Silva vs. Ford Motor Company

charges which can be intelligently met.’” (Ibid.) “Less specificity should be required of fraud claims ‘when “it appears from the nature of the allegations that the defendant must necessarily possess full information concerning the facts of the controversy,” [citation]; “[e]ven under the strict rules of common law pleading, one of the canons was that less particularity is required when the facts lie more in the knowledge of the opposite party . . . .” ’ ” (Ibid.)

Here, GenWay must necessarily possess the full facts regarding GenWay’s own records regarding the loan, as well as the calculations of overcharges and refunds/disbursements. Therefore, less specificity is required of Plaintiffs’ pleading. Plaintiffs allege the time of the alleged concealment (documents starting in April 2014), the nature of the concealment, and the damages being claimed as a result of that concealment. Thus, the Court finds that the allegations are sufficient and the Demurrer as to the fraud cause of action is OVERRULED.

GenWay is ordered to file an answer to the SAC within 20 days.

Moving party to give notice.

4. 30-2025-01455873 1. Case Management Conference 2. Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel of Record Silva vs. Ford Motor Company The unopposed motion of Strategic Legal Practices, APC to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff Enrique Silva is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

On 05/07/2026, the Court continued the hearing on this motion to 06/18/2026 because Moving Counsel did not show that the moving papers were timely served on the client and all other parties who have appeared in the case at least 16 court days before the hearing pursuant to code. (ROA 104.) The Court continued the hearing and ordered Moving Counsel to file “proof of service of the moving papers no later than 16 court days before the continued hearing.” (Ibid.)

Based on the Court’s order and code, the proof of service needed to be filed by 05/27/2026. Moving Counsel again did not file a timely proof of service and did not establish timely service of the moving papers on the client and appearing parties. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 1005, subd. (b); Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subd. (d).)

The Motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

Moving counsel to give notice.

6. 30-2024-01448151 1. Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel of Record

Conley vs. Kang The unopposed motion of attorney Jessica Williams of Sweet James LLP to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff DaVon James Conley is CONTINUED.

Moving counsel did not show proof of service of the moving papers on the client. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 1005, subd. (b); Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subd. (d).) While the declaration filed in support of the motion states that the client was served by mail, there is no proof that the client was timely served with the papers.

The hearing on the Motion is CONTINUED to July 30, 2026 at 1:30 pm in C34.