July 28, 2014
Law & Motions Tentative Rulings
  • Law and Motion Department Tentative Ruling Line:  (650) 261-5019
  • Other Judges' tentatives: please reference the appropriate Case Number and Case Caption below and contact the appropriate department.

Telephonic Appearances (CourtCall): If an appearance is required or if a party has provided timely notice of intent to appear by 4:00 p.m. to the court and all parties, any party may appear telephonically through CourtCall. To do so, you must contact CourtCall at (888) 882-6878 no later than 4:30 p.m. on the court day prior to the hearing. Notifying CourtCall with your intent to appear is not an alternative to notifying the court. Please visit their website for more information. Please also see California Rule of Court No. 3.670.

In the Superior Court of the State of California

In and for the County of San Mateo

 

Law and Motion Calendar

Judge: Honorable ELIZABETH K. LEE

Department 17

 

400 County Center, Redwood City

Courtroom 2M

 

JULY 25, 2014

 

IF YOU INTEND TO APPEAR ON ANY CASE ON THIS CALENDAR YOU MUST DO THE FOLLOWING:

1. YOU MUST CALL (650) 261-5019 BEFORE 4:00 P.M. TO INFORM THE COURT OF YOUR INTENT TO APPEAR.

2. You must give notice before 4:00 P.M. to all parties of your intent to appear pursuant to California Rules of Court 3.1308(a)(1).

 

Failure to do both items 1 and 2 will result in no oral presentation.

 

N.B. Notifying CourtCall with your intent to appear is not an alternative to notifying the court.  

 

All Counsel are reminded to comply with California Rule of Court 3.1110.  The Court will expect all exhibits to be tabbed accordingly. 

 

    Case                  Title / Nature of Case

9:00

1

CIV 521342       CITIBANK, N.A. VS. NICHOLAS MAKREUS

 

 

CITIBANK, N.A.                        HARVEY M. MOORE

NICHOLAS MAKREUS

 

 

DEMURRER TO FIRST Amended COMPLAINT of CITIBANK, N.A. BY NICK MAKREAS

 

 

·         Defendant’s Demurrers to the 1st, 4th and 7th Causes of Action (Breach of Contract) are OVERRULED.  The pleading does not allege facts showing that the agreement required a signature for its creation.  Acceptance of an offer and the creation of a contract may occur when the party accepts the benefits of the contract.  (Civil Code §§ 1581-1584 and 1589.)  The Complaint alleges contract creation by Defendant’s acceptance of the contract benefits.  (Complaint ¶¶ 9, 27 and 45.)  Also, the offeree “may accept, either in words or by his actions or conduct.”  (Beatty v. Oakland Sheet Metal Supply Co. (1952) 111 Cal.App.2d 53, 62.)  “Conduct of the offeree may, under proper circumstances, constitute acceptance.”  (Id.)  The Complaint sufficiently alleges that Defendant accepted the offer by his conduct of using the credit cards and accepting the benefits of the credit agreement.  (First Amended Complaint ¶¶ 8, 26 and 44.) 

 

·         Defendant shall file and serve an Answer no later than August 8, 2014.

 

·         Demurring party is directed to prepare a written order consistent with the Court’s ruling for the Court’s signature, pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1312, and provide notice thereof to the opposing party/counsel as required by law and the California Rules of Court.  The order is to be submitted directly to Judge Elizabeth K. Lee, Department 17.

                                     

_____________________________________________________________________

9:00

2

CIV 522062       JOHN CHAN VS. QUALITY STAFFING, LLC

 

 

JOHN CHAN                             MICHAEL H. KIM

QUALITY STAFFING, LLC                 BLAKE J. WOODHALL

 

 

MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES (SET ONE) BY JOHN CHAN

 

 

·         The Motion to Compel is denied.  The contact information of Defendant’s current and former employees is protected by the right to privacy and Plaintiff has not established that his need for the information outweighs the employees’ privacy rights.  Life Technologies Corp. v. Superior Court (2011) 197 Cal.App.4th 640. Plaintiff argues Defendant claims he was terminated due to an economic downturn and that he must question the employees in order to refute this claim.  However, Defendant’s discovery responses do not indicate Plaintiff’s employment was terminated as a result of any economic downturn. 

 

·         Moving party is directed to prepare a written order consistent with the Court’s ruling for the Court’s signature, pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1312, and provide notice thereof to the opposing party/counsel as required by law and the California Rules of Court.  The order is to be submitted directly to Judge Elizabeth K. Lee, Department 17.

 

_____________________________________________________________________

9:00

3

CIV 522374       JERRY S. LOU VS. RICHARD T. CHANG, ET AL.

 

 

JERRY S. LOU                          MARC BRANCO

RICHARD T. CHANG                      PRO/PER

 

 

MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT RICHARD T. CHANG AND REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS OF $1500.00 BY JERRY S. LOU

 

 

·         Plaintiff JERRY S. LOU’s unopposed Motion for Sanctions is GRANTED as to the request for monetary sanctions in the amount of $1,500.00 against Defendant RICHARD T. CHANG for his failure to obey the Court’s prior order compelling discovery responses.  Defendant CHANG is ordered to pay Plaintiff $1,500 in monetary sanctions and serve his responses to Form Interrogatories (Set One), Special Interrogatories (Set One) and Request for Production of Documents (Set One) no later than August 8, 2014. 

 

·         Moving party is directed to prepare a written order consistent with the Court’s ruling for the Court’s signature, pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1312, and provide notice thereof to the opposing party/counsel as required by law and the California Rules of Court.  The order is to be submitted directly to Judge Elizabeth K. Lee, Department 17.

 

_____________________________________________________________________

9:00

4

CIV 522390       ANDY SABERI VS. SAEED GHAFOORI

 

 

ANDY SABERI                           DONALD F. DRUMMOND

SAEED GHAFOORI                        MATTHEW P. GUICHARD

 

 

MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT BY SAEED GHAFOORI

 

 

·         Defendant’s Motion to Strike is DENIED because Defendant has not demonstrated that the late filing affected any substantial right of Defendant (see Code of Civil Procedure § 475); also, Defendant did have substantial notice of the First Amended Complaint.  Defendant’s Request for Discovery Concessions are DENIED without prejudice to allow Defendant to pursue such discovery at a later date.  The Court notes that Plaintiff has represented that Mr. Buenaventura is available for further deposition.

 

·         Moving party is directed to prepare a written order consistent with the Court’s ruling for the Court’s signature, pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1312, and provide notice thereof to the opposing party/counsel as required by law and the California Rules of Court.  The order is to be submitted directly to Judge Elizabeth K. Lee, Department 17.

 

_____________________________________________________________________

9:00

5

CIV 525412       DIANNE RODRIGUEZ-COOK VS. FOSTER CITY POLICE

                   DEPARTMENT

 

 

DIANNE RODRIGUEZ-COOK                 STANLEY GOFF

FOSTER CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT         TODD H. MASTER

 

 

MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY RESPONSES AND FOR SANCTIONS BY CITY OF FOSTER CITY

 

 

·         Defendant’s unopposed Motion to Compel Responses to Form Interrogatories [Set 1], Special Interrogatories [Set 1] and Demand for Production of Documents [Set 1] is GRANTED pursuant to CCP §§ 2030.290 and 2031.300.  Plaintiff has not provided complete and verified responses to Defendant’s discovery requests as required by CCP §§ 2030.250(a), 2030.260 and 2031.260.  Plaintiff is ORDERED to provide verified responses, without objection, to Defendant’s Form Interrogatories [Set 1], Special Interrogatories [Set 1] and Request for Production of Documents [Set 1] within 15 days of service of notice of this order.

 

·         Defendant’s Request for Sanctions is GRANTED.  Defendant shall be awarded $1,540.00 in attorney’s fees and costs incurred to prepare this motion under CCP §§ 2030.290(c) and 2031.300(c).  Plaintiff is ORDERED to pay $1,540.00 in sanctions within 15 days of service of notice of this order.

 

·         Moving party is directed to prepare a written order consistent with the Court’s ruling for the Court’s signature, pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1312, and provide notice thereof to the opposing party/counsel as required by law and the California Rules of Court.  The order is to be submitted directly to Judge Elizabeth K. Lee, Department 17.

 

_____________________________________________________________________

9:00

6

CIV 526284       WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION vs. SCOTLAND-

                    COLORADO, LLC, ET AL.

 

 

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.                ANNE M. SCHAUERMAN

SCOTLAND-COLORADO, LLC                ROBERT G. HOWIE

 

 

DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT of WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION BY SCOTLAND-COLORADO LLC AND ROBERT HOWIE 

 

 

·         This matter is moot.  The moving parties have asked that this matter be taken off calendar. 

 

_____________________________________________________________________

9:00

7

CIV 526302       WILLIAM M. WINDSOR VS. FACEBOOK, INC.

 

 

WILLIAM M. WINDSOR                    PRO/PER

FACEBOOK, INC.                        JULIE E. SCHWARTZ

 

 

MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS SET ONE & SET TWO BY WILLIAM M. WINDSOR

 

 

·         This matter is being taken off calendar due to the order issued by Judge Lisa A. Novak on July 2, 2014 staying the proceedings until August 11, 2014.  The parties are directed to meet and confer to select a new date for the hearing on this motion after August 11, 2014.

 

_____________________________________________________________________

9:00

8

CIV 527299       A.J. VS. FOSTER FAMILY HOME AND SMALL

                   FAMILY HOME INSURANCE FUND

 

 

A.J.                                  GERALD SINGLETON

FOSTER FAMILY HOME                    SUSAN J. KAWALA

 

 

DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT A.J. BY FOSTER FAMILY HOME AND SMALL FAMILY HOME INSURANCE FUND

 

 

·         This matter has been taken off calendar at the request of the moving parties, Foster Family Home and Small Family Home Insurance Fund, who advised that the parties are engaged in settlement negotiations.

 

_____________________________________________________________________

9:00

9

CIV 527656       PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY VS. WOODSIDE LAND,

                   LLC, ET AL.

 

 

PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC CO.          CHRISTOPHER J. GONZALEZ

WOODSIDE LAND, LLC

 

 

MOTION FOR ORDER FOR PREJUDGMENT POSSESSION BY PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY

 

 

·         This matter is moot.  Plaintiff, the moving party, asked that the matter be taken off calendar. 

 

_____________________________________________________________________

9:00

10

CLJ 523371       AMERICAN EXPRESS CENTURION BANK VS. SOPHIA CABOSE

 

 

AMERICAN EXPRESS CENTURION BANK       MARTIN HOFFMANN

SOPHIA CABOSE                         PRO/PER

 

 

MOTION TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT AND REFER THE MATTER FOR BINDING ARBITRATION BY SOPHIA CABOSE

 

 

·         Since the Defendant’s motion seeks to set aside the judgment granted by Judge Lisa A. Novak, the motion must be heard by her.  The moving party is directed to contact Judge Novak’s department at (650) 261-5113 to obtain a special set hearing date for her to consider this motion.   

 

_____________________________________________________________________

9:00

11

CLJ 528045       DISCOVER BANK VS. DALE A. BAGNELL

 

 

DISCOVER BANK                         JOHN E. GORDON

DALE A. BAGNELL                       PRO/PER

 

 

MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS BY DISCOVER BANK

 

 

·         Plaintiff Discover Bank’s unopposed Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is GRANTED.  Under CCP § 438(c)(1)(A), a motion for judgment on the pleadings can be made where the Complaint states sufficient facts to constitute a cause of action against the defendant and the Answer does not state facts sufficient to constitute a defense to the Complaint.  Here, the defendant’s Answer does not contain a denial of any of the allegations of Plaintiff’s unverified Complaint.  Nor has Defendant offered any affirmative defenses or exceptions.  Judgment for Plaintiff in the amount of $13,936.45 plus costs in the amount of $425.00 for a judgment of $14,361.45.

 

·         Moving party is directed to prepare a written order consistent with the Court’s ruling for the Court’s signature, pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1312, and provide notice thereof to the opposing party/counsel as required by law and the California Rules of Court.  The order is to be submitted directly to Judge Elizabeth K. Lee, Department 17.

 

_____________________________________________________________________

9:01

12

CLJ 209808       NATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES vs. DEBRA RAE WARD

 

 

NATIONAL CHURCH RESIDENCES            JONATHAN HERSCHEL BORNSTEIN

DEBRA RAE WARD

 

 

MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE OF UNLAWFUL DETAINER SUMMONS BY DEBRA RAE WARD

 

 

·         Defendant Debra Rae Ward’s Motion to Quash is DENIED without prejudice for insufficient notice.  San Mateo County Superior Court Local Rule 3.15 provides that all motions to quash in Unlawful Detainer actions must be served and filed not less than 3 nor more than 7 days after filing the Notice.  This Motion to Quash was originally set on July 18, 2014 for a hearing on July 25, 2014.  This would provide a minimum of 3 days’ notice [and not more than 7 days].  The Proof of Service, however, states that the motion was served by regular mail on Plaintiff’s counsel on July 18, 2014.  Five (5) additional calendar days are required for mailing pursuant to CCP § 1005.  This notice is technically insufficient under our local rule.  A minimum of 3 days’ notice plus 5 additional days for mailing from July 18, 2014 means that the first day this motion could be heard is July 28, 2014 [as July 26, 2014 is a Saturday]. Notice for a hearing on July 25, 2014 is technically insufficient.

 

·         Moving party is directed to prepare a written order consistent with the Court’s ruling for the Court’s signature, pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1312, and provide notice thereof to the opposing party/counsel as required by law and the California Rules of Court.  The order is to be submitted directly to Judge Elizabeth K. Lee, Department 17.

 


 

In the Superior Court of the State of California

In and for the County of San Mateo

 

Presiding Judge Law and Motion Calendar

Judge: HONORABLE ROBERT D FOILES

Department 21

 

400 County Center, Redwood City

Courtroom 2J

 

JULY 25, 2014

 

If you plan to appear on any case on this calendar,

 you must call (650) 261-5121 before 4:00 p.m. and you must give notice also before 4:00 p.m. to all parties of your intent to appear pursuant to California Rules of Court 3.1308(a)(1).

 

Case                   Title / Nature of Case

9:00

1

CIV 521249       VICTOR SUAREZ, ET AL. VS. JERRY CHIN

 

 

VICTOR SUAREZ                         PHILIP L. GREGORY

JERRY CHIN                            ILYSSA M. ADLER

 

 

MOTION TO REOPEN DISCOVERY AND CONTINUE ALL PRE-TRIAL DATES AND DEADLINES BY JERRY CHIN

 

 

·         APPEAR.  

 


 

 

 

 


POSTED:  3:00 PM

 

© 2014 Superior Court of San Mateo County