Keller vs. Etheridge
Motion for Summary Adjudication
Motion type
Browse all Motion for Summary Adjudication rulings statewide →
Parties
Ruling
15 Keller vs. Etheridge Motion for Summary Adjudication
OFF-CALENDAR. The matter was CONTINUED to 9/18/26, per Stipulation. (See 9/10/26 Minute Order.)
16 Samuel Hale 2, LLC Motion for Summary Judgment and/or Adjudication vs. SS Personnel LLC The court GRANTS Plaintiff SAMUEL HALE 2, LLC dba SHE3’s unopposed motion for summary judgment on the Complaint filed against Defendants SS PERSONNEL LLC, ROBERT MORINAGA, KENJI SEIJI T. MORINAGA, SIGNATURE SELECT PERSONNEL, LLC, and ESSENTIAL STAFF, LLC.
Plaintiff’s alternative motion for summary adjudication of issues is DENIED as MOOT.
The Complaint asserts the following causes of action:
1. Breach of contract 2. Fraud in the inducement 3. Rescission 4. Unjust enrichment
Except for the third cause of action, each cause of action is asserted against each defendant. The third cause of action (for rescission) is asserted against Defendant SS PERSONNEL LLC only.
RJN: Plaintiff’s request for judicial notice is GRANTED. (Evid. Code § 452(b) and (d).)
On 11/12/25, the court entered an order pursuant to the parties’ stipulation that Essential Staff, LLC is deemed to be the successor entity to SS Personnel, LLC and/or doing business as Essential Staff. The Complaint is deemed amended to substitute and/or add Essential Staff, LLC as a Defendant in place of, or in addition to, SS Personnel, LLC, and Essential Staff, LLC shall assume all liabilities alleged against SS Personnel, LLC in the existing Complaint. (ROA 175.)
According to Plaintiff’s proffered evidence:
30
Cited authorities
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Ask about this ruling
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”