What are the civil statute of limitations laws?

Useful Rulings on Civil Statute of Limitations Laws

Recent Rulings on Civil Statute of Limitations Laws

1-25 of 10000 results

T-12 THREE, LLC VS. TURNER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

Motion by Saddleback Corp. dba Saddleback Waterproof for Summary Judgment or Adjudication as to Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint Defendant Saddleback’s motion for summary judgment and summary adjudication of Issues 5 and 6 (statute of limitations) is DENIED. The motion for summary adjudication is GRANTED as to Issues 1, 3 and 4 (contract-based claims), with leave to amend as to Plaintiffs T-12 and HRG only.

  • Hearing

    Apr 25, 2026

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

Yes Attorney fees if supported by contract, statute or law. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(9); Local R. 3.214; open book – CC 1717.5.) N/A_________ _ Interest computations. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(3); 10% for contracts - Civ. Code 3289.) Yes Memorandum of costs and disbursements. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(4); JC Form CIV-100 item 7.) Yes Declaration of nonmilitary status for each defendant. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(5); JC Form CIV-100 item 8.) Yes Proposed form of judgment. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(6).) N/A Statement of Damages served (P.I.

  • Hearing

    Oct 07, 2020

JOSE AGUILERA VS 5 STAR DELIVERY INC

N/A Attorney fees if supported by contract, statute or law. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(9); Local R. 3.2; open book – CC 1717.5.) See above______ Interest computations. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(3); 10% for contracts - Civ. Code 3289.) Yes Memorandum of costs and disbursements. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(4); JC Form CIV-100 item 7.) Yes Declaration of nonmilitary status for each defendant. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(5); JC Form CIV-100 item 8.) Yes Proposed form of judgment. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(6).) N/A Statement of Damages served (P.I.

  • Hearing

    Sep 24, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

WEST COVINA CAR STOP, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS ROUND TABLE REMARKETING D.R.S., INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

Yes Attorney fees if supported by contract, statute or law. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(9); Local R. 3.214; open book – CC 1717.5.) Yes_______ __ _ Interest computations. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(3); 10% for contracts - Civ. Code 3289.) Yes Memorandum of costs and disbursements. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(4); JC Form CIV-100 item 7.) Yes Declaration of nonmilitary status for each defendant. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(5); JC Form CIV-100 item 8.) Yes Proposed form of judgment. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(6).) N/A Statement of Damages served (P.I.

  • Hearing

    Sep 23, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

UPGRADE SECURITIZATION TRUST I VS CHRISTOPHER LOPEZ

N/A Attorney fees if supported by contract, statute or law. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(9); Local R. 3.214; open book – CC 1717.5.) N/A __ _______ Interest computations. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(3); 10% for contracts - Civ. Code 3289.) Yes Memorandum of costs and disbursements. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(4); JC Form CIV-100 item 7.) Yes Declaration of nonmilitary status for each defendant. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(5); JC Form CIV-100 item 8.) Yes Proposed form of judgment. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(6).) N/A Statement of Damages served (P.I.

  • Hearing

    Aug 17, 2020

JINGXUAN ZHANG VS HUMMINGBIRD NEST ENTERTAINMENT CORP

Yes Attorney fees if supported by contract, statute or law. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(9); Local R. 3.214; open book – CC 1717.5.) Yes __ __ Interest computations. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(3); 10% for contracts - Civ. Code 3289.) Yes Memorandum of costs and disbursements. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(4); JC Form CIV-100 item 7.) Yes Declaration of nonmilitary status for each defendant. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(5); JC Form CIV-100 item 8.) Yes Proposed form of judgment. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(6).) N/A Statement of Damages served (P.I.

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

YESLENDER, LLC, A PENNSYLVANIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS FIVE BULLS TRANSPORT, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

Yes Attorney fees if supported by contract, statute or law. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(9); Local R. 3.214; open book – CC 1717.5.) Yes __ _______ Interest computations. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(3); 10% for contracts - Civ. Code 3289.) Yes Memorandum of costs and disbursements. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(4); JC Form CIV-100 item 7.) Yes Declaration of nonmilitary status for each defendant. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(5); JC Form CIV-100 item 8.) Yes Proposed form of judgment. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(6).) N/A Statement of Damages served (P.I.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

CITRUS OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLGY VS CITRUS VALLEY HEALTH

Second Cause of Action: Inducing Breach of Contract (i.e., Issues Nos. 14-21) “The elements of a cause of action for inducing breach of contract are the existence of a valid contract, defendants’ intent to induce a breach of the contract, and a breach resulting from defendants’ unjustifiable or wrongful conduct.” (Scott v. McDonnell Douglas Corp. (1974) 37 Cal.App.3d 277, 292.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 06, 2020

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

HWANSHIK YOON VS ELLEN EUN YOO, ET AL.

No Attorney fees if supported by contract, statute or law. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(9); Local R. 3.214; open book – CC 1717.5.) Yes Interest computations. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(3); 10% for contracts - Civ. Code 3289.) Yes Memorandum of costs and disbursements. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(4); JC Form CIV-100 item 7.) Yes Declaration of nonmilitary status for each defendant. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(5); JC Form CIV-100 item 8.) No Proposed form of judgment. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(6).) N/A Statement of Damages served (P.I./wrongful death).

  • Hearing

    Aug 06, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

CHANGLIANG DAI VS THOMAS CHEN, ET AL.

On September 5, 2019, Plaintiff filed a complaint, asserting causes of action against Chen, Tissuesco and Does 1-10 for: Breach of Contract Breach of Fiduciary Duty On October 23, 2019, Chen’s default was entered. Discussion The hearing on Plaintiff’s Application for Default Judgment is CONTINUED to September 2, 2020 8:30 a.m. The following defects are noted: Tissuesco’s default has not been entered.

  • Hearing

    Jul 31, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

ANTHONY SAM VS RENEE KWAN ET AL

Leave to amend is thus liberally granted, provided there is no statute of limitations concern. (Kolani v. Gluska (1998) 64 Cal.App.4th 402, 411.) The court may deny the plaintiff’s leave to amend if there is prejudice to the opposing party, such as delay in trial, loss of critical evidence, or added costs of preparation. (Id.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 29, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

CHING FU CHANG, ET AL. VS PAN MING LEI, ET AL.

N/A Attorney fees if supported by contract, statute or law. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(9); Local R. 3.214; open book – CC 1717.5.) Yes __ _______ Interest computations. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(3); 10% for contracts - Civ. Code 3289.) Yes Memorandum of costs and disbursements. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(4); JC Form CIV-100 item 7.) Yes Declaration of nonmilitary status for each defendant. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(5); JC Form CIV-100 item 8.) Yes Proposed form of judgment. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(6).) Yes Statement of Damages served (P.I.

  • Hearing

    Jul 29, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

ANNE SHOYKHET, ET AL. VS NATHALIE DUBOIS, ET AL.

First Cause of Action: Breach of Contract To state a cause of action for breach of contract, Plaintiff must be able to establish “(1) the existence of the contract, (2) plaintiff’s performance or excuse for nonperformance, (3) defendant’s breach, and (4) the resulting damages to the plaintiff.” (Oasis West Realty, LLC v. Goldman (2011) 51 Cal.4th 811, 821.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

MED CAFE CORP, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION VS MOSTAFA KARIMBEIK, ET AL.

Such allegations could support a claim for breach of contract, but the Court requires Plaintiff to provide a copy of the written contract as an attachment to the complaint because in other parts of the FAC, Plaintiff also alleges oral agreements and that the contract required Venice Ventures to “expeditiously obtain the Certificate of Occupancy,” which is not contained within the quoted portion of the contract. (See FAC ¶ 15.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

HOMAYOUN LARIAN VS EDWARD CZUKER, ET AL.

Finally, the statute of limitations for a negligent misrepresentation claim is two years. (Ventura County National Bank v. Macker (1996) 49 Cal.App.4th 1528, 1529.) This is so because negligent misrepresentation “more closely resembles” negligence than fraud. (Id. at p. 1531.) Finally, Plaintiff alleges the representations were made in September 2016 (FAC ¶ 71), but he did not file this action until almost three years later, approximately one year past the expiration of the statute of limitations.

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

HAGOP TCHAKERIAN VS CITY OF LOS ANGELES

death or the injury to his person or property was one of the class of persons for whose protection the statute, ordinance, or regulation was adopted.”

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

KOUROSH IZADPANAHI VS MARIA ALMA YOLANDA IBARRA DABDOUB, ET AL.

Accordingly, Plaintiff was required to file his claims for (1) intentional misrepresentation on or before December 31, 2018 (three-year statute of limitations, per Code Civ. Proc., § 338, subd. (d)), (2) negligent misrepresentation on or before December 31, 2017 (two-year statute of limitations, per Code Civ. Proc., § 339), (3) intentional interference with contractual relations on or before December 31, 2017 (two-year statute of limitations, per Code Civ.

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA VS CHARLES PETERS

Meet and Confer At the outset, the Court notes that Defendant failed to file a declaration describing the meet-and-confer efforts which are required by statute. (Code Civ. Proc., § 439, subd. (a)(3).) The purpose of the meet-and-confer requirement is to determine whether the parties can reach an agreement as to the issues raised in the motion.

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

11TH STREET INVESTMENTS, LLC VS TARYN ROSE

Next, attorneys’ fees may only be awarded where they are authorized by statute or contract. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1021.) Here, Plaintiff has failed to identify a basis for an award of attorneys’ fees.

  • Hearing

    Jul 25, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

NINA MARIE JOHNSON VS IAN PATTON, ET AL.

An award of attorney’s fees is proper when authorized by contract, statute, or law. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 1032, subd. (b), 1033.5, subd. (a)(10).) Plaintiff asserts she is entitled to attorney’s fees under her written lease agreement, but Plaintiff fails to provide the contract or the attorney’s fees provision. Where a claim is based on a written contract, “the terms must be set out verbatim in the body of the complaint or a copy of the written agreement must be attached and incorporated by reference.”

  • Hearing

    Jul 24, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

JOHNATHAN MOLTONI, ET AL. VS XTREME MOTOR SPORTS, INC., ET AL.

N/A Attorney fees if supported by contract, statute or law. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(9); Local R. 3.214; open book – CC 1717.5.) See Above Interest computations. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(3); 10% for contracts - Civ. Code 3289.) Yes Memorandum of costs and disbursements. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(4); JC Form CIV-100 item 7.) Yes Declaration of nonmilitary status for each defendant. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(5); JC Form CIV-100 item 8.) Yes Proposed form of judgment. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(6).) N/A Statement of Damages served (P.I.

  • Hearing

    Jul 23, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

LA LIVE PROPERTIES, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS KA WAIKWAN, AN INDIVIDUAL, ET AL.

Plaintiff’s claim against Triple 8 Restaurant, LLC for breach of contract alleges that Triple 8 Restaurant, LLC, the tenant, breached the lease agreement with Plaintiff. Plaintiff’s claim against Defendants Kwan and Moy for breach of lease and personal guaranty of lease, alleges that Defendants Kwan and Moy breached their guaranty of lease with Plaintiff. (FAC, ¶¶ 22-37.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 23, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

LOREN NAUTA V. SUSAN MURPHY

The complaint sets forth causes of action for breach of contract and legal malpractice and arises out of Murphy’s representation of Nauta in connection with a pending foreclosure. On October 15, 2019, Murphy responded by filing a Motion for Change of Venue, which the Court granted on December 18, 2019. Nauta did not appear at the hearing. At the Court’s direction, Murphy mailed Nauta a Notice of Ruling that same day. Murphy then forwarded to Nauta a signed Order After Hearing on January 16, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Jul 22, 2020

ESTATE OF DANNY BOHART

Due to staffing limitations, processing times may be delayed. To assist in processing, attorneys and parties should include the next court date in the “Filing Description” field provided by the electronic service provider. That field is also used for further descriptions of the document being e-filed, so be sure to put the calendar date FIRST in the field – BEFORE any further description of the document being e-filed (e.g.: 06/28/16 For XYZ).

  • Hearing

    Jul 21, 2020

KIM VS. HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA

The plain wording of the statute requires the trial court to base the fee award on actual time expended on the case, as long as such fees are reasonably incurred – both from the standpoint of time spent and the amount charged. (Robertson v. Fleetwood Travel Trailers of Cal., Inc. (2006) 144 Cal.App.4th 785, 817.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 20, 2020

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 400     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.