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

PERSOLVE LEGAL GROUP, LLP VS LETICIA HERNANDEZ

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).) N/A Statement of Damages served (P.I.

  • Hearing

CEMEX USA, INC. VS ATILANO, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

(“Corporation”) entered into a written agreement (“Contract”), wherein Corporation agreed to pay Plaintiff all amounts due as invoiced. On or about March 2, 2020, Corporation breached the Contract by failing to pay all amounts due. The Contract was guaranteed by Louie Atilano (“Atilano”).

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

717 NOGALES, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS NEW DIAMOND TRUCKING, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION AND, 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.) 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

MARK LIU VS XUEFAN LIU

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).) N/A Statement of Damages served (P.I.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

AVITUS INC. VS ANDIAMO MANAGEMENT COMPANY, A 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

CHANGLIANG DAI VS THOMAS CHEN, 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.) 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

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC VS NEW CENTURY MORTGAGE CORPORATION, A CALIFORNIA COR~ORATION

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.) 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./wrongful death).

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

LUZ BELTRAN, ET AL. VS NICHOLAS SCHWARTZ, 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.) 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

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

MARTIN BALMACEDA VS ZHICHENG LIU ET AL

Plaintiff filed this action three years ago, less than two months before the statute of limitations ran. Thus, Plaintiff has had five years to locate Liu and three years to serve him, to no avail. The Court has continued this motion for summary judgment almost one year (from January 22, 2020, to the present) to allow Plaintiff to serve Liu. There is nothing in the record suggesting that Plaintiff will be able to serve Liu with a deposition subpoena if afforded more time.

  • Hearing

CARLOS HALILI VS FCA US, LLC

The Complaint asserts causes of action for violations of the Song Beverly statute. Plaintiff’s claims arise from his purchase of a 2018 Ram 1500 (Vehicle).

  • Hearing

JEFFREY NATHAN PURVEY VS YOUNG MEN'S CHRISTIAN ASSOCIATION OF BURBANK, CALIFORNIA

However, because the right to costs is governed strictly by statute a court has no discretion to award costs not statutorily authorized.” (Ladas v. California State Auto. Assn. (1993) 19 Cal.App.4th 761, 774, internal citations omitted.) “The court’s first determination, therefore, is whether the statute expressly allows the item, and whether it appears proper on its face. If so, the burden is on the objecting party to show them to be unnecessary or unreasonable.” (Nelson v.

  • Hearing

FUNDATION GROUP LLC VS BINH NGUYEN, 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

  • Type

    Collections

  • Sub Type

    Promisory Note

ADRIAN MADDEN VS GURUCUL SOLUTIONS, LLC

On December 19, 2019, Plaintiff Adrian Madden commenced this action against Gurucul Solutions, LLC for (1) breach of contract; (2) failure to pay wages; and (3) quantum meruit. On July 17, 2020, the Court sustained Defendant’s demurrer to the second cause of action with leave to amend. On August 17, 2020, Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint (“FAC”) against Defendant for (1) breach of contract; (2) quantum meruit; and (3) failure to pay wages (pursuant to Ontario Labor Standards Act).

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

CALIFORNIA DUI LAWYERS ASSN ET AL VS CALIFORNIA DEPT OF MOTO

DISCUSSION Except as otherwise provided by statute, a prevailing party is entitled as a matter of right to recover costs in any action or proceeding. (Code Civ. Proc. § 1032(a)(4).) The right to recover any of such costs is determined entirely by statute. (Gorman v. Tassajara Development Corp. (2009) 178 Cal.App.4th 44, 71.) In ruling upon a motion to tax costs, the trial court’s first determination is whether the statute expressly allows the particular item and whether it appears proper on its face.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

Code § 3334; (3) nuisance; and (4) breach of contract.

  • Hearing

HAIM¿ AHRONI VS LISA¿ DIANE HARPER, ET AL.

DISCUSSION To state a prima facie claim for punitive damages, a plaintiff must allege the elements set forth in the punitive damages statute, Civil Code section 3294. (Coll. Hosp., Inc. v. Superior Court (1994) 8 Cal.4th 704, 721.) Per Civil Code section 3294, a plaintiff must allege that the defendant has been guilty of oppression, fraud or malice. (Civ. Code, § 3294, subd. (a).)

  • Hearing

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

The Complaint asserts causes of action for violations of the Song Beverly statute. Plaintiff’s claims arise from his purchase of a 2012 Chevy Cruze (Vehicle).

  • Hearing

ALESSANDRA M. STRAHL, TRUSTEE OF THE ALESSANDRA STRAHL REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST U/T/D 0924-93. VS JNY INVESTMENTS LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

Strahl, Trustee of the Alessandra Strahl Revocable Living Trust U/T/D 09-24-93 commenced this action against Defendant JNY Investments LLC for (1) breach of contract; and (2) negligence. On October 19, 2020, default was entered against Defendant JNY Investments LLC. ANALYSIS: Plaintiff has not filed her request for dismissal of DOES. (CRC 3.1800(a)(7).)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

ESTATE OF DONN STRATTON PARDEE

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

ESTATE OF DOROTHY E. BENFORD

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

IN THE MATTER OF FRANK PICAZO JR.

This petition is filed without referencing any statute or providing any authority for the requested orders. In general, the Court is willing to allow a vehicle worth less than $1,000 appraised value to be donated. Value of vehicle: The court does not appraise estate assets. The PG should file a "Corrected" Inventory and Appraisal after seeking a reappraisal from the probate referee.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Family Law

  • Sub Type

    Conservatorship

ESTATE OF LUIS RODRIGUEZ

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

SHAFFER V RICE RANCH COMMUNITY LLC

Merits Where the dates alleged in the complaint or disclosed by matters that are judicially noticeable show the cause of action is barred by the statute of limitations, a general demurrer lies. (See Saliter v. Pierce Bros. Mortuaries (1978) 81 Cal.App.3d 292, 300; Vaca v. Wachovia Mortg. Corp. (2011) 198 Cal.App.4th 737, 746.) Arch demurs to the complaint on the basis that the fourth cause of action is barred by the statute of limitations and therefore fails to state a cause of action.

  • Hearing

JENNIFER HERRINGTON V THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ET AL

. & Loan Assn. (1990) 219 Cal.App.3d 97, 103 [“To allege that the contract was unconscionable states no more than a legal conclusion”].)

  • Hearing

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 load this page.