June 29, 2016
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 donald j. ayoob

Department 27

 

400 County Center, Redwood City

Courtroom 7B

 

Thursday, June 23, 2016

 

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

1

CIV 507680      STEVEN EDELMAN, ET AL. VS. NICHOLSON-LAMB VENTURE LP, ET AL.

 

 

STEVEN EDELMAN                        G. SCOTT EMBLIDGE

NICHOLSON-LAMB VENTURE LP             KRISTOFER W. BIORN

MOTION TO AMEND JUDGMENT BY STEVEN EDELMAN, ET AL.

 

The Plaintiffs’ Motion to Amend the Judgment in this action must be heard by the Hon. Elizabeth M. Hill. Judge Hill entered the judgment which Plaintiffs now seek to amend. The Plaintiffs are directed to contact the clerk to Judge Hill, in Department 12, at (650) 261-5112 to calendar a Special Set hearing for their Motion to Amend Judgment.

_____________________________________________________________________


9:00

2

CIV 523248       JIM BAKA, ET AL. VS. CITY OF BELMONT

 

 

JIM BAKA                              DAVID M. KING

CITY OF BELMONT                       HOLLY O. WHATLEY

 

 

MOTION FOR BIFURCATED LEGAL ISSUE TRIAL BY CITY OF BELMONT

 

The motion to bifurcate trial is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Defendant’s argument based on the declaratory relief claim is moot, since Plaintiff dismissed that claim on June 9, 2016. Bifurcating the liability phase of the inverse condemnation claim will not achieve any efficiency, because the same facts and liability must be tried before a jury for Plaintiff’s claims of nuisance and trespass. The question of whether lower Marburger Avenue is public or private property is not dispositive in the inverse condemnation claim, since Plaintiffs allege damage to not just to the road, but also for diminution in value of their respective residences. (See 2nd Am. Comp. ¶¶ 14-16.)

 

Finally, trying inverse condemnation liability separately before the court could result in a finding inconsistent from the finding of a jury that hears the same facts for trespass and nuisance.  

 

Denial of this motion is without prejudice to Defendant’s bringing the same motion to the judge who is assigned for trial.

 

If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court. Thereafter, Plaintiff shall 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 written notice of the ruling to all parties who have appeared in the action, as required by law and the California Rules of Court.

_____________________________________________________________________


9:00

3

CIV 527347       KEALAONAPUA O'SULLIVAN LUM VS. MIDPEN HOUSING

                   CORPORATION, ET AL.

 

 

KEALAONAPUA O'SULLIVAN LUM            CHARLES J. SMITH

MIDPEN HOUSING CORPORATION                      DAVID M. MCLAUGHLIN

 

MOTION FOR CONTEMPT AND FOR ISSUE SANCTIONS RE: PLAINTIFF LUM'S REFUSAL TO SUBMIT BY MIDPEN HOUSING CORPORATION, ET AL.

 

Defendant MIDPEN Housing Corporation’s Motion for Contempt arises from the Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the order issued by the Hon. Susan Etezadi on December 23, 2015. Because the motion seeks to hold plaintiff in contempt for violation of Judge Eteadi’s order, this motion must be heard by Judge Etezadi. Defendant MIDPEN Housing Corporation is directed to contact the clerk in Department 18 at (650) 261-5118 to arrange a special set hearing for their Motion for Contempt.

     _____________________________________________________________________


9:00

4

CIV 534169     J & J DISTRIBUTING COMPANY, INC. VS. JUST NATURAL, INC, ET AL

 

 

J & J DISTRIBUTING COMPANY, INC.      PAUL J. SMOOT

JUST NATURAL, INC.                    TODD A. ROBERTS

 

 

DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT of J & J DISTRIBUTING COMPANY, INC. BY JUST NATURAL, INC., ET AL.

 

Plaintiff’s request for dismissal having been granted and entered on June 10, 2016, the matter is off calendar.

     __________________________________________________________________


9:00

5

CIV 537708       AVIS CORPORATION, ET AL. VS. MEHMET GUNDOGDU, ET AL.

 

 

AVIS CORPORATION                      KENNETH R. VAN VLECK

MEHMET GUNDOGDU                       EUGENE ASHLEY

 

 

HEARING ON PETITION TO COMPEL BINDING CONTRACTUAL ARBITRATION FILED BY SUBHASH GROVER, ET AL.

 

 

JOINDER OF MARCUS & MILLICHAP REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT, FABIO SANGIORGI TO AVIS CORP'S PETITION TO COMPEL BINDING ARBITRATION

 

Plaintiffs / Petitioners AVIS CORPORATION and SUBHASH GROVER’s Petition to Compel Binding Contractual Arbitration is DENIED. 

 

Defendants / Respondents MEHMET GUNDOGDU and AYNUR GUNDOGDU have filed a Cross-Complaint alleging causes of action not only against Plaintiffs / Petitioners, but also against Cross-Defendants MARCUS & MILLICHAP REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT SERVICES and FABIO SANGIORGI, who are not parties to the arbitration agreement.  Where, as here, a party is involved in litigation with third parties arising out of the same transaction or series of related transactions and there is a real possibility of conflicting rulings on common issues of law or fact, arbitration should not be compelled.  Code Civ. Proc. § 1281.2(c).

 

The Plaintiff’s request for monetary sanctions is DENIED.

 

Prevailing 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 Donald J. Ayoob, Department 27.

_____________________________________________________________________


9:00

6

CLJ 534557       IN RE: $3872.00

 

 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA     MEGAN C. WILKINS

ANTHONY MEDINA

 

MOTION  FOR ORDER THAT REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS BE DEEMDED ADMITTED BY PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

 

The Plaintiff’s unopposed Motion to Deem Matters Admitted is GRANTED pursuant to CCP § 2033.280. All matters set forth in the Request for Admissions [Set 1], dated March 21, 2016 are hereby deemed admitted. 

 

MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES BY PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

 

The Plaintiff’s unopposed Motion to Compel Interrogatory Responses is GRANTED pursuant to CCP §2030.290(b). Interested Party Anthony Medina shall provide verified responses, without objection, to the Form Interrogatories [Set 1] within 15 days of service of the notice of entry of the order.

 

Interested Party Anthony Medina is further ordered to pay sanctions in the amount of $175.00 to Plaintiff within 15 days of service of the notice of entry of 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 Donald J. Ayoob, Department 27.

_____________________________________________________________________


9:00

7

CLJ 535878       WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. VS. HALEY HAFKENSCHIEL

 

 

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.                MATTHEW W. QUALL

HALEY HAFENSCHIEL                     PRO/PER

 

 

MOTION FOR ORDER: (1) TRUTH OF MATTERS SPECIFIED IN REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS BY WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.

 

The unopposed Motion by Plaintiff that Truth of Matters Specified in Requests for Admission Be Deemed Admitted is GRANTED.  The genuineness of each document and the truth of all matters specified in Request for Admissions, Set One, dated February 5, 2016, are hereby deemed admitted. 

 

The unopposed motion by Plaintiff imposing monetary sanctions is GRANTED pursuant to CCP §2033.280(c).  Defendant is to pay monetary sanctions to plaintiff in the amount of $60.00 within 15 days of service of the notice of entry of 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 Donald J. Ayoob, Department 27.

_____________________________________________________________________


9:00

8

CLJ 537000       IN RE $1,055.00

 

 

DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE               MEGAN C. WILKINS

DEVIN LUM

 

 

MOTION FOR ORDER THAT REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS BE DEEMDED ADMITTED BY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE

 

The Plaintiff’s unopposed Motion to Deem Matters Admitted is GRANTED pursuant to CCP § 2033.280. All matters set forth in the Request for Admissions [Set 1], dated April 1, 2016 are hereby deemed admitted. 

 

MOTION FOR SANCTIONS AND TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES BY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE

 

The Plaintiff’s unopposed Motion to Compel Interrogatory Responses is GRANTED pursuant to CCP §2030.290(b). Interested Party Devin Lum shall provide verified responses, without objection, to the Form Interrogatories [Set 1] within 15 days of service of the notice of entry of the order.

 

Interested Party Devin Lum is further ordered to pay sanctions in the amount of $175.00 to Plaintiff within 15 days of service of the notice of entry of 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 Donald J. Ayoob, Department 27.

____________________________________________________________________________

 

 

 

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 JOHN L. GRANDSAERT

Department 11

 

400 County Center, Redwood City

Courtroom 2D

 

Thursday, June 23, 2016

 

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

 you must call (650) 261-5111 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 538403       RAUL RIVERA VS. FITBIT INC. ET AL.

 

 

RAUL RIVERA                           BRIAN J. ROBBINS

FITBIT, INC.

 

 

COMPLEX CASE STATUS CONFERENCE

 

 

·         The complex case status conference is continued to 90 days to September 22, 2016, at 9:00 a.m.  The case has been removed to federal court.

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________

 

 

 

In the Superior Court of the State of California

In and for the County of San Mateo

 

WRITS AND RECEIVERS CALENDAR

Judge: Honorable GEORGE A. MIRAM

Department 28

 

400 County Center, Redwood City

Courtroom 2F

 

Thursday, June 23, 2016

 

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

 you must call (650) 261-5128 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

2:00

1

CIV 536764       VIOLETA GRIGORESCU VS. THE SUPERIOR COURT

 

 

VIOLETA GRIGORESCU                    GEORGE F. CAMERLENGO

BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE SAN M        JOSHUA E. MORRISON

 

 

DEMURRER TO FIRst Amended PETITION of GRIGORESCU BY BOARD

OF TRUSTEES OF THE SAN MATEO COMMUNIT Y C

 

 

·         Moot.  A second amended petition has been filed.

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________


2:00

2

CIV 355792       RE: SAN GREGORIO CREEK STREA

 

 

SAN GREGORIO CREEK STREAM SYST

RANDOLPH P RHODES

 

 

HEARING ON PETITION TO MODIFY DECREE IN REGARD TO THE WATER

ALLOTMENT ASSIGNED TO IRENE GOUGH, ETC. FILED BY KASSI CHILDERS

 

 

·         GRANTED.

 

 

_____________________________________________________________________


2:00

3

CIV 535981       ANDREW KOTVAL VS. DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES

 

 

ANDREW KOTVAL                            MARSANNE WEESE

DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES             TERRY SENNE

 

 

WRIT OF MANDATE BY ANDREW KOTVAL.

 

 

·         The DMV’s findings come before the Court with a strong presumption of correctness and the petitioner bears the burden of convincing the Court that the decision is contrary to the weight of the evidence.  Fukuda v. City of Angels (1999) 20 Cal 4th 805, 817.  Determinations regarding the credibility of witnesses are within the province of the hearing officer.  Mullen v. Department of Real Estate (1988) 204 Cal App3d 295, 300-301.  Here the hearing officer determined the Petitioner’s witnesses were not credible and the officer was credible.  Suspicion of Driving Under the Influence, which arose soon after contact here, is sufficient to detain the driver.  There is no compelling evidence that the detention was unjustified or unduly prolonged.  Applying this court’s Independent Judgment, the weight of the evidence here supports the hearing officer’s determination. Writ DENIED.

 

 



2:00

4

CIV528792        MAURO ALVAYERO CRUZ, ET AL. VS. SIERRA CORPORATE 

                   MANAGEMENT, INC. ET AL.

 

 

 

MAURO ALVAYERO CRUZ                   FRANK PITRE

SIERRA CORPORATE MANAGEMENT           VINCENT S. LOH

 

 

MOTION FOR AN UNDERTAKING PURSUANT TO CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SECTION 529 BY SIERRA CORPORATE MANAGEMENT, INC. AND TRAILER RANCHO ASSOCIATES, L.P.

 

 

·         Off calendar.

 

 


 

 

 

 


POSTED:  3:00 PM

 

© 2016 Superior Court of San Mateo County