On June 21, 2023 a
Motion-Secondary
was filed
involving a dispute between
Frias, Norma,
and
Does 1-20,
Himnel Usa Incorporated,
for Wrongful Termination Unlimited
in the District Court of San Bernardino County.
Preview
ORIGINAL
ElyzaP. Heraldez, Esq. (State Bar No. 293395)
HERALDEZ LAW PC
7349 Milliken Avenue, Ste. 1404
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730
Office: (909) 942-9992
Email: Elyza.Heraldez@Heraldezlaw.com F L
Panett Ge A Oe ao
Attorneys for Plaintiff, SENT
oon BERNARDINO
VERONICA HERNANDEZ
SEP 2 9 2023
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
0 fk acon
FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
10
11 VERONICA HERNANDEZ CASE NO. CIVSB2314471
12 Plaintiff, [Assigned for all purposes to the Hon. John M
Pacheco, Dpt. $31]
13 VS.
PLAINTIFF VERONICA HERNANDEZ’S
14 HIMNEL USA INCORPORATED, a California OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT HIMNEL
Corporation, HIMNEL USA INCORPORATED USA INCORPORATED’S DEMURRER:
15 DBA ST. MARY’S MONTESSORI SCHOOL, a MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND
California Corporation, and DOES 1-20. AUTHORITIES FILED IN SUPPORT
16 Inclusive. THEREOF
17 Defendants. [Filed concurrently with Declaration of Elyza P
Heraldez; [proposed] Order on Demurrer;
18 Evidentiary Objection and Motion to Strike
Declaration of Dusty M. Knapp; and [proposed]
19 Order on Evidentiary Objection]
20 Hearing Date: October 10, 2023
Time: 8:30 a.m.
21 Location: Department S31
22
Complaint filed: June 28, 2023
23 Discovery Cutoff: None Set
Trail Date: None Set
24
25
26
27
28
1
PLAINTIFF VERONICA HERNANDEZ’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT HIMNEL USA
INCORPORATED’S DEMURRER
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
Il STATEMENT OF FACTS
TI. REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE.............
IV. PROCEDURAL DEFECTS
A The Court Should Strike Or, Alternatively, Overrule Defendant’s Demurrer For
10 Failure To Meet And Confer In Person Or By Telephone Prior To Filing A
11
Demurrer
12
B Objection To Submission Of Improper Evidence...........
13
Vv ARGUMENT
14
15 A Legal Standard
16 B Plaintiff Pleads A Cognizable Claim For Violation Of The Bane Act
17
1 The Bane Act Applies Broadly To Constitutional Or Statutory Violations
18
Accomplished By Threat, Intimidation, Or Coercion.
19
Allegations Of Threatening Or Committing An Act Of Violence Is Not
20
21 Necessary To State A Cognizable Claim Under The Bane Act
22 3 The Bane Act Applies To Employment Cases . 12
23 Cc Plaintiff Should Be Given Leave to Amend............. 12
24
VI. CONCLUSION... 13
25
26
27
28
2
PLAINTIFF VERONICA HERNANDEZ’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT HIMNEL
USA
INCORPORATED’S DEMURRER
Document Filed Date
September 29, 2023
Case Filing Date
June 21, 2023
Category
Wrongful Termination Unlimited
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
ORIGINAL ElyzaP. Heraldez, Esq. (State Bar No. 293395) HERALDEZ LAW PC 7349 Milliken Avenue, Ste. 1404 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Office: (909) 942-9992 Email: Elyza.Heraldez@Heraldezlaw.com F L Panett Ge A Oe ao Attorneys for Plaintiff, SENT oon BERNARDINO VERONICA HERNANDEZ SEP 2 9 2023 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 0 fk acon FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO 10 11 VERONICA HERNANDEZ CASE NO. CIVSB2314471 12 Plaintiff, [Assigned for all purposes to the Hon. John M Pacheco, Dpt. $31] 13 VS. PLAINTIFF VERONICA HERNANDEZ’S 14 HIMNEL USA INCORPORATED, a California OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT HIMNEL Corporation, HIMNEL USA INCORPORATED USA INCORPORATED’S DEMURRER: 15 DBA ST. MARY’S MONTESSORI SCHOOL, a MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND California Corporation, and DOES 1-20. AUTHORITIES FILED IN SUPPORT 16 Inclusive. THEREOF 17 Defendants. [Filed concurrently with Declaration of Elyza P Heraldez; [proposed] Order on Demurrer; 18 Evidentiary Objection and Motion to Strike Declaration of Dusty M. Knapp; and [proposed] 19 Order on Evidentiary Objection] 20 Hearing Date: October 10, 2023 Time: 8:30 a.m. 21 Location: Department S31 22 Complaint filed: June 28, 2023 23 Discovery Cutoff: None Set Trail Date: None Set 24 25 26 27 28 1 PLAINTIFF VERONICA HERNANDEZ’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT HIMNEL USA INCORPORATED’S DEMURRER TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Il STATEMENT OF FACTS TI. REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE............. IV. PROCEDURAL DEFECTS A The Court Should Strike Or, Alternatively, Overrule Defendant’s Demurrer For 10 Failure To Meet And Confer In Person Or By Telephone Prior To Filing A 11 Demurrer 12 B Objection To Submission Of Improper Evidence........... 13 Vv ARGUMENT 14 15 A Legal Standard 16 B Plaintiff Pleads A Cognizable Claim For Violation Of The Bane Act 17 1 The Bane Act Applies Broadly To Constitutional Or Statutory Violations 18 Accomplished By Threat, Intimidation, Or Coercion. 19 Allegations Of Threatening Or Committing An Act Of Violence Is Not 20 21 Necessary To State A Cognizable Claim Under The Bane Act 22 3 The Bane Act Applies To Employment Cases . 12 23 Cc Plaintiff Should Be Given Leave to Amend............. 12 24 VI. CONCLUSION... 13 25 26 27 28 2 PLAINTIFF VERONICA HERNANDEZ’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT HIMNEL USA INCORPORATED’S DEMURRER