supporting declaration, stating: (1) the effect of the amendment; (2) why the amendment is necessary and prop...

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: ...set forth evidence that defendant Mateo Galvan continues in possession of real property after a three‐day written notice to quit was served upon him, where the property was sold in accordance with Section 2924 of the Civil Code, under a power of sale contained in a deed of trust executed by defendant, and the title under the sale was duly perfected. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1161a, subd. (b), (b)(3); RJN Nos. 1‐5; RFAs deemed admitted 1‐9; Reyes...

Excerpt: ... Cal.App.2d 749, 759; Miller Decl., ¶ 6, Exhibit A; Boutin Decl., ¶ 6.) The Court declines to rule upon the remaining objection to Eric Miller's declaration as the Court did not rely upon the remaining challenged paragraphs of said declaration in determining the instant motion. The Court declines to rule on plaintiffs Robert Shelton and Adrian Shelton's [evidentiary] objection to Underwood declaration as the Court did not rely upon the challeng...

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: ...constitutes “[a] significant, unanticipated change in the status of the case as a result of which the case is not ready for trial.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(c)(7), emphasis added; Renno decl., ¶¶ 2‐5.) Second, while plaintiff Krista Mitchell filed two petitions for writ of mandate in December, 2021, both petitions have since been dismissed. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(c)(7).) Finally, defendant has not shown that he has...

Excerpt: ...h 238, 268, fn. 6; see Malek Media Group LLC v. AXQG Corp. (2020) 58 Cal.App.5th 817 825.) Petitioner Jennifer Marston, and the minor, Ryan Marston are DIRECTED TO APPEAR. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 7.952.) If the parties fail to appear at the hearing and the Court has not excused their personal appearance, the petition will be denied without prejudice. No request for a hearing is required. 2 of 3 Motion for attorney's fees and common fund reduct...

Excerpt: ... notice request number six is DENIED as irrelevant. (People v. Rowland (1992) 4 Cal.4th 238, 268, fn. 6.) With regard to request number one, this Court can only take judicial notice of facts to the extent that they are not or cannot be disputed. (Joslin v. H.A.S. Ins. Brokerage (1986) 184 Cal.App.3d 369, 375–376.) Plaintiff asks that this Court take judicial notice of the fact that defendant “Phillips 66 is a for‐hire motor carrier (USDOT n...

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: ...)(1), provides two alternative prongs to prove malice – by showing intentional conduct or by showing despicable conduct which is carried on by the defendant with a willful and conscious disregard of the rights or safety of others. Defendant proffers UMF 10 to address the intentional prong of the statute; however, the only admissible evidence provided to the Court in support of said UMF is defendant's self‐serving declaration. (UMF 10; Gotelli...

Excerpt: ...on 1946.2, subdivision (b)(2)(D). In this case, section 1946.2 requires plaintiffs to notify the tenant of the tenant's right to relocation assistance or rent waiver. (Civ. Code, § 1946.2, subd. (d)(2).) If the owner elects to waive the rent for the final month of the tenancy, the notice shall state the amount of rent waived and that no rent is due for the final month of the tenancy. (Id., emphasis added.) Plaintiffs' 60‐day notice of terminat...

Excerpt: ...ubd. (a).) Specifically, defendant, as the owner of the documents at issue, directed respondent California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training to produce only redacted copies of said documents to petitioner Electronic Frontier Foundation; thus, in defendant's absence, the Court cannot accord complete relief between petitioner and respondent. (Id.; See Sierra Club Inc. v. Coastal Com. (1979) 95 Cal.App.3d 495, 502; Am. Writ, ¶¶ 21...

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: ...nds that the operative second amended complaint (“SAC”) is an “action on a contract”, and that the 1995 Declaration contains an attorney's fees provision that is broad enough to encompass all the causes of action found within the SAC. (Civ. Code, § 1717, subd. (a); Douglas E. Barnhart, Inc. v. CMC Fabricators, Inc. (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 230, 239 – 241; Lerner v. Ward (1993) 13 Cal.App.4th, 155, 159; Cruz v. Ayromloo (2007) 155 Cal.App...

Excerpt: ...e, the attorney's fees requested by petitioner for time actually spent prosecuting the instant action are reasonable. (PLCM Group, Inc. v. Drexler (2000) 22 Cal.4th 1084, 1096; Knox Decl., ¶¶ 5 – 10, 12 – 20.) However, the Court declines to award attorney's fees for time not yet incurred ($4,500.00). (Knox Decl., ¶¶ 7, 11D, 12, Exhibit 2, p. 1.) Based on the foregoing, the Court awards defendant $37,530.00 in attorneys' fees. On the Court...

Excerpt: ...ination of the instant motion. (People v. Rowland (1992) 4 Cal.4th 238, 268, fn. 6.) Defendant Michaels Stores, Inc.'s objections to evidence as to Mr. Petrovich's declaration paragraphs 12 and 13 and UMF nos. 79‐80 are SUSTAINED. Defendant's objections to evidence as to Mr. Petrovich's declaration paragraphs 20 through 24 and UMF nos. 28, 54, 63, 68‐78, 83, 89‐90, and 99 are OVERRULED. The Court declines to rule on defendant's other 2 of 3...

Excerpt: ... or the truth of any matter when requested to do so under this chapter, and if the party requesting that admission thereafter proves the genuineness of that document or the truth of that matter, the party requesting the admission may move the court for an order requiring the party to whom the request was directed to pay the reasonable expenses incurred in making that proof, including reasonable attorney's fees.” (Ibid.) Plaintiff has provided s...

Excerpt: ...between plaintiff Swinerton Builders and all defendants in the instant action [and related actions] are subject to the mediation provisions found within the respective subcontracts. (Compl., Exhibits 1 ‐ 16, subds. (d), (e), (f).) The Court further finds that pursuant to said provisions, neither arbitration nor litigation may proceed until such mediation occurs. (See Civ. Code, §§ 1636, 1638; Templeton v. Superior Court, (2006) 144 Cal.App.4t...

Excerpt: ... (Palagin v. Paniagua Construction, Inc. (2013) 222 Cal.App.4th 124, 140; Burkes v. Robertson (2018) 26 Cal.App.5th 334, 343.) “[T]he employer must post the undertaking before it files its notice of appeal, and no later than 10 days after service of the Commissioner's order.” (Id. at p. 131, emphasis added; see also Burkes v. Robertson (2018) 26 Cal.App.5th 334, 347.) The clerk properly rejected appellant's notice of appeal because appellant ...

Excerpt: ...esult of his mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. (Baratti v. Baratti (1952) 109 Cal.App.2d 917, 921; Douglas decl.) Finally, defendant has failed to establish that he filed the motion diligently after discovering the entry of default and default judgment. (Hopkins & Carley v. Gens (2011) 200 Cal.App.4th 1401, 1410.) The notice of motion does not provide notice of this Court's tentative ruling system as required by Local Rule 11...

Excerpt: ... 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.) The court finds that plaintiff's counsel's sole meet and confer letter to defendant Cesar Pedroia's counsel on December 16, 2021, was insufficient to meet the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 2016.040 prior to the filing of the instant motion. (See Townsend, supra, at p. ...

Excerpt: ...aw”; thus, are not a proper basis for reconsideration. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1008, subd. (a); Forrest v. Department of Corporations (2007) 150 Cal.App.4th 183, 202; see Morris v. AGFA Corp. (2006) 144 Cal.App.4th 1452.) The Court further finds that even if the assignments were considered “new or different facts, circumstances, or law”, HOA has failed to provide any explanation, much less a strong showing of diligence, as to why HOA did obtai...

Excerpt: ...red document is irrelevant to the Court's determination of the instant motion. (People v. Rowland (1992) 4 Cal.4th 238, 268, fn. 6.) Defendant's motion for summary adjudication as to issues 1‐3 is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (p)(2).) “A motion for summary adjudication shall be granted only if it completely disposes of a cause of action, an affirmative defense, a claim for damages, or an issue of duty.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c...

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: ...Defendant's demurrer to the second cause of action within plaintiff's complaint for unjust enrichment is OVERRULED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subd. (e).) Plaintiff has alleged the requisite elements to maintain this cause of action. (Prakashpalan v. Engstrom, Lipscomb & Lack (2014) 223 Cal.App.4th 1105, 1132; Am. Compl., ¶¶ 16, 40, 58.) Defendant's demurrer to the third cause of action within plaintiff's complaint for a violation of Californ...

Excerpt: ... for leave to amend. The right to amend is limited to the original complaint; there is no right to amend, without leave, an amended complaint. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 472.) Defendant South Tahoe Public Utility District's unopposed request for judicial notice of Exhibits 1 through 5 is GRANTED. (Evid. Code, §§ 452, subds. (c), (h); 453.) Defendant's demurrer to the amended complaint and each cause of action on the basis that the complaint fails...

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: ...n…” (Platypus Wear, Inc. v. Goldberg (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 772, 787 [“Platypus”].) However, “a trial court must be wary about freely granting a party the right to file an anti‐SLAPP motion past the 60–day deadline.” (Ibid.) “In exercising its discretion in considering a party's request to file an anti‐SLAPP motion after the 60–day period, a trial court must carefully consider whether allowing such a filing is consistent wit...

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: ... dealing causes of action by alleging that ZNEA failed to pay money owed to plaintiff. (Richman v. Hartley (2014) 224 Cal.App.4th 1182, 1186; Thrifty Payless, Inc. v. The Americana at Brand, LLC (2013) 218 Cal.App.4th 1230, 1244; FAC, ¶¶ 51, 54.) Defendants' demurrer to plaintiff's FAC as to the third and fourth causes of action is SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subd. (e).) “An omission to perform a contract ob...

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,...

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: ...date, the arbitration hearing has yet to occur. (Briggs Decl., ¶¶ 4, 8, 11 – 14, Exs. 3, 4.) The parties SHALL meet and confer and select a new arbitration hearing date by January 28, 2022, with said hearing to occur before the case management conference set for April 4, 2022. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 128, subds. (a)(1) – (4).) Plaintiff's request for sanctions is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 177.5.) The Court finds that plaintiff has faile...

Excerpt: ...43; Ostling v. Loring (1994) 27 Cal.App.4th 1731, 1744; Crestmar Owners Assn. v. Stapakis (2007) 157 Cal.App.4th 1223, 1230–1231 [“When amendments to a complaint contain substantive changes….a defaulting defendant against whom the court has not yet entered judgment has the right to appear in the action to answer the amended complaint”].) Defendant shall file an answer to the FAC by no later than January 3, 2022 (10 days after the hearing)...

Excerpt: ...d 597, 600; Trafton v. Youngblood (1968) 69 Cal.2d 17, 25 [“If the account is sent to the debtor and he does not object to it within a reasonable time, his acquiescence will be taken as an admission that the account is truly stated.”]; UMF 9‐16.) 2 of 2 Plaintiff has established all required elements for open book account (issue 1) against defendant. (Code Civ. Proc., § 337a; see also Interstate Group Administrators, Inc. v. Cravens, Darga...