Excerpt: ...pplies? D efendants contend that the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) applies to this action because the Mutual Agreement to Arbitrate Claims expressly states that “[t]he Federal Arbitration Act (9 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.) (‘FAA') governs this Agreement, which evidences a transaction involving commerce.” (See Gralak Decl., ¶ 10, Exh. A, p. 1, lines 4 -5). Defendants also present evidence that Defendant HEARTLAND operates more than 62 health...

Excerpt: ...h violation, in addition to any other penalty established by law (H&S Code §25249.7(b)(1)). These violations may be enforced by, inter alia, persons in the public interest. (H&S Code §25249.7(c) -(d).) If there is a settlement of an action brought by a person in the pub lic interest, the plaintiff shall submit the settlement to the court for approval upon noticed motion, and the court may approve the settlement only if the court makes all of th...

Excerpt: ...tiffs”), filed a Complaint against Defendants IVY Cottages, Inc. and Carmen Rodriguez (“Defendants”). (ROA 2.) The Complaint alleges 14 causes of action for: 1. Failure to Pay All Wages Earned; 2. Failure to Provide Rest Breaks; 3. Failure to Provide Meal Periods; 4. Failu re to Indemnify; 5. Failure to Provide Accurate Wage Statements; 6. Failure to Pay Wages Owed Every Pay Period; 7. Failure to Pay Wages When Employment Ends; 8. PAGA Pen...

Excerpt: ...blic funds and , thus, does not eliminate the claim presentation requirement. Meet and Confer The Court finds Defendants adequately attempted to meet and confer with Plaintiff. Legal Standard “The party against whom a complaint or crosscomplaint has been filed may obje ct, by demurrer or answer as provided in Section 430.30, to the pleading on any one or more of the following grounds … [¶] The pleading does not state facts sufficient to co...

Excerpt: ... to amend. “To establish a prima facie case of harassment, [Plaintiff] must show that: (1) she is a member of a protected class; (2) she was subjected to unwelcome harassment; (3) the harassment was based on her protected status; (4) the harassment unreasonably interfered with her w ork performance by creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work environment; and (5) defendants are liable for the harassment.” Galvan v. Dameron Hospital...

Excerpt: ...pp.4th 1451, 1479.) The 2ndAC omits breach of fiduciary duty claims premised on fraud. Thus, the 2ndAC does not “clearly and affirmatively” show that the claim is barred by the statute of limitations based upon the dates alleged and is therefore not subject to demurrer. (See Marshall v. Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher (1995) 37 Cal.App.4th 1397, 1403.) Burtin raises additional new arguments in his Reply attempting to show that the first cause of ac...

Excerpt: ...the sixth ca use of action, the court finds that Plaintiff has alleged a special relationship that supports a cause of action for constructive trust. Further, that cause of action is not barred by the statute of limitations as Code Civ. Proc. §340.1 applies rather than Code Civ. Proc. § 338. Accordingly, the demurrer to that cause of action is overruled. On the seventh cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty, the court finds that Plaint...

Excerpt: ...e Amended Complaint of Plaintiff, Randell Young is CONTINUED to May 13, 2024, at 8:30 a.m. in Department N15. Defendants Seabreeze Management Company, Inc.; Estela Alday; Heidi Speare; Eric James; Fred Olsen; and Todd Hunter are ORDERED to serve all demurrer and mo tion to strike moving papers and reply papers upon Plaintiff Randell Young properly by mail service on or before April 16, 2024, and file a proof of service on or before April 19, 202...

Excerpt: ... a termi nating sanction against anyone engaging in conduct that is a misuse of the discovery process by an order striking out the pleadings or parts of the pleadings of any party engaging in the misuse of the discovery process, an order staying further proceedings by that party until an order for discovery is obeyed, an order dismissing the action, or any part of that action, of that party, or an order rendering a judgment by default against tha...

Excerpt: ...e demurrers a re virtually identical and assert the same challenges to the FAC. As such, the demurrers will be addressed together with any significant distinctions highlighted. Defendants' challenge both the first cause of action for medical negligence and the second c ause of action for fraud on the ground “[Defendants are] . . improper doe defendant[s]. (Code of Civil Procedure section 474.)” (Demurrers, p. 3, lines 5, 9.) Whether a defen...

Excerpt: ...d until nea rly 9:00 p.m. on April 8, 2024 —i.e., nearly a week late and after the close of business on the same day Smith's reply was due. Plaintiff provides no explanation or justification for failing to timely serve the opposition, and the late filing of the opposi tion has deprived Smith of its opportunity to file anything more than an untimely, truncated opposition. The court therefore exercises it discretion to refuse to consider the o...

Excerpt: ...dgment on the plea dings with respect to the Second Amended Complaint (SAC) filed by Plaintiff Jane Doe 7030. Standard for Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings A defendant may make a motion for judgment on the pleadings on the ground that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against that defendant. (Code Civ. Proc., § 438, subd. (c)(1)(B)(ii); Stevenson Real Estate Servs., Inc. v. CB Richard Ellis Real E...

Excerpt: ...dgment on the plea dings with respect to the Second Amended Complaint (SAC) filed by Plaintiff Jane Doe 7030. Standard for Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings A defendant may make a motion for judgment on the pleadings on the ground that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against that defendant. (Code Civ. Proc., § 438, subd. (c)(1)(B)(ii); Stevenson Real Estate Servs., Inc. v. CB Richard Ellis Real E...

Excerpt: ...ment. (See Govt. Code §§ 911.2(a) and 945.4 [setting forth claims presentation requirements].) The FAC alleges Government Code section 905(m), which was amended by AB 218, exempts any requirement that Plaintiff comply with the claim presentation requirement. The District argues that the change to Government Code section 905(m) made by AB 218 was unconstitutional as an improper gift of public funds under Article XVI, section 6 of the California ...

Excerpt: ...gwick is ORDERED to se rve the Complaint-In -Intervention upon all parties within 30 days of filing the Complaint -In -Intervention. Proposed Plaintiff -In -Intervention Sedgwick moves for leave to file a Complaint -In -Intervention. Standard for Intervention A non- party, who is referred to as an “intervenor,” may become a party to an action or proceeding between other persons by: (1) Joining a plaintiff in claiming what is sought by the c...

Excerpt: ...the exchange of information and documents which may be subject to confidentiality limitations on disclosure due to federal laws, state laws, and privacy rights. Standard for Motion for Protective Order Civil Procedure Code section 2030.090 provides that: (b) The co urt, for good cause shown, may make any order that justice requires to protect any party or other natural person or organization from unwarranted annoyance, embarrassment, or oppressi...

Excerpt: ...the exchange of information and documents which may be subject to confidentiality limitations on disclosure due to federal laws, state laws, and privacy rights. Standard for Motion for Protective Order Civil Procedure Code section 2030.090 provides that: (b) The co urt, for good cause shown, may make any order that justice requires to protect any party or other natural person or organization from unwarranted annoyance, embarrassment, or oppressi...

Excerpt: ...ness of the defect, the foreseeability of danger to Plaintiff, and the trivialness of the defect. Defendant's evidentiary objections are overruled. Basic Rules for Summary Judgment/Adjudication Under Code Civ. Proc. § 437, a party may move for summary adjudicatio n as to one or more causes of action within an action, one or more affirmative defenses, one or more claims for damages, or one or more issues of duty, if that party contends that the c...

Excerpt: ...ez -Bass mov es for terminating sanctions and monetary sanctions against Defendant Roberto Francisco Gallegos (Defendant Gallegos). Standard for Monetary and Non- Monetary Discovery Sanctions The court may impose monetary, issue, evidence, terminating, or contempt san ctions against any person engaging in any misuse of the discovery process. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.030, subds. (a) -(e).) Misuse of the discovery process includes, but is not ...

Excerpt: ...must follow the cor rect rules of procedure. (See Rappleyea v. Campbell (1994) 8 Cal.4th 975, 984 -985; Nwosu v. Uba (2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 1229, 1246 -1247). A self -represented litigant is not entitled to any greater consideration than other litigants and attorneys. (See Petr osyan v. Prince Corp. (2013) 223 Cal.App.4th 587, 594 [self -represented litigants are entitled to same treatment as represented parties].) The fact that Defendant is a se...

Excerpt: ...upon a clea r and convincing showing that a defendant is guilty of oppression, fraud or malice. A court order is required to obtain discovery of a defendant's financial condition in actions seeking punitive damages. (Civ. Code, § 3295, subd. (c).) Before a court m ay enter an order permitting discovery of a defendant's financial condition, it must (1) weigh the evidence submitted in favor of and in opposition to motion for discovery and (2) ma...

Excerpt: ... reason able particularity subject to any orders that may be appropriate under Section 3426.5 of the Civil Code.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2019.210.) Plaintiff has failed to demonstrate compliance with this requirement. Contrary to plaintiff's contentions, the first amended complaint (FAC) does not identify the subject trade secret with reasonable particularity. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 2019.210; Perlan Therapeutics, Inc. v. Superior Court (2009) ...

Excerpt: ...mpt at an informal resolution of each issue presented by the motion .”]; Clement v. Alegre (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 1277, 1293- 1294; Leko v. Cornerstone Building Inspection Services (2001) 86 Cal.App.4th 1109, 1124; see also Thomas Decl., ¶ 6, Exh. D [addressing Defendant's objections on 2/12/24].) Defendant maintains that it is willing to produce a witness as to Matters for Examination Nos. 1 and 2, but objects to Matters Nos. 3 and 4 on vario...

Excerpt: ...ional mis representation), 3rd cause of action (Bus. & Prof. Code 17200 violation), 4th cause of action (promissory estoppel), 5th cause of action (“set aside trustee's sale and void/cancel trustee's deed upon sale”), and 6th cause of action (quiet title). 2nd C/A (intentional misrepresentation) A cause of action for intentional misrepresentation requires showing (1) a misrepresentation; (2) knowledge of its falsity; (3) intent to induce reli...

Excerpt: .... Univ ersity of San Francisco (2024) 100 Cal.App.5th 75 should inform its analysis. In their supplement, “Plaintiffs recognize Berlanga's persuasive force on this Court” and concede that “their arguments may, ultimately, may need to be decided in this District's appellate court.” (ROA 369 at p. 3.) To be clear, Berlanga is not merely persuasive authority in this Court, it is binding. (See Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962) ...