Haloy Technology Corporation v. Tazga LLC

Client Thompson may file a response or opposition no later than five (5) court days before the continued hearing.

Moving Counsel shall provide notice of this ruling and continued hearing date on the client.

3 Haloy Technology Off calendar. Corporation v. Tazga LLC

1:30 p.m.

1 Long v. Glyder No Tentative Ruling. LLC

2 Teger v. Stevens Defendants Jack Stevens and Carol Stevens’ motion for summary judgment is GRANTED.

Defendants’ request for judicial notice is GRANTED. (Evid. Code § 452, subd. (h)).

This motion is unopposed.

Motions for Summary Judgment and/or Adjudication standard

“Summary judgment shall be granted if all the papers submitted show that there is no triable issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (c).) A “party moving for summary judgment bears an initial burden of production to make a prima facie showing of the nonexistence of any triable issue of material fact . . . .” (Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 850.) “A prima facie showing is one that is sufficient to support the position of the party in question.” (Id. at 851.)

A defendant moving for summary judgment satisfies the initial burden by submitting undisputed evidence “showing that a cause of action has no merit [because] one or more elements of the cause of action, even if not separately pleaded, cannot be established, or that there is a complete defense to the cause of action.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 437c, subd. (p)(2); Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co., supra, 2