Motion to Impose a Cost Obligation and Stay Case
2 Espinoza Aceves Motion to Consolidate Cases vs. Southern California Edison Defendant/cross-complainant Southern California Edison Company Company’s (SCE) Motion to Consolidate is DENIED 30-2024- without prejudice. 01436382-CU- PO-CJC SCE has not complied with California Rules of Court, rule 3.350, subd. (a)(1)(C) as it has not filed notices of the motion to consolidate in each case sought to be consolidated.
Clerk to give notice.
3 David Dyrnaes Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint as Trustee for the David Neil Plaintiff’s unopposed motion for leave to file second Dyrnaes and amended complaint is GRANTED. Mayumi Nagakura Joint Amendments to pleadings are liberally allowed in Living Trust, furtherance of justice, and trial has not yet begun. Dated August 11, 2010 vs. City Plaintiff is ORDERED to file and serve the second of Laguna Beach amended complaint within two court days. 30-2025- 01519061-CU- Clerk to give notice. WM-CJC 4 Foerster vs. The Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint City of Laguna Niguel Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file third amended complaint 30-2023- is GRANTED. 01338201-CU- PO-CJC Amendments to pleadings are liberally allowed in furtherance of justice, and trial has not yet begun.
Plaintiffs are ORDERED to file and serve the third amended complaint within two court days.
Trial is CONTINUED to 2/26/2027 at 11:30 AM. The court re-opens discovery for the limited purpose of the newly- added cause of action. The new discovery cutoff is to run with the new trial date.
Clerk to give notice.
5 Meriplex Motion to Impose a Cost Obligation and Stay Case Communications, Defendant Rocker Solenoid Company, d/b/a Rocker LTD. vs. Rocker Solenoid Industries’ unopposed motion requiring Plaintiff to post an undertaking to secure costs and attorney fees is Company GRANTED.
30-2026- Defendant has established Plaintiff resides outside the 01551910-CU- state of California, and there is a reasonable possibility CL-CJC Defendant will obtain judgment in the action. (Code Civ. Proc,. § 1030, subds. (a), (b); Stein Decl., ¶ 3, Ex. A; Perry Decl., ¶¶ 4-19.)
Defendant’s request for an undertaking of $125,000 is excessive. (Stein Decl., ¶ 6.) The court grants a reduced undertaking of $50,000.
Plaintiff is ORDERED to file an undertaking in the sum of $50,000 within 30 days. (Civ. Proc. Code, § 1030, subd. (d).) If Plaintiff fails to file the undertaking within the time allowed, upon request by Defendant, the court will dismiss the action.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
Defendant to give notice.
6 Villasenor vs. Motion to Reopen Discovery to Compel and American Honda Complete Deposition of Plaintiff’s Designated Motor Co., Inc. Experts or Exclude their Testimony and Impose 30-2024- Sanctions 01430801-CU- BC-CJC Defendant American Honda Motor Co., Inc.’s (AHM) Motion to Reopen Discovery to Compel and Complete Deposition of Plaintiff’s Experts, or alternatively, to Exclude Their Testimony and for Sanctions is DENIED as MOOT.
Plaintiff offered a date for deposition for Sims and de- designated the remaining experts only after AHM filed its motion. Plaintiff does not explain why it did not respond to AHM’s counsel’s attempts to follow up after Plaintiff served its objections or otherwise attempted to meet and confer in good faith regarding Plaintiff’s expert witnesses’ availability prior to this motion being filed.
Accordingly, AHM’s request for sanctions in the amount of $2,524.00 is GRANTED. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2023.030, 2023.010.) Plaintiff is ORDERED to pay the sanctions within 20 days.
Clerk to give notice.
7 Sultzer vs. Ford Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Motor Company The Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings by Defendant 30-2025- Ford Motor Co. and Tuttle Click Ford is DENIED as to the 01464483-CU- BC-CJC first through fourth causes of action and GRANTED as to the fifth and sixth causes of action.
Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint (FAC) alleges claims for breach of Civil Code section 1793.2 (first-third),