Excerpt: ...ise to the cause of action. (In re Automobile Antitrust Cases I and II (2005) 135 Cal.App.4th 100, 108‐09; Integral Development Corp. v. Helmut Weissenbach (2002) 99 Cal.App.4th 576, 583‐84.) The plaintiff bears the initial burden of “demonstrating facts by a preponderance of the evidence justifying the exercise of jurisdiction in California.” (In re Automobile Antitrust Cases, supra, 135 Cal.App.4th at p. 110.) The necessary facts are by...

Excerpt: ...e, however, was the request for dismissal filed by Helaire on April 20, 2021, purporting to have the case dismissed as to her without prejudice. That request for dismissal, which the clerk acted on and entered the dismissal on the same date, does not comport with the orders made by the court on April 9, 2021. The transcript from that hearing (Exb. C to the request for judicial notice) demonstrates clearly and unambiguously, that the dismissal was...

Excerpt: ...were due, Akbar Razavi Sayed Razavi served verified supplemental responses to all the discovery responses. Therefore, the motions are moot except with respect to the issue of monetary sanctions. For purposes of evaluating the request for sanctions only, the following rulings are those that would have applied to the original responses had verified supplemental responses not been served. The court has not considered the supplemental responses. The ...

Excerpt: ...iced hearing.… ‘The hearing may be held either on the motion of the representative to certify the case as a class action; or, on motion by the party opposing the class to dismiss the class action allegations; or, by the court on its own motion....'”].) Thus it is entirely proper for a defendant to bring a motion to deny class certification. This motion, however, fails to demonstrate through admissible evidence why any necessary element for ...

Excerpt: ...the order, and the court respects counsel's right to disagree, nothing about the order needs clarification. It appears the moving parties do Page 2 of 2 not want the order clarified; they want it changed. The moving parties are asking the court to reconsider its prior ruling based on the arguments presented and to modify the ruling accordingly. This is a motion for reconsideration, notwithstanding the title. A motion for reconsideration must: (1)...

Excerpt: ...ing the content of a discovery request or the responses to such a request must be accompanied by a separate statement”, specifically including a motion “[f]or issue or evidentiary sanctions.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1345(a)(7).) The court has Page 2 of 3 discretionary power to deny a discovery motion based on lack of a compliant separate statement. (Mills v. U.S. Bank (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 871, 893.) Defendant does not note this defic...

Excerpt: ...hority for the stay of the PAGA claims pending arbitration of the related claims. When a trial court “has ordered arbitration of a controversy which is an issue involved in an action or proceeding pending before” the court, it “shall, upon motion of a party . . . stay the action of proceeding until an arbitration is had in accordance with the order to arbitrate . . . .” (§ 1281.4.) “It is irrelevant under the statute whether the movant...

Excerpt: ... agreement. [Citations.] Only in limited circumstances may an arbitration agreement be enforced by nonsignatories. One such circumstance is where a benefit is conferred on the nonsignatory as a result of the agreement, making the nonsignatory a third party beneficiary of the arbitration agreement. [Citation.] Another is when the equitable estoppel doctrine applies and a nonsignatory is allowed to enforce an arbitration clause because the claims a...

Excerpt: ...) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: CIVDS2019176 RULING ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE: GRANTED Date: July 12, 2021 Time: 1:30 p.m. Dept: S‐26 ‐ 1 ‐ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 I Introduction Petitioner City of Hesperia (the “City”) seeks a writ of mandate to prevent Respondent Lake Arrowhead Community Services District (the “District”)1 from building a solar en...

Excerpt: ...violations. But in this case, there are no individual claims being asserted. Therefore, there is no reason to stay the PAGA case, which is prosecuted by the named representative, acting on behalf of the State. No individual claims for damages are at issue, only penalties under PAGA. Defendant's position that plaintiff must pursue Page 2 of 3 individual claims in arbitration before pursuing claims on behalf of the State, for the benefit of the Sta...

Excerpt: ...while the putative class in this case addresses only post‐shift security checks; 3. Tuliau, the first‐filed case, goes back farther in time than this case; and 4. Tuliau includes claims under PAGA, which this case does not. While Tuliau is broader, there are no claims asserted in this case that are not also covered by Tuliau. Plaintiff argues that abatement is improper because the two cases are not identical, insofar as Tuliau is broader. Thi...

Excerpt: ...ntially to his Parkinson's disease entitling him to a disability retirement under Government Code section 31720. Petitioner argues that SBCERA abused its discretion when it denied him a service‐connected disability retirement. He contends that the detailed medical report of Dr. Bijan Zardouz and Petitioner's testimony, along with that of his wife and other officers, constitute substantial evidence that his employment contributed substantially t...

Excerpt: ...t sanctions should not be imposed under Code of Civil Procedure section 1218. (Notice of Motion, p. 3, lines 12‐12.) Code of Civil Procedure section 1209, subdivision (a)(5), provides that disobedience of any lawful judgment, order or process of the court “are contempts of the authority of the court.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1209, subd. (a)(5); see also, Ketscher v. Superior Court (1970) 9 Cal.App.3d 601, 604.) An individual or entity can be i...

Excerpt: ...eges that when employees had accrued but unused vacation hours upon separation of employment, Defendant failed to pay for these earned wages at the “final rate” including applicable shift differentials as required by Labor Code section 227.3. (FAC, ¶¶3, 5, 6.) Defendant demurs, asserting that the action is preempted by the federal Labor Management Relations Act of 1947 (29 U.S.C. § 185(a), LMRA) because Plaintiff either claims rights under...

Excerpt: ...d on four safety violations. Petitioner appealed the citations to the Occupational Safety and Health Appeals Board (the “Board”). The appeal involved a four‐day evidentiary hearing conducted by an Administrative Law Judge (the “ALJ”). The ALJ issued a decision upholding two of the citations containing three of the violations, but vacated Citation 2, which involved a $15,300 penalty against Petitioner for violation of 8 Cal. Code Regs. s...

Excerpt: ...ts are sought in the amount of $17,901.15. Counsel, however, has failed to present an itemization of costs in a manner that the court can easily evaluate. Rather than summarizing the costs in a single location, the costs are documented in three separate places: the Karim Declaration ($2,304.44), the Westrick Declaration ($4,256.77), and the Crosner Declaration ($11,264.94). None of the costs were easy to Page 2 of 2 locate, because counsel submit...

Excerpt: ... the fees or costs required to continue the arbitration proceeding are not paid within 30 days after the due date, the drafting party is in material breach of the arbitration agreement, is in default of the arbitration, and waives its right to compel the employee . . . to proceed with that arbitration as a result of the material breach. (b) If the drafting party material breaches the arbitration agreement and is in default under subdivision (a), ...

Excerpt: ...neral Act, Labor Code section 2698 et seq. (“PAGA”). Each cause of action in the class action complaint is expressly predicated on California law: 1. Failure to Pay All Wages Owed, including Minimum Wages (Labor Code §§ 1194, 1197, 1198) 2. Failure to Pay Overtime (Labor Code §§ 510, 1194) 3. Failure to Provide Lawful Meal Periods (Labor Code § 512) 4. Failure to Authorize and Permit Lawful Rest Periods (Labor Code § 226.7) 5. Failure t...

Excerpt: ...or demurrer. The court may likewise, in its discretion, after notice to the adverse party, allow, upon any terms as may be just, an amendment to any pleading or proceeding in other particulars; and may upon like terms allow an answer to be made after the time limited by this code. Procedurally, a motion to amend a pleading must (1) include a copy of the proposed amended pleading, which must be serially numbered to differentiate it from previous p...

Excerpt: ...e is mandatory. c. The statute of limitations has expired. According to Talavera's notice to the LWDA, his last day of employment was March 15, 2019. He had one year to file a lawsuit. (Code Civ. Proc., § 340, subd. (a); Brown v. Ralphs Grocery Co. (2018) 28 Cal.App.5th 824, 839.) Under normal circumstances, the limitations period would expire March 15, 2019. Two periods of tolling, however, extended the deadline. Apparently by agreement, the st...

Excerpt: ...ning property and business affairs of the judgment debtor.” (Lee v. Swansboro County Property Owners Assn. (2007) 151 Cal.App.4th 575, 581; Young v. Keele (1987) 188 Cal.App.3d 1090, 1093 [“[T]he examination is intended to be summary and factual according to the widest scope for inquiry concerning property and business affairs of the debtor; the object of the proceeding being to compel the judgment debtor to give information concerning his pr...

Excerpt: ...27, 2021. Based on the supplemental briefing, the motion is granted. The settlement is within the appropriate range considering the factors set forth in Tech‐Bilt, Inc. v. Woodward‐Clyde & Associates (1985) 38 Cal.3d 488, 499. The Settling Defendants' Financial Condition The settling defendants have made a prima facie showing of limited financial resources that can be directed to a settlement fund. Although a settling defendant's financial co...

Excerpt: ...fendants failed to pay minimum wages, overtime wages, and rest period wages, such that these wages were not paid twice monthly because they were not paid at all. Candy Shops, Inc. v. Superior Court (Silva) 210 Cal.App.4th 889, however, held that section 204 addresses only “how wages have been paid,” not “what wages are owed.” (Id. at pp. 904‐905.) Plaintiff argues that Candy Shops is inapplicable because it did not involve a claim for p...

Excerpt: ... of public access. Due to the commercial interest, a substantial probability exists that the interest will prejudiced if the information is not sealed. However, the entirety of the documents do not need to be sealed. The parties have failed to file redacted documents as directed. Before granting the motion, the court needs to review the proposed redactions. 2. Motion to sequence discovery: Grant. Williams precludes requiring the representative pl...

Excerpt: ...The correct Arbitration Agreement (Exhibit C, rather than Exhibit B) only required employees to sign the agreement if they consented to arbitration. Therefore, defendant's evidence is sufficient to show, at least prima facie, that plaintiff signed. Significantly, plaintiff fails to submit a declaration denying that she signed; she only argues that defendant's showing is insufficient. She is mistaken. A document which has been destroyed or is othe...