SOUSA vs APEX SITE SOLUTIONS, INC.

1. CASE # CASE NAME HEARING NAME SOUSA vs APEX SITE MOTION TO COMPEL

SOLUTIONS, INC. ARBITRATION Tentative Ruling: Appearances requested to discuss the substantive unconscionability issue.

2. CASE # CASE NAME HEARING NAME PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR MACIAS vs D.R. EVIDENTIARY AND ISSUE HORTON LOS ANGELES CVSW2402801 SANCTIONS AGAINST HOLDING COMPANY, DEFENDANT FOR SPOLIATION OF INC. EVIDENCE Tentative Ruling: A party has a duty to preserve evidence. Failure to preserve evidence for another party’s use in pending or future litigation is a serious form of discovery abuse. Victor Valley Union High School Dist. v. Superior Court (2023) 91 Cal.App.5th 1121, 1139. Sections can include an evidentiary inference that the evidence that was destroyed or rendered unavailable was unfavorable to the party that did not preserve it.

Sanctions can include issue sanctions or precluding the Cedars- Sinai Medical Center v. Superior Court (1998) 18 Cal.4th 1, 8, 11-12. offending party from supporting or opposing designated claims or defenses. It appears undisputed that certain evidence was not preserved. Appearances requested.

3. CASE # CASE NAME HEARING NAME CORNEJO VS. STIPULATION TO APPROVE PAGA CVRI2404634 BEAUMONT MANOR, SETTLEMENT LLC Tentative Ruling: Appearances requested to confirm that this settlement includes the individual claims originally made in the related action, CVRI2403435. Need to select date for review of administrator’s report (order, ¶ 12).