May 25, 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 JOSEPH C. SCOTT

Department 25

 

400 County Center, Redwood City

Courtroom 2G

 

Wednesday, May 25, 2016

 

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 525865       GEORGE K. PLAVJIAN VS. ROSAS INVESTMENT CORP., ET AL.

 

 

GEORGE K. PLAVJIAN                    MARK BRIFMAN

ROSAS INVESTMENT CORP.

 

 

MOTION FOR ASSIGNMENT ORDER BY MSB HOMES, LLC

 

 

·         The Motion for Assignment Order by Judgment Creditor MSB Homes, LLC is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE due to defective notice.  The Court notes that the proof of service indicates the motion was served on Capital Finance by mail at: 700 East Redlands Blvd., Suite U, #233, Redlands, CA 92373.  The website for the California Secretary of State shows a current address for service of process on Capital Finance as 5295 Arlington Avenue, Riverside, CA 92504.

 

·         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 Joseph C. Scott, Department 25.

 

_____________________________________________________________________

9:00

2

CIV 527067     DORIS MAMALES, ET AL. VS. ASHLEY INGRID JOHNSON, ET AL.

       

 

DORIS MAMALES                         GERALDINE ARMENDARIZ

ASHLEY INGRID JOHNSON                 LANCE BURROW

 

 

MOTION RE: WRITTEN DISCOVERY & RELATED MOTION FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS

AGAINST PLAINTIFF DORIS MAMALES AND HER ATTORNEY GERALDINE ARMENDARIZ BY GINA HAAS AND GABRIELLE HAAS

 

 

·         Moot.  Notice of Settlement of Entire Case was filed on April 25, 2016.

 

 

MOTION RE: WRITTEN DISCOVERY & RELATED MOTION FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS

AGAINST PLAINTIFF KASSORDA MAMALES AND HER ATTORNEY GERALDINE ARMENDARIZ BY GINA HAAS AND GABRIELLE HAAS

 

 

·         See above.

 

_____________________________________________________________________

9:00

3

CIV 530750       AMERICAN EXPRESS CENTURION BANK VS. KOH OHSEDO

 

 

AMERICAN EXPRESS CENTURION BANK       MARTIN HOFFMAN

KOH OHSEDO  

 

 

MOTION TO ENTER JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO CCP §664.6 BY AMERICAN EXPRESS CENTURION BANK

 

 

  • The Motion for Entry of Judgment by Plaintiff American Express Centurion Bank is GRANTED pursuant to Code Civ. Proc. §664.6.  Plaintiff shall have judgment in the principal amount of $3,760.22 against Defendant KOH OHSEDO and statutory court costs pursuant to a Memorandum of Costs.

 

  • Moving party is directed to prepare an order and judgment 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 Joseph C. Scott, Department 25.

 

_____________________________________________________________________

9:00

4

CIV 531937       PATRICK BALDWIN VS. 4D GLOBAL PARTNERS, LLC, ET AL.

 

 

PATRICK BALDWIN                       CHRISTOPHER MADER

4D GLOBAL PARTNERS, LLC

 

 

MOTION FOR ASSIGNMENT AND TURNOVER ORDER BY PATRICK BALDWIN

 

 

·         Continued on the Court’s motion to May 27, 2016, at 9:00 a.m., in the Law and Motion department.

 

_____________________________________________________________________

9:00

5

CIV 536790       TRUDY LORRAINE SUSOEFF VS. CITY OF REDWOOD CITY

 

 

TRUDY LORRAINE SUSOEFF                MARK R. SWARTZ

CITY OF REDWOOD CITY                  FURAH Z. FARUQUI

 

 

DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT of SUSOEFF BY CITY OF REDWOOD CITY

 

 

  • The Demurrer by Defendant City of Redwood City is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND.

 

  • The Court grants Defendant’s Request for Judicial Notice as to Exhibits A through D.  (Gong v. City of Rosemead (2014) 226 Cal.App.4th 363, 369 n.1 [court may take judicial notice of contents of claims file].)  Exhibit B demonstrates that Defendant served notice of rejection on October 20, 2014, thereby giving rise to a deadline of April 20, 2015.  The Court rejects Plaintiff’s contention that a notice of rejection that is served after 45 days is ineffective.  The notice of rejection may be served “at any time.”  (Glorietta Foods, Inc. v. City of San Jose (1983) 147 Cal.App.3d 835, 838; Katelaris v. County of Orange (2001) 92 Cal.App.4th 1211, 1216 n.4.)  In addition, Exhibit D demonstrates that the parties agreed on an “extended” deadline of October 17, 2015.  Regardless of which of these deadlines applies, Plaintiff missed both by filing her complaint on January 4, 2016.

 

  • The Court grants leave to amend for Plaintiff to allege facts, if any, that would support a contention that:  (1) Defendant City is estopped from asserting the statute of limitations or (2) Plaintiff’s complaint is within the applicable statute of limitations.  Leave to amend is granted until June 15, 2016 to file and serve a First Amended Complaint. 

 

  • If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court.  Thereafter, Defendant 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

6

CLJ 534272       AMERICAN EXPRESS BANK, FSB VS. STELLA OMEGA KRAUZ

 

 

AMERICAN EXPRESS BANK, FSB            LINA M. MICHAEL

STELLA OMEGA KRAUZ                    PRO/PER

 

 

MOTION TO DEEM MATTERS ADMITTED AND FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS BY AMERICAN EXPRESS BANK, FSB

 

 

  • The unopposed Motion to Deem Matters Admitted is GRANTED.  The genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters in the Requests for Admission are deemed admitted. 

 

  • The Request for Sanctions is also GRANTED pursuant to CCP §2033.280(c).  Defendant shall pay Plaintiff $360.00 within 10 days of service of 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 Joseph C. Scott, Department 25.

 


 

 

 

 


POSTED:  3:00 PM

© 2016 Superior Court of San Mateo County