Excerpt: ...to amend, as Plaintiff concedes in her Opposition that she is no longer pursuing these claims. 2. First (violation of Civ. Code, § 2923.5), Third (violation of Civ. Code, § 2924.9), Fifth (wrongful foreclosure), and Eighth (cancellation of written instruments) Causes of Action: The demurrers are sustained with leave to amend. From the allegations and exhibits attached to the Complaint, Plaintiff is not a borrower on the foreclosed loan. She has...

Excerpt: ...ruled the demurrer for uncertainty and sustained the demurrer, without leave to amend, as to the First, Second, Third and Fourth Causes of Action. With respect to the Fifth Cause of Action for Trade Libel, the Court overruled the demurrer as to Defendant Tran and, as to Defendant Papadotos, sustained the demurrer, with thirty days leave to amend. The Court also ruled that to the extent the Sovereigns claimed that the pleading the Court treated as...

Excerpt: .... The rulings assume, to some extent, what evidence will be presented and that issues are germane, which may not turn out to be the case. The Court reserves the right to exclude any such evidence upon proper objection during the trial depending upon what occurs at trial. The denial or grant of these motions is without prejudice. I. PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS IN LIMINE: Motion in Limine #1 – Exclude Evidence Regarding Alleged Absence of Prior Similar I...

Excerpt: ...tice, and [(2)] lack of prejudice, to the defendant, and [(3)] reasonable and good faith conduct on the part of the plaintiff.' (Addison, supra, 21 Cal.3d at p. 319.) These requirements are designed to ‘balanc[e] … the injustice to the plaintiff occasioned by the bar of his claim against the effect upon the important public interest or policy expressed by the [operative] limitations statute.'” Saint Francis Memorial Hospital v. State Dept. ...

Excerpt: ...mary judgment. Jimenez v. Protective Life Ins. Co. (1992) 8 Cal.App.4th 528 “a trial court may overlook the failure of a notice of motion to state a ground for relief when the supporting materials discuss and support that ground for relief so that it is clear that relief is sought on that ground. In that situation, the trial court may treat the supporting papers as curing the defective notice. [Citations.]” Luri v. Greenwald (2003) 107 Cal.Ap...

Excerpt: ...mpany (HUDSON) was the value of the subject vehicle, i.e., $5,999 [as agreed by the parties in the summary adjudication facts]. Hudson paid that amount and an additional dollar, thus, all relief afforded under Vehicle Code § 11711, subdivision (a), was afforded. While Plaintiffs assert, under DeSaulles v. Community Hospital of Monterey Peninsula (2016) 62 Cal.4th 1140, 1158 (“DeSaulles”), that they are the prevailing party as the dismissal c...

Excerpt: ...t evidence appears to show.” Fremont Indemnity Co. v. Fremont General Corp. (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 97, 115. The Court cannot decide this issue by demurrer. Moreover, the document is not properly authenticated. Defendant's Evidentiary Objection: 1. overruled. 2. sustained 3. sustained 2 Demurrer: Preliminarily, the Court does not consider Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint (FAC) to be a “sham pleading.” Plaintiffs assert that the vehicle co...

Excerpt: ...October 14, 2022. The current responses potentially leave open the possibility that some documents, beyond the privileged documents, were withheld pursuant to the privilege or some other objection since only a list of what items Defendant Ozuna was willing to produce was provided and production was made without waiving the objections. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.220 [outlining the requirements of a document demand response].) 2. The witness sta...

Excerpt: ...rwise indicated, a Supreme Court order granting review of a published opinion will be deemed to incorporate a provision that pending review, the appellate court opinion may be cited “not only for its persuasive value, but also for the limited purpose of establishing the existence of a conflict in authority that would in turn allow trial courts to 2 exercise discretion under Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962) 57 Cal.2d 450, 456, to...

Excerpt: ...e each legal theory for which she seeks recovery. (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 2.112.) Additionally, the specific acts for which Plaintiff seeks recompense are very confusing. 2. The demurrer to the referenced “emotional tort” claim (which the Court construes speculatively that this is an intent to allege some type of emotional distress claim) is sustained because the complaint fails to adequately allege (a) outrageous conduct; and (b) intent o...

Excerpt: ... Order. The offers now made by Defendants to narrow the subpoena should have been proposed and agreed to during their meet and confer. It is unclear to the Court why these things were not done. In the future, the Court orders the parties to engage in an Informal Discovery Conference with the Court prior to filing any future discovery motion. The Court orders as follows: 1. Order applicable to all requests, except as otherwise noted: a. All of the...

Excerpt: ...1403.) Although the Complaint alleges when Plaintiff Cruz purchased the vehicle and took it in for repairs, those dates are not demonstrated dates he knew or should have known that Defendant General Motors (GM) concealed that the Subject Vehicle was sold with a defective transmission. Thus, from the face of the pleading, it cannot be said the fraud claim is time‐barred. The cause of action is not barred by the Economic Loss Rule. The allegation...

Excerpt: ...l.App.4th 1242, 1249‐ 50 [“Puerto”].) But individuals under the California Constitution have a right to privacy that protects their information, i.e., medical, financial, and employment records. (Williams v. Superior Court (Marshalls of CA, LLC) (2017) 3 Cal.5th 531, 552. [“Williams”]; Hill v. National Collegiate Athletic Assn (1994) 7 Cal.4th 1, 52. A privacy interest is invaded if there is “a legally protected privacy interest, an o...

Excerpt: ... to meet and confer, the remainder of his declaration is improper and thus, not considered. The entire declaration of Plaintiff's Counsel is improper so it was not considered. 1.‐3. sustain 4. overrule (pertinent to meet and confer) 5. sustain 6. overrule (pertinent to meet and confer) 7.‐9. sustain Request for Judicial Notice: The Court overrules Plaintiff's objections to Exhibits A, B, and D attached to Defendant's Request for Judicial Noti...

Excerpt: ...anuary 2021 Terms: 1.‐8. Overrule Defendants' Request for Judicial Notice: The Court grants judicial notice of the Complaint pursuant to Evidence Code §452 (d) but denies judicial notice of the proof of services, as irrelevant, and the arbitration rules, as no ground exists to judicially notice a private company's rules and procedures. Motion: The motion is granted as to Plaintiff Christopher Wend but denied as to Plaintiff Valorie Wend. Preli...

Excerpt: ...s follows: 1. Plaintiff's counsel has improperly cited to Plaintiff's additional facts rather than directly to opposing evidence in response to many of Defendants' submitted material facts in violation of California Rules of Court, rule 3.1350(f) (2). 2. Plaintiff's counsel failed to provide only the specific deposition transcript page, rather than the entirety of various transcripts and failed to mark the relevant portions of the deposition in a...

Excerpt: ...rney's position with respect to this discovery. There was no real effort on the part of defense counsel to resolve a very simple issue involving an error which everyone involved understood to be clerical. The face page of the discovery clearly indicates who the Plaintiff is and the wrong name is clearly a typographical error and one that should have been agreed to have been corrected instead of requiring the Court to read and hear these motions. ...

Excerpt: ...iod. The statute which allows for relief from forfeiture provides for equitable relief to a defaulted tenant following entry of judgment. It is an equitable proceeding in which the Court balances the hardship to each party in either enforcing the judgment for possession in favor of the landlord or allowing for the reinstatement of the lease in favor of the tenant. After balancing the hardships, the Court determines that the hardship to Defendant ...

Excerpt: ...22 Cal. 4th 1084, 1095. The burden is on the party seeking attorney fees to prove that the fees it seeks are reasonable. Center for Biological Diversity v. County of San Bernardino (2010) 188 Cal.App.4th 603, 615. “[Parties] are not entitled to compensation for this work merely because it was performed. It was their burden to persuade the trial court the work was reasonably necessary, both as to the particular tasks performed and the amount of ...

Excerpt: ...ld “make clear the specific ground of the objection.” (Evidence Code, § 353; Cole v. Town of Los Gatos (2012) 205 Cal.App.4th 749, 764 [failure to cite Evidence Code, § 801 (governing admissibility of expert opinion) or make “coherent argument” in support of objection constituted “abandonment of the objection”].) As to all the objections, the statement opined in Cole v. Town of Los Gatos (2012) 205 Cal.App.4th 749, 764, fn. 6, is ap...

Excerpt: ...s to conflate the elements of promissory fraud and misrepresentation of fact. In this regard, the allegations are confusing, the basis for the claim is unclear, and the “when,” “where,” and “how” particulars of Defendant Seymen's purported promissory fraud or misrepresentations are not alleged. The detrimental reliance element also lacks specificity. b. Promises to forward payments are also not assertions of fact and it is unclear how...

Excerpt: ...al Interrogatory Nos. 69, 76‐77, 80‐81, and 92‐93. Sanctions are denied as to either party as the result was mixed. Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Further Responses to Request for Production (Set 2): The motion is granted. Defendant City of San Bernardino is ordered to provide further verified code‐compliant2 answers, without objection, and any responsive documents, to Request 1Throughout all of the motions, Plaintiff's tone is antagonistic...

Excerpt: ...000) 22 Cal. 4th 1084, 1095. The burden is on the party seeking attorney fees to prove that the fees it seeks are reasonable. Center for Biological Diversity v. County of San Bernardino (2010) 188 Cal.App.4th 603, 615. “[Parties] are not entitled to compensation for this work merely because it was performed. It was their burden to persuade the trial court the work was reasonably necessary, both as to the particular tasks performed and the amoun...

Excerpt: ...uired to sustain such objections. (See W. Pico Furniture Co., supra, 56 Cal.2d 407 at pp. 417‐418 [discussing the need for evidence related to objections on burden grounds].) Similarly, no evidence was submitted as to the trade secret objection in order to show that the information or documents withheld actually constitute a trade secret. While GM did submit the declaration from Lu, the declaration is more than three years old and was therefore...

Excerpt: ...e evidence to be stricken, “. . . especially where only part of it is objectionable.” OCFCD v. Sunny Crest Dairy, Inc. (1978) 77 Cal.App.3d 742, 753; 3 Witkin, California Evidence (4th Ed. 2000), Presentation at Trial, §383, pp. 475‐476; cf. Rose v. State of California (1941) 19 Cal.2d 713, 742 [“A motion to strike out inadmissible evidence may be properly denied where it is general and embraces evidence which is admissible as well as th...