February 28, 2017
Law & Motion Department 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 RICHARD H. DuBOIS

Department 16

 

400 County Center, Redwood City

Courtroom 7A

 

Monday, February 27, 2017

 

NOTICE TO ALL COUNSEL

 

Until further order of the Court, no endorsed-filed “courtesy copy” of pleadings is required to be provided to the Law and Motion Department.

 

 

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.

 

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

Line: 1

16-CIV-00617     MTC FINANCIAL INC. vs. 811 SKYLINE DRIVE, DALY CITY

                    CA 94015

 

MTC FINANCIAL, INC.                        JONATHAN J. DAMEN

811 SKYLINE DRIVE, DALY CITY CA 94015     

 

 

motion FOR ORDER OF DEPOSIT OF ADDITIONAL FUNDS, DISCHARGE, AND ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS BY PETITIONER

TENTATIVE RULING:

 

On Jan. 18, 2017, Claimant Ken Wong filed a Notice of Appeal in the California Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Case No. A150407.  This is a non-appealable order and, therefore, this motion is not subject to a stay.

 

The motion is GRANTED. 

 

If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court, pursuant to Rule 3.1308(a)(1), adopted by Local Rule 3.10, effective immediately, and no formal order pursuant to Rule 3.1312 or any other notice is required as the tentative ruling affords sufficient notice to the parties.

 

 



9:00

Line: 2

16-CIV-02754     BRANDON COLLINS vs. CARLYPSO, INC., et al.

 

 

HOVHANNES TUMANYAN                    Charles J. Smith

BRANDON COLLINS                       GEORGE J. VASQUEZ

 

 

demurrer TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT

TENTATIVE RULING:

 

The Demurrer by Defendant Hovhannes Tumanyan to Plaintiff Brandon Collins’ Complaint is SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND. Plaintiff has not, and cannot, state a cause of action for violation of Labor Code sec. 1102.5(b) against this individual defendant. 

 

Labor Code sec. 1102.5(b) was amended in 2013 to add the phrase ...  an employer, “or any person acting on behalf of the employer  retaliating against an employee…. It is unclear from the plain meaning of this phrase whether the legislature intended to provide for individual liability for managers and supervisors, or whether the phrase was intended to further define the liability of employers.  There is no legislative history or California appellate case to help explain this ambiguity.

 

The California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) defines “employer” as “any person acting as an agent of an employer,” which is very similar to the 2013 amendment to Labor Code sec. 1102.5(b) above. Gov’t Code § 12926(d).  However, it has been determined that there is no liability for managers and supervisors under FEHA, although the language of the statute defines “employer” nearly identically as Labor Code sec. 1102.5. 

 

Therefore, drawing the parallel to the FEHA, this Court finds no individual liability for managers and supervisors under Labor Code sec. 1102.5(b).

 

Defendant’s Request for Judicial Notice is granted.

 

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 Richard H. DuBois, Department 16. 

 



9:00

Lines: 3 - 5

16-UDL-00410     Bosco Credit LLC vs. GLORIA b. SAN PEDRO, et al.

 

 

Bosco Credit LLC                      MICHAEL R. ASATOURIAN

GLORIA B. SAN PEDRO                   jeffrey c. tsu

 

 

 

3. MOTION TO compel ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES

TENTATIVE RULING:

 

Plaintiff BOSCO CREDIT, LLC’s Motion to Compel Responses to Form and Special Interrogatories is GRANTED.  Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.290(b).  Defendant GLORIA B. SAN PEDRO is ordered to serve full and complete responses, without objections, no later than March 13, 2017.   

 

If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court, pursuant to CRC Rule 3.1308(a)(1), adopted by Local Rule 3.10.  If the tentative ruling is uncontested, prevailing party is directed to prepare, circulate, and submit a written order reflecting this Court’s ruling verbatim for the Court’s signature, consistent with the requirements of CRC Rule 3.1312.  The proposed order is to be submitted directly to Judge Richard H. DuBois, Department 16.

 

 

4. MOTION TO compel RESPONSE TO DOCUMENT REQUESTS

TENTATIVE RULING:

 

Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Response to Request for Production of Documents is GRANTED.  Code Civ. Proc. § 2031.300(b).  Defendant is ordered to serve full and complete responses, without objections, no later than March 13, 2017.  

 

If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court, pursuant to CRC Rule 3.1308(a)(1), adopted by Local Rule 3.10.  If the tentative ruling is uncontested, prevailing party is directed to prepare, circulate, and submit a written order reflecting this Court’s ruling verbatim for the Court’s signature, consistent with the requirements of CRC Rule 3.1312.  The proposed order is to be submitted directly to Judge Richard H. DuBois, Department 16.

 

 

5. MOTION TO HAVE REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION SERVED ON DEFENDANT GLORIA B SAN PEDRO BE DEEMED ADMITTED

TENTATIVE RULING:

 

Plaintiff’s Motion to Deem Matters Admitted is GRANTED.  The genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in Plaintiff’s Requests for Admissions (Set One) are deemed admitted pursuant to Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 2033.280(b).

 

Plaintiff’s request for monetary sanctions is GRANTED in the total amount of $750.00 for all three motions.  Defendant is ordered to pay this amount no later than March 13, 2017. 

 

Plaintiff’s premature request for evidence sanctions for all three motions is DENIED.    

 

If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court, pursuant to CRC Rule 3.1308(a)(1), adopted by Local Rule 3.10.  If the tentative ruling is uncontested, prevailing party is directed to prepare, circulate, and submit a written order reflecting this Court’s ruling verbatim for the Court’s signature, consistent with the requirements of CRC Rule 3.1312.  The proposed order is to be submitted directly to Judge Richard H. DuBois, Department 16.

 

 

 


 

 

 


9:00

Line: 6

17-CIV-00407     COUNTY OF SAN MATEO SHERIFF CARLOS BOLANOS vs.

                      RICHARD VINCENT DEBELLA

 

 

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO SHERIFF CARLOS BOLANOS John C. Beiers

RICHARD VINCENT DEBELLA

 

 

Motion to seal

TENTATIVE RULING:

 

Petitioner COUNTY OF SAN MATEO SHERIFF CARLOS BOLANOS’ Motion to Seal Records is GRANTED.  

 

Pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 2.550(d), the Court finds that (1) an overriding interest exists which overcomes the right of public access to the record; (2) the overriding interest supports sealing the record; (3) a substantial probability exists that the overriding interest will be prejudiced if the record is not sealed; (4) the proposed sealing is narrowly tailored; and (5) no less restrictive means exist to achieve the overriding interest. 

 

Exhibit A to the Declaration of Adam W. Ely, filed in support of the Petition Re: Confiscated Firearms and Ammunition, is hereby sealed. 

 

If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court, pursuant to Rule 3.1308(a)(1), adopted by Local Rule 3.10, effective immediately, and no formal order pursuant to Rule 3.1312 or any other notice is required as the tentative ruling affords sufficient notice to the parties.

 



9:00

Lines: 7 & 8

CIV522042     JAMES IRIZARRY VS. TERRACE ASSOCIATES, INC. ET AL.

 

 

JAMES IRIZARRY                         DANIEL RAY BACON

TERRACE ASSOCIATES, INC.                   NANCY J. DEPASQUALE

LARRY AIKINS                          PAUL SHENG

 

7. joinder of Defendant Larry Aikins to Defendant Terrace Associates, Inc.'s Motion to Exclude Anonymous Letters and Handwriting Expert

TENTATIVE RULING:                                  

 

Defendant’s motion to exclude evidence is denied without prejudice to bringing the motion before the judge who eventually is assigned for trial

 

If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court, pursuant to Rule 3.1308(a)(1), adopted by Local Rule 3.10, effective immediately, and no formal order pursuant to Rule 3.1312 or any other notice is required as the tentative ruling affords sufficient notice to the parties.

 

 

8. motion to exclude BY TERRACE ASSOCIATES

TENTATIVE RULING:

 

Defendant’s motion to exclude evidence is denied without prejudice to bringing the motion before the judge who eventually is assigned for trial

 

If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court, pursuant to Rule 3.1308(a)(1), adopted by Local Rule 3.10, effective immediately, and no formal order pursuant to Rule 3.1312 or any other notice is required as the tentative ruling affords sufficient notice to the parties.

 

 



9:00

Lines: 9 & 10

CIV532236     PETER HARVEY VS. VINCE CASAREZ, ET AL.

 

 

VINCE CASAREZ                         KENYON MARK LEE

PETER HARVEY                          NICHOLAS D. YONANO

 

 

 

9. motion for leave to file cross-complaint and amended answer

TENTATIVE RULING:

 

This matter is dropped from calendar at the request of the moving party. 

 

                                                   

 

10. motion for order APPOINTING REFEREE 

TENTATIVE RULING:

 

This matter is dropped from calendar at the request of the moving party.


 


9:01

Line: 11

CLJ211895     MOAB INVESTMENT GROUP VS. REGINA B. MANANTAN

 

 

MOAB INVESTMENT GROUP, LLC             JOANNA KOZUBAL

REGINA B. MANANTAN                     TIMOTHY L. MCCANDLESS

 

 

MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

TENTATIVE RULING:

 

The defendant’s motion for reconsideration of the court’s ruling enforcing stipulation made on January 17, 2017 and upon which a judgment was entered on January 30, 2017 is DENIED.

 

CCP section 1008 provides that a request for reconsideration must be based upon new or different facts, law, or circumstances that was not reasonably available to the moving party at the time the order was entered.  Defendant has not presented new facts in this matter and is, therefore, not entitled to reconsideration of the previous order.

 

If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court, pursuant to Rule 3.1308(a)(1), adopted by Local Rule 3.10, effective immediately, and no formal order pursuant to Rule 3.1312 or any other notice is required as the tentative ruling affords sufficient notice to the parties.

 

     

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 


POSTED:  3:00 PM

 

© 2017 Superior Court of San Mateo County