What is a Motion to Strike?

Useful Rulings on Motion to Strike

Recent Rulings on Motion to Strike

26-50 of 10000 results

GOLDEN RAIN FOUNDATION OF LAGUNA WOODS V. DICKINSON

Cross-Defendants are ordered to give notice. (2)MOTION TO STRIKE OR TAX COSTS Cross-Complainant Alan Dale Dickinson’s motion to strike or tax the costs of Cross-Defendants Brian Gruner, Jennifer Murphy, Beth Perak, and Marcy Sheinwold is DENIED. Unless otherwise expressly prohibited by statute, a prevailing party is entitled to recover costs as a matter of right. Code Civ. Proc. § 1032(b).

  • Hearing

TAMARA CHOLAKIAN VS STEPHEN SANTEN

“In order to survive a motion to strike an allegation of punitive damages, the ultimate facts showing an entitlement to such relief must be pled by a plaintiff. [Citations.] In passing on the correctness of a ruling on a motion to strike, judges read allegations of a pleading subject to a motion to strike as a whole, all parts in their context, and assume their truth. [Citations.] In ruling on a motion to strike, courts do not read allegations in isolation. [Citation.]” (Clauson v.

  • Hearing

DONALD HEINSHEIMER LEEDS VS STOLTZ MANAGEMENT OF DELAWARE, INC., ET AL.

Motion to Strike Any party, within the time allowed to respond to a pleading may serve and file a notice of motion to strike the whole or any part thereof. (Code Civ. Proc., § 435, subd. (b)(1); Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1322, subd. (b).)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

TERRY BRICE, ET AL. VS BRIAN HENSEL

On 11/10/20, Plaintiffs filed the operative First Amended Complaint rendering the demurrer moot and motion to strike moot, and on 11/12/20, Defendant filed a notice requesting the demurrer and motion to strike be taken off-calendar. Therefore, the demurrer and motion to strike are moot and taken off-calendar. Defendant is ordered to give notice.

  • Hearing

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

MOTION TO STRIKE Any party, within the time allowed to respond to a pleading, may serve and file a notice of motion to strike the whole or any part thereof. (Code Civ. Proc., § 435(b)(1)). The notice of motion to strike a portion of a pleading shall quote in full the portions sought to be stricken except where the motion is to strike an entire paragraph, cause of action, count or defense. (California Rules of Court Rule 3.1322.)

  • Hearing

KIMBERLEY BERRUETE LOPEZ VS WESTERN MERCHANDISED EXPRESS, INC., ET AL.

“In order to survive a motion to strike an allegation of punitive damages, the ultimate facts showing an entitlement to such relief must be pled by a plaintiff. [Citations.] In passing on the correctness of a ruling on a motion to strike, judges read allegations of a pleading subject to a motion to strike as a whole, all parts in their context, and assume their truth. [Citations.] In ruling on a motion to strike, courts do not read allegations in isolation. [Citation.]” (Clauson v.

  • Hearing

DAVID BABAIE, ET AL. VS TRANS WEST INVESTIGATIONS, INC., A CORPORATION, ET AL.

Motion to Strike A. Legal Standard Any party may file a timely notice of a motion to strike the whole or any part of a pleading. (Code Civ. Proc., § 435, subd. (b).) For the purpose of a motion to strike, the Code of Civil Procedure defines a "pleading" as a demurrer, answer, complaint, or cross-complaint. (Code Civ. Proc., § 435, subd. (a)(2).)

  • Hearing

DEBRA MCCOY, AN INDIVIDUAL VS LINDA MAE KUSHNER, AN INDIVIDUAL

“In order to survive a motion to strike an allegation of punitive damages, the ultimate facts showing an entitlement to such relief must be pled by a plaintiff. [Citations.] In passing on the correctness of a ruling on a motion to strike, judges read allegations of a pleading subject to a motion to strike as a whole, all parts in their context, and assume their truth. [Citations.] In ruling on a motion to strike, courts do not read allegations in isolation. [Citation.]” (Clauson v.

  • Hearing

CYRUS CHADY VS PEDRAM SHAMEKH ET AL

MOTION TO STRIKE Any party, within the time allowed to respond to a pleading, may serve and file a notice of motion to strike the whole or any part thereof. (Code Civ. Proc., § 435(b)(1)). The notice of motion to strike a portion of a pleading shall quote in full the portions sought to be stricken except where the motion is to strike an entire paragraph, cause of action, count or defense.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

REBECCA A RICKLEY VS FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY

Legal Standard “Before filing a motion to strike pursuant to this chapter, the moving party shall meet and confer in person or by telephone with the party who filed the pleading that is subject to the motion to strike for the purpose of determining if an agreement can be reached that resolves the objections to be raised in the motion to strike.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Insurance

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

SHERYL BARNECK VS CITY OF LOS ANGELES

“In order to survive a motion to strike an allegation of punitive damages, the ultimate facts showing an entitlement to such relief must be pled by a plaintiff. [Citations.] In passing on the correctness of a ruling on a motion to strike, judges read allegations of a pleading subject to a motion to strike as a whole, all parts in their context, and assume their truth. [Citations.] In ruling on a motion to strike, courts do not read allegations in isolation. [Citation.]” (Clauson v.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

MASSIS DANIELIAN VS RICHARD DENOGEAN, ET AL.

ORDER Defendant Mission Properties Services; and Defendants Richard Denogean; and Hong Denogean’s separate Demurrers came on regularly for hearing on November 25, 2020, together with Defendant Raymond Zakari’s Special Motion to Strike, with appearances/submissions as noted in the minute order for said hearing, and the court, being fully advised in the premises, did then and there rule as follows: THE DEMURRERS ARE SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND; AND THE SPECIAL MOTION TO STRIKE IS OFF CALENDAR.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

CHANDRA FORTIER, ET AL. VS MICHAEL LABERGE, ET AL.

Motion to Strike Defendant moves to the punitive damages claim asserted for breach of fiduciary duty. Here, the Court sustained the demurrer to the breach of fiduciary duty cause of action with leave to amend. Here too, Plaintiffs have not alleged sufficient facts for punitive damage under Civil Code section 3294. Therefore, the motion to strike is granted with leave to amend.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

GEORGE SANTOPIETRO VS JAMES HARDEN, ET AL.

(c)(1) states that “a prevailing defendant on a special motion to strike shall be entitled to recover his or her attorney's fees and costs.” “The party prevailing on a special motion to strike may seek an attorney fee award through three different avenues: simultaneously with litigating the special motion to strike; by a subsequent noticed motion, . . . or as part of a cost memorandum.” (Carpenter v. Jack In The Box Corp. (2007) 151 Cal.App.4th 454, 461.)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

MATTHEW MODARAEI VS REZA MOMENI

TENTATIVE RULING 11/25/2020 MODARAEI V MOMENI CASE NO. 20VECV00920 GRANT MOTION FOR LIMITED DISCOVERY PENDING SPECIAL MOTION TO STRIKE AS TO WRITTEN DISCOVERY IDENTIFIED IN THE SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF RASSAMDANA FILED 11/23/202 AND DEPOSITION OF ZAHRA FARAJI.

  • Hearing

LUIS LICEA, AN INDIVIDUAL VS BROWN SUGAR, LLC, A GEORGIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

MOTION TO STRIKE Due to the demurrer to each cause of action in the FAC being sustained, the motion to strike is GRANTED with 20 days leave to amend. Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling. In consideration of the current COVID-19 pandemic situation, the Court strongly encourages that appearances on all proceedings, including this one, be made by LACourtConnect if the parties do not submit on the tentative.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

CAROL J. HABER VS. WILLIAM M. BRUCE, ET AL

NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: MOTION TO STRIKE — PORTIONS OF PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT [DEFT] COMPASS CALIFORNIA, INC. [DEFT] ED TOMAN RULING The panics are ordered to appear on November 25, 2020 at 1:30 pm. in Depanment B. Parties must comply with Moritz County Superior Court Local Rules, Rule 1.10(B) to contest the tentative decision.

  • Hearing

NASSER SEDAGHAT VS TARZANA HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER

On June 12, 2019, the Court sustained without leave to amend Defendant Kamram Kamrava, M.D.’s demurrer and granted Defendant Kamram Kamrava, M.D.’s motion to strike to the SAC. On June 26, 2019, Plaintiff filed a request for dismissal with prejudice as to Defendant Kamran Kamrava, M.D. On March 16, 2020, Plaintiff filed a notice of settlement of the entire case.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

RAVELL PIERCE, AN INDIVIDUAL VS LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY, A PUBLIC ENTITY, ET AL.

DISCUSSION Plaintiff’s filing of a second amended complaint after Defendant LACMTA filed this demurrer and motion to strike renders the demurrer and motion to strike as moot. The court notes that Plaintiff did not seek leave to do so. Nonetheless, since had the court sustained LACMTA’s demurrer, it would have been with leave to amend, the court doe not see any point in striking the Second Amended Complaint at this juncture. CONCLUSION The demurrer is OVERRULED as MOOT.

  • Hearing

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

MOTION TO STRIKE Any party, within the time allowed to respond to a pleading, may serve and file a notice of motion to strike the whole or any part thereof. (Code Civ. Proc., § 435(b)(1)). The notice of motion to strike a portion of a pleading shall quote in full the portions sought to be stricken except where the motion is to strike an entire paragraph, cause of action, count or defense.

  • Hearing

MCELFISH LAW VS. FRANCOVICH

Defendant/Cross-Complainant Injury Medical Network, LLC's Motion to Strike Ashley Francovich's Answer to the First Amended Complaint in Interpleader Note: this tentative is issued by Judge O'Neill, who will conduct the hearing on November 24th. Defendant/Cross-Complainant Injury Medical Network, LLC's Motion to Strike Ashley Francovich's Answer to the First Amended Complaint In Interpleader is DENIED. CCP §128, 435 and 436. Ms. Francovich has a good faith claim to the funds at issue.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Insurance

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

DINKJIAN V. TRAVELERS COMMERCIAL INSURANCE COMPANY

Defendant’s (Travelers Commercial Insurance Company) Motion to Strike Punitive Damages From the Complaint (Motion), filed on 9-10-20 under ROA No. 11, is GRANTED with leave to amend.

  • Hearing

SHARON V. PORTER

Plaintiff did not file a motion to strike or tax costs. Thus, there has been no showing of prejudice with regard to the premature Memorandum(s) of Costs. Here, Defendant has timely filed Defendant’s Memorandum of Costs related to the appeal (ROA No. 130) and the Memorandum of Costs related to the trial. (ROA No. 126.) Since Plaintiff did not timely file any motion to strike or tax costs, the court GRANTS Defendant’s Motion for Entry of Judgment (Motion), filed on 1-24-20 under ROA No. 147, in its entirety.

  • Hearing

EAGAN AVENATTI, LLP V. STOLL

Turning Point of Central California, Inc. (2010) 191 Cal.App.4th 53, 63, states, “ ‘In passing on the correctness of a ruling on a motion to strike, judges read allegations of a pleading subject to a motion to strike as a whole, all parts in their context, and assume their truth.’ [Citation.] [¶] In order to state a prima facie claim for punitive damages, a complaint must set forth the elements as stated in the general punitive damage statute, Civil Code section 3294. [Citation.]

  • Hearing

NORMAN W MEAD VS. KRIS KRISTJANSSON

The Court DENIES the motion to strike the identified excerpts of the FAXC. The two challenged excerpts of the FAXC allege that Mead failed to disclose to Kristjansson and CRC that his real estate broker's license had been revoked prior to, and was restricted at the time of, the subject transaction. The Court rejects Mead's argument that the Public Records Act (Gov. Code, § 6254) immunized Mead from disclosing the prior discipline which resulted in revocation of his broker's license.

  • Hearing

  « first    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.