Lacambra vs. Gue

310 Lacambra vs. Defendants Dennis Han Gue Oh dba Total Painting Gue & Maintenance and In Tae Oh dba Total Painting and Maintenance’s (Defendants) demurrer to the first amended complaint (FAC) of plaintiff Robert Lacambra is SUSTAINED with 20 days leave to amend.

8th cause of action (negligent infliction of emotional distress): The FAC fails to state facts sufficient to constitute this cause of action, including the existence of a legal duty. (Ragland v. U.S. Bank National Assn. (2012) 209 Cal.App.4th 182, 205 [negligent infliction of emotional distress under a “direct victim” theory requires the violation of a duty that the defendant owes directly to the plaintiff]; Friedman v. Merck & Co. (2003) 107 Cal.App.4th 454, 470 [“damages for emotional distress are recoverable when the defendant assumes a duty in which the emotional condition of the plaintiff is an object”].)

Plaintiff’s request for a finding pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 166.1 is DENIED.

The 8/17/26 CMC is continued to 10/19/26 at 1:30pm.

Defendants shall give notice.

311 Abukamleh vs. The Motion to Compel Binding Arbitration, filed on Hyundai Motor 5/8/26 by Defendant Hyundai Motor America America (HMA) is DENIED.

HMA has failed to show that the parties entered into a valid agreement to arbitrate. HMA asserts that Plaintiff Wisam Abukanileh (Plaintiff) agreed to arbitrate because HMA included an arbitration provision in its “Owner’s Handbook & Warranty Information” (Warranty) for the vehicle. (Ameripour Decl., ¶ 4 and Ex. 2.) But HMA has not