What is Wrongful Termination – Employment Contract?

Useful Rulings on Wrongful Termination – Employment Contract

Recent Rulings on Wrongful Termination – Employment Contract

1-25 of 10000 results

T-12 THREE, LLC VS. TURNER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

MaryJane MaryJane operates the hotel’s coffee shop pursuant to a lease with T-12 Three, LLC (“T-12”), the successor-in-interest to the Developer under the Construction Contract (the “Contract”) with Turner. MaryJane was formed in September 2007 and, therefore, was not in existence at the time the Contract was formed and was not a party to the Contract.

  • Hearing

PERSOLVE LEGAL GROUP, LLP VS LETICIA HERNANDEZ

/wrongful death). (JC Form CIV-050; CCP 425.11.) N/A Punitive Damages are supported. Info re Defendant’s financial status. (CCP 425.115)

  • Hearing

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

/wrongful death). (JC Form CIV-050; CCP 425.11.) N/A Punitive Damages are supported. Info re Defendant’s financial status. (CCP 425.115)

  • 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.

/wrongful death). (JC Form CIV-050; CCP 425.11.) N/A Punitive Damages are supported. Info re Defendant’s financial status. (CCP 425.115)

  • Hearing

MARK LIU VS XUEFAN LIU

/wrongful death). (JC Form CIV-050; CCP 425.11.) N/A Punitive Damages are supported. Info re Defendant’s financial status. (CCP 425.115)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

PRIME STAFF INC VS PARTNERSHIP STAFFING SOLUTIONS LLC

Strictly construed, serving a statement of damages cannot satisfy section 580 in an action not involving personal injury or wrongful death.” Id., at p. 1176. Upon review of the FACC, the Court could not find any language referencing the administrative fees, and even if those fees were requested as part of the actual damages, “in excess of” a specified dollar amount “and according to proof” limits the amount of the award in a default judgment to that dollar amount.

  • Hearing

AVITUS INC. VS ANDIAMO MANAGEMENT COMPANY, A CORPORATION, ET AL.

/wrongful death). (JC Form CIV-050; CCP 425.11.) N/A Punitive Damages are supported. Info re Defendant’s financial status. (CCP 425.115)

  • Hearing

FALISHA PORTER VS PHARMAVITE, LLC

Also, it is unclear how employment with the City of Pasadena for some unspecified time prior to her employment with Pharmavite is relevant. It is defendant’s burden of establishing good cause for how these records relate to its specific defenses. Finally, the issue of whether every single page of her employment file should be open to discovery is also an issue. For instance, what if she had private conversations about health issues unrelated to the damages in this case.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

CHANGLIANG DAI VS THOMAS CHEN, ET AL.

/wrongful death). (JC Form CIV-050; CCP 425.11.) N/A Punitive Damages are supported. Info re Defendant’s financial status. (CCP 425.115)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

RE: PET’N FOR APPT OF CONSERVATOR OF PERSON & ESTATE

File a declaration to state why termination of the guardianship is in the best interest of the minor 3. Proof of mailing petition and notice of hearing to all parties entitled to notice The Court is still waiting for: A. Response from guardian Note: Letters of guardianship issued to maternal grandmother Luz Salgado 3/12/2018 ALINNA CHAVEZ AMADOR CHAVES LUZ M.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    Fenstermacher

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

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.

/wrongful death). (JC Form CIV-050; CCP 425.11.) N/A Punitive Damages are supported. Info re Defendant’s financial status. (CCP 425.115)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

FUNDATION GROUP LLC VS BINH NGUYEN, ET AL.

/wrongful death). (JC Form CIV-050; CCP 425.11.) N/A Punitive Damages are supported. Info re Defendant’s financial status. (CCP 425.115)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Collections

  • Sub Type

    Promisory Note

MARIAN A ANDERSON VS SHERMAN OAKS HOSPITAL, ET AL.

On a claim for wrongful death of a decedent, the real party in interest is the decedent’s personal representative, or the decedent’s surviving spouse, registered domestic partner, children and issue of deceased children, or, if none, persons who would inherit the decedent’s property by intestate succession. (Code Civ. Proc., § 377.60.) While Plaintiff alleges that Decedent was her sister, Plaintiff does not allege that she has standing to sue for the wrongful death of Decedent.

  • Hearing

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

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

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

  • 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

CONSERVATORSHIP OF EVA WILSON

However, death of the conservatee “does not cause the court to lose jurisdiction of the proceeding for the purpose of settling the accounts of the [] conservator or for any other purpose incident to the enforcement of the judgments and orders of the court upon such accounts or upon the termination of the relationship.” (Prob. Code, § 2630.)

  • Hearing

SHAFFER V RICE RANCH COMMUNITY LLC

The bond is for the benefit of any person damaged as a result of a wilful and deliberate violation of “of this chapter” in the execution or performance of a construction contract.(Bus. & Prof. Code, § 7071.5, subd. (c).)[1] Any action against a contractor’s license bond shall be brought “[w]ithin two years after the expiration of the license period during which the act or omission occurred.” (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 7071.11, subd. (c)(1).)

  • Hearing

JENNIFER HERRINGTON V THE NATURE CONSERVANCY ET AL

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

  • Hearing

SUNBELT RENTALS INC V GWEN J HAUENSTEIN ET AL

On June 6, 2017, plaintiff and defendants entered into a contract for construction supplies. On April 30, 2018, defendants defaulted under the terms of the contract and $19,064.32 remains due, plus interest. On October 11, 2018, plaintiff filed a complaint for (1) foreclosure of mechanic’s lien; and (2) breach of contract. Defendants BMI Group, Inc. and Ara Baljian filed an answer on January 2, 2019. Defaults for Gwen Hauenstein and Gary Hauenstein were entered on July 22, 2019.

  • Hearing

FROM THE EARTH, LLC VS CITY OF COMMERCE, ET AL.

Defendant asserts that the protected activity is described in “Paragraph 25 [which] specifically alleges that Beltran requested in a ‘pre-drafted contract ...to “solidify [Plaintiff’s] efforts to secure local permits or licenses to operate cannabis businesses, specifically in the City of Commerce”’ and ‘Beltran had his connection ...City of Commerce...’” (Id. at p. 7:14-17.)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Discrimination/Harass

HEATHER GRUENINGER VS CENTURY CITY DENTAL GROUP, ET AL.

December 1, 2020 Plaintiff’s attorney of record, Heather Grueninger (“Counsel”), seeks to relieved as counsel, asserting Counsel is in the process of closing his law practice, and that Counsel has obtained employment at a different law firm that makes it impossible to represent Plaintiff’s interests. Further, Counsel contends there has been a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship, such that Counsel cannot effectively represent Plaintiff.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

JINKUN CHA, ET AL. VS PACIFIC EXPRESSWAY, INC., A CORPORATION , ET AL.

Analysis “ “A cause of action for wrongful death is ... a statutory claim. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 377.60–377.62.) Its purpose is to compensate specified persons—heirs—for the loss of companionship and for other losses suffered as a result of a decedent's death.” [Citations.] “ ‘The elements of the cause of action for wrongful death are the tort (negligence or other wrongful act), the resulting death, and the damages, consisting of the pecuniary loss suffered by the heirs.’ ” ” (Lattimore v.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

JINSONG SHI VS ALG LAWYERS INC., ET AL.

Defendant argues that “[i]n the FAC, Plaintiff now alleges "common counts"—apparently in recognition that it cannot allege the elements of breach of contract against any defendants.” (Demurrer 14:21-23.) However, the FAC alleges that Defendants received money which they should not now be allowed to retain. (FAC ¶ 72.) Again, if Defendant disputes ever receiving the money, it can argue as such upon summary judgment.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

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.