Preview
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF PLACER
Physical
Address: MailingAddress:
10820Justice
CenterDrive PO Box 619072
Roseville,
CA 95678 Roseville,
CA 95661
11/27/2018
Sohey! Tahsildoost
15901 Hawthorne blvd Suite 270
LAWNDALE CA 90260
Re: King, Anna P. vs. Hyundai Motor America S-CV-0038637
DOCUMENT:
C) Complaint/Petition/Cross-Complaint/Amended (J Answer/Responsive
7 Default [] Notice of Deposit of Jury Fees
Motion/OSC/Demurrer CL]Proof of Service
CJ Judgment/Order L] Request for Dismissal
] Request for Trial Setting (UD) L] Notice of Entry of Dismissal
C} Abstract/Writ C] Substitution of Attorney
CJ Notice of Unavailability of Counsel Other: (Motion documents for
() Check # for $ hearing currently reserved for 12-18-
18)
YOUR PAPERS WERE NOT FILED; REASONS FOR REJECTION:
No filing fee/incorrect filing fee was tendered. The correct filing fee is$500.00 L per person.
(] Proof of service must include a cover page with the case name, case number and name of the
party filingthe proof of service.
C1 Incorrect case number listed
[No case number listed.
LJ Papers were submitted to the wrong county.
CJ No signature on papers.
CJ No original signature on papers and papers are not marked as filed by facsimile or electronic
filing.
CJ)Conformed copy of Request for Entry of Dismissal must be attached to Notice of Entry of
Dismissal.
C1)Your papers do not comply with CRC §3.250.
C] First pages of papers must include allthe information required by CRC §2.111(1), including
the name, address, bar number (ifapplicable), telephone number, and fax number and email
address (ifavailable) of the attorney or party presenting the papers.
C Your papers are not in proper filing format . CRC §2.118(a) and §2.100-2.117.
the Judgment must be submitted.
LJ]Must answer as named in complaint/cross-complaint
L) Your name and/or law office does not appear as the Attorney of Record.
L) Per CRC §3.250(a)(21) Notice of Deposit of Jury Fees are not to be filed with the Court.
C1]Notices of Unavailability (AKA Tenderloin Notices) for civil filing are no longer accepted.
Carl v. Superior Court (Coast Community College Dist.) (2007) 157 Cal. App. 4" 73.
OTHER: Please review dates as one states December 18, 2019, but upon further review it
states December 18, 2018.
LJ Documents were placed in pick-up basket at the Historic Courthouse as no envelope was
provided (Local Rule 10.9(N).
C} Documents were placed in pick-up basket at the Gibson Courthouse as no envelope was
provided (Local Rule 10.9(N).
CL)Documents were placed in pick-up basket at the Tahoe Courthouse as no envelope was
provided (Local Rule 10.9(N).
C2 You may wish to obtain information from the law library or from an attorney or other
professional.
Jake Chatters,
Clerk of the Superior Court
E. Cavazos,
AO, Deputy Clerk
qx
Pa
Vgscrat Sohey! Tahsildoost (Bar No. 271294)
Kainoa Aliviado (Bar No. 308382)
THETA LAW FIRM, LLP
i)
15901 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 270
Lawndale, CA 90260
Telephone: (424) 297-3103
Facsimile: (424) 286-2244
Attorneys for defendant Hyundai Motor America
Que]
a
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF PLACER
ANNA P. KING, Case No.: S-CV-0038637
Plaintiff, DEFENDANT HYUNDAI MOTOR
So AMERICA’S MOTION FOR
VS. DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY
See
ADJUDICATION TO BE HEARD LESS
HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA, a THAN 30 DAYS BEFORE TRIAL OR IN
a
California Corporation, and DOES | THE ALTERNATIVE TO ADVANCE THE
HEARING DATE; MEMORANDUM OF
NS
through 10, inclusive,
POINTS AND AUTHORITIES;
NS
DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO;
NS
Defendants.
[PROPOSED] ORDER
Nee
Dept.: 40
Judge: Commissioner Michael A. Jacques
Date: December 18, 2019
NS
Time: 8:30 a.m.
es
Complaint Filed: October 28, 2016
Trial Date: February 4, 2019
ee
ee
TO THE COURT AND TO PLAINTIFF AND PLAINTIFF’S ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on December 18, 2018 at 8:30 a.m., or as soon thereafter
as the matter may be heard in Department 40 of the above-titled Court located at 10820 Justice
Center Drive, Roseville, CA 95678, there will be a hearing on defendant Hyundai Motor
America’s (“HMA”) motion for HMA’s motion for summary adjudication (“MSA”) to be heard
less than 30 days before trial on January 8, 2019 as originally scheduled or in the alternative, for
M \KING,
ANNA\MOTIONS\MOTION
TOADVANCE MSAHEARING\MTN
REMSA I HEARING
DATEDOCX
DEFENDANT HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA’S MOTION FOR DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION TG
BE HEARD LESS THAN 30DAYS BEFORE TRIAL OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE;
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO; [PROPOSED] ORDER
an order advancing the hearing date to January 3, 2019. Asa last resort, ifneither of the other
options are available, HMA would request that the shortest possible trialcontinuance be granted
so as to allow HMA’s MSA to be heard 30 days before trial.
This motion for summary adjudication is based on this notice, the attached memorandum
of points and authorities, the accompanying declaration of Kainoa Aliviado, all pleadings,
documents and records on fileherein, together with such oral and documentary evidence as may
be presented with this motion for summary adjudication and at the hearing.
Pursuant to Local Rule 20.2.3, the court will issue a tentative ruling for this matter on the
court day before the hearing. The tentative ruling will be available after 12:00 noon as an audio
recording accessible at (916) 408-6480; the tentative ruling will also be available at the court’s
website, www.placer.courts.ca.gov. The tentative ruling shall become the final ruling on the
matter and no hearing will be held unless oral argument istimely requested or the tentative ruling
indicates otherwise. Requests for oral argument must be made by calling (916) 408-6481 no later
than 4:00 p.m. on the court day prior to the hearing.
Dated: November 21, 2018
THETA LAW FIRM, LLP
SOHEYL TAHSILDOOST
Attorneys for Defendant Hyundai Motor America
MAKING,
ANNA\MOTIONS\MOTION
TO ADVANCEMSAHEARING\MTNREMSA HEARINGDATE DOCX
DEFENDANT HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA’S MOTION FOR DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION TO
BE HEARD LESS THAN 30 DAYS BEFORE TRIAL OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE;
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO; [PROPOSED] ORDER
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
1. INTRODUCTION
Nw
This is a“Lemon Law” case brought against Defendant Hyundai Motor America
(“HMA”) by Plaintiff Anna P. King (“Plaintiff”) concerning Plaintiff's 2010 Hyundai Tucson
(“subject vehicle’) that Plaintiff purchased on February 19, 2010. On October 19, 2018, HMA
timely served Plaintiff via personal service, with HMA’s Motion for Summary Adjudication
(“MSA”). (Aliviado Decl. § 2.) Trial in this matter isset for February 4, 2019. U/d.) HMA’s MSA
is setto be heard on January 8, 2018, which is less than 30 days before trial,as January 8, 2018
was the earliest available hearing date for HMA’s MSA to be heard. (/d., § 3.)
HMA brings the instant motion for an order allowing the MSA to be heard as currently
scheduled on less than 30 days’ notice on January 8, 2019 or, in the alternative, to have the Court
advance the hearing to January 4, 2019, which is 30 days before trial while stillproviding
Plaintiff with the required 75-day notice. HMA timely filed and served itsMSA to provide
Plaintiff with sufficient notice to have the MSA heard on either January 3rd or January 8".
Moreover, case law is clear that where a party timely filesand serves a motion for summary
adjudication, the motion must be heard, irrespective of a court’s hearing availability and local
rules and/or practices. Because HMA properly filed and served itsMSA, the MSA must be heard
and HMA’s motion should be granted.
2 STATEMENT OF FACTS
Prior to serving the MSA, HMA’s counsel attempted to obtain a hearing date that would
be 30 days before trialand that would provide Plaintiff with sufficient notice. (Aliviado Decl. §
3.) Upon contacting the Court, HMA’s counsel was informed that the earliest hearing date
available was January 8, 2019 so HMA’s counsel scheduled the motion for that date. (/d.)
January 8, 2019 is less than 30 days before trial,specifically, 27 days before trial.(/d.) HMA’s
MSA was served with sufficient time to be heard on January 2-4, 2019, however these dates
were unavailable. (/d.) Plaintiff was personally served on October 19, 2018. (/d. § 2.) The Court
clerk informed HMA’s counsel that allmotions for summary judgment and/or summary
M\KING,ANNA\MOTIONS\MOTION
TO ADVANCEMSAHEARING\MTNREMSA HEARING DATEDOCX
DEFENDANT HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA’S MOTION FOR DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION TO
BE HEARD LESS THAN 30DAYS BEFORE TRIAL OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE;
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO; [PROPOSED] ORDER
adjudication are heard on Tuesday, for odd numbered cases and Thursday for even numbered
cases. (/d.§ 3.) Trial is set for February 4, 2019. (/d.)
3 ARGUMENT
A. Applicable Law Requires the Motion for Summary Adjudication Be Heard
Under applicable law, HMA’s MSA must be heard. The time limits for filing and serving
a motion for summary judgment and/or summary adjudication isset forth inCode Civil
Procedure § 437c. Specifically, § 437c(a)(2) provides that “[n]Jotice of the motion and
supporting papers shall be served on allother parties to the action at least 75 days before the time
appointed for the hearing.” HMA has provided Plaintiff with sufficient 75-day notice for any
date from January 2,2019 on. As such, there is no prejudice to Plaintiff with respect to
Plaintiff's ability to oppose the MSA.
Additionally, § 437c(a)(3) provides that a motion for summary judgment and/or summary
adjudication “shall be heard no laterthan 30 days before the date of trial.” (C.C.P. § 437c(a)(3).)
HMA concedes that, as currently scheduled, the MSA will be heard less than 30 days before
trial,however, the reason for this isthat the Court did not have a suitable date available.
It iswell-settled law that a motion for summary judgment and/or summary adjudication
that is timely served within the time limits ofCalifornia Code of Procedure § 437c, must be
heard, regardless of whether the Court has a hearing date available. (Sentry Ins. v. Superior
Court (1989) 207 Cal.App.3d 526, 529, citing Wells Fargo Bank v. Superior Court (1989) 206
Cal.App.3d 918.) Local rules and practices may not be applied so as to prevent the hearing of
such a motion. (Sentry Ins. (1989) 207 Cal.App.3d at 529.) HMA’s MSA was timely served to
provide Plaintiff with atleast 75 days’ notice inorder to have the MSA heard 30 days before trial
on or before January 4, 2019. While HMA is aware of and respects this Court’s policy to hear
odd number cases such as this one on Tuesdays, the holding in Sentry Ins. v. Superior Court is
clear that this cannot be grounds to prevent a motion for summary judgment/summary
adjudication from being heard. Therefore, HMA’s MSA must be heard.
/I/
M \KING,
ANNA\MOTIONS\MOTION
TO ADVANCEMSAHEARING\MTNREMSA QHEARINGDATEDOCX
DEFENDANT HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA’S MOTION FOR DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION TO
BE HEARD LESS THAN 30 DAYS BEFORE TRIAL OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE;
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO; [PROPOSED] ORDER
B. Good Cause Exists to Hear the Motion Less than 30 Days Before Trial
Furthermore, § 437c(a)(3) allows for a motion for summary adjudication to be heard less
than 30 days before trial “unless the court for good cause orders otherwise.” There isgood cause
for this Court to allow the MSA to be heard on January 8, 2019, since, as stated above, the MSA
was timely filed and served, which coincides with this State’s public policy interest in deciding
cases on their merits. In addition, the MSA will narrow the issues for trialand allow the parties
to conduct a more focused trial preparation. There isalso little,ifany prejudice, to Plaintiffin
hearing the MSA on January 8, 2019 as itis the very next date that this Court hears motions for
summary adjudication and is a full 27 days before trial,providing Plaintiff with sufficient time to
prepare for trial. Furthermore, ifthe MSA isgranted, it will reduce the scope of Plaintiffs trial
preparation, as stated above. For allthese reasons, good cause exists to grant the instant motion
and hear the MSA on January 8, 2019.
C: Alternatively the Motion for Summary Adjudication Should Be Advanced to
January 4, 2019 or the Trial Should be Continued
As an alternative to hearing the MSA on January 8, 2019, HMA requests that the Court
allow the MSA hearing to be advanced to January 3, 2019. This would stillprovide Plaintiff
with the requisite 75-day notice and allow the MSA to be heard 30 days before trial. Moreover,
this Court hears motions for summary adjudication on Thursday. HMA would also accept have
the MSA heard on January 4, 2019.
As a final alternative, HMA would request this Court order trialcontinued by the shortest
amount of time possible to allow HMA’s MSA to be heard 30 days before trial, however, this is
the least desirous result.
///
///
///
HI
M/
M \KING,
ANNA\MOTIONS\MOTION
TO ADVANCEMSAHEARING\MTNREMSA SHEARINGDATEDOCX
DEFENDANT HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA’S MOTION FOR DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION TO
BE HEARD LESS THAN 30DAYS BEFORE TRIAL OR INTHE ALTERNATIVE TO ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE;
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO; [PROPOSED] ORDER
IV. CONCLUSION
For allthe foregoing reasons, HMA asks this Court to grant itsmotion to allow HMA’s
tw
MSA to be heard on January 8, 2019 or to grant alternative reliefas requested and/or as deemed
appropriate by this Court.
Dated: November 21, 2018
THETA LAW FIRM, LLP
/ ee
Lo?
SOHEYL TAHSILDOOST
Attorneys for Defendant Hyundai Motor America
MAKING,
ANNA\MOTIONS\MOTION
TOADVANCE MSAHEARING\MTNREMSA G HEARING
DATE DOCX
DEFENDANT HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA’S MOTION FOR DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION TO
BE HEARD LESS THAN 30 DAYS BEFORE TRIAL OR INTHE ALTERNATIVE TO ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE;
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO; [PROPOSED] ORDER
DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO
I,Kainoa Aliviado, declare as follows:
tO
I. I am an associate inthe law firm of Theta Law Firm, LLP, attorneys of record for
Defendant Hyundai Motor America. If called as a witness, I could and would competently
testify under oath to the following facts of which I have personal knowledge.
Ds On October 19, 2018, HMA timely served Plaintiff via personal service, with
HMA’s Motion for Summary Adjudication (“MSA”). Trial in this matter isset for February 4,
2019.
3. Prior to serving the MSA, my office attempted to obtain a hearing date that would
be 30 days before trial and that would provide Plaintiff with sufficient notice. Upon contacting
the Court, we were informed that the earliest hearing date available was January 8, 2019 so
HMA’s counsel scheduled the motion for that date. January 8, 2019 isless than 30 days before
trial,specifically, 27 days before trial. My office had the MSA was served with sufficient time
to be heard on January 2-4, 2019, but again, the Court informed us these dates were unavailable.
The Court clerk informed our office that all motions for summary judgment and/or summary
adjudication are heard on Tuesday, for odd numbered cases and Thursday for even numbered
cases.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on November 21, 2018 atLawndale, California.
7 — f
Ma ee Ley
ao 7 a
KAINOA ALIVIADO
25
26
2/
M \KING,
ANNA\MOTIONS\MOTION
TOADVANCE MSAHEARING\MTNREMSA HEARING DATEDOCX
DEFENDANT HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA’S MOTION FOR DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION TO
BE HEARD LESS THAN 30 DAYS BEFORE TRIAL OR INTHE ALTERNATIVE TO ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE;
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO; [PROPOSED] ORDER
Prepared By:
Sohey! Tahsildoost (Bar No. 271294)
Kainoa Aliviado (Bar No. 308382)
NO
THETA LAW FIRM, LLP
15901 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 270
Lawndale, CA 90260
Telephone: (424) 297-3103
Facsimile: (424) 286-2244
Attorneys for defendant Hyundai Motor America
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF PLACER
ANNA P. KING, Case No.: S-CV-0038637
a
Plaintiff, [PROPOSED] ORDER
Ss
SS
VS.
Ss
Dept.: 40
a
HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA, a Judge: Commissioner Michael A. Jacques
a
California Corporation, and DOES | Date: | December 18, 2019
a
through 10, inclusive, Time: 8:30 a.m.
a
as
Defendants. Complaint Filed: October 28, 2016
as
Trial Date: February 4, 2019
Na
a
Nee
TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
The Court having read, considered and heard argument on Defendant Hyundai Motor
America’s noticed motion to have Defendant’s motion for summary adjudication heard on
January 8, 2019, less than 30 days before the February 4, 2019 trialdate or, in the alternative, to
advance the hearing date for Defendant’s motion for summary adjudication from January 8, 2019
to January 3 or 4, 2019, or for an order continuing trial for to allow HMA’s motion to be heard
30 days before trial:
IT IS ORDERED that Defendant’s motion isgranted.
[ ] Defendant’s motion for summary adjudication shall be heard on
in Department at a.m./p.m. All associated
deadlines shall be calculated from the new hearing date, per applicable rules and law, as if the
M.\KING,
ANNA\MOTIONS\MOTION
TOADVANCE MSAHEARING\MTN
REMSA QHEARINGDATE DOCX
DEFENDANT HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA’S MOTION FOR DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION TO
BE HEARD LESS THAN 30DAYS BEFORE TRIAL OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE;
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO; [PROPOSED] ORDER
motion were properly filed and served to be heard on said date.
[OR]
Ww
[ | The Court will hear Defendant’s motion for summary adjudication on
and will continue the trialto: in
Department at a.m./p.m. All deadlines associated with Hyundai Motor
America’s motion for summary adjudication shall be calculated from the new hearing date, per
applicable rules and law, as ifthe motion were properly filed and served to be heard on said date.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED:
JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
M\KING,ANNA\MOTIONS\MOTION
TOADVANCE MSAHEARING\MTNREMSA QHEARINGDATE.DOCX
DEFENDANT HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA’S MOTION FOR DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION TO
BE HEARD LESS THAN 30 DAYS BEFORE TRIAL OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE;
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO; [PROPOSED] ORDER
PROOF OF SERVICE
(Code Civ. Proc., § 1013a(3) Revised 5-1-88)
I am over the age of 18, not a party to this action, and employed inthe county where this mailing
tO
occurred.’ My business address is 15901 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 270, Lawndale, CA 90260. On
November 21, 2018 | served the following documents described as DEFENDANT HYUNDAI
MOTOR AMERICA’S MOTION FOR DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY
ADJUDICATION TO BE HEARD LESS THAN 30 DAYS BEFORE TRIAL OR IN THE
ALTERNATIVE TO ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS
AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO; [PROPOSED]
ORDER on interested parties in this action by placing original/true copies thereof insealed
envelopes addressed as follows:
Steve Mikhov Bryan C. Altman
Amy Morse Altman Law Group
Knight Law Group 10250 Constellation Blvd. #2500
10250 Constellation Blvd. #2500 Los Angeles, CA 90067
Los Angeles, CA 90067 (310) 277-8481 Phone
(310) 552-2250 Phone (310) 277-8483 Fax
(310) 552-7973 Fax
xX BY MAIL: I deposited such envelope inthe mail at Lawndale, California. The envelope
was mailed with proper postage thereon fully prepaid. |am "readily familiar" with the firm's
practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Said mailing is deposited with
the United States Postal Service on that same day in the ordinary course of business and there is
delivery service by United States mail atthe place so addressed. | am aware that on motion of
the party served, service is presumed invalid ifpostal cancellation date or postage meter date is
more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit.
L | BY PERSONAL SERVICE: I delivered such envelope by hand to the individual(s) listed
on the above service list.
LC] BY ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION: Icaused to be electronically transmitted such
document referenced above to the individual(s) listed on the above service list.
[ ] BY FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION: I transmitted the facsimile to the individual(s)
listed on the above service listatthe facsimile number listedthereon. The telephone number on
the facsimile machine I used is (424) 286-2244. The facsimile machine Iused complied with
Rule 2.306 and no error was reported by the machine. Pursuant to Rule 2.306, Icaused the
machine to print a transmission record of the transmission, a copy of which isattached to this
declaration.
C] BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY: Ienclosed the documents inan envelope or package
provided by an overnight delivery carrier and addressed to the person at the above-address. |
placed the envelope or package for collection and overnight delivery at an office or a regularly
utilized drop box of the overnight delivery carrier.
Ideclare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above
is true and correct. Executed on November 21, 2018 at Lawndale, California.
ge
Steven Correa
M\KING,
ANNA\MOTIONS\MOTION
TO ADVANCEMSAHEARING\MTNREMSA l QHEARING
DATEDOCX
DEFENDANT HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA’S MOTION FOR DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION TO
BE HEARD LESS THAN 30 DAYS BEFORE TRIAL OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE;
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO; [PROPOSED] ORDER
Preview
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF PLACER Physical Address: MailingAddress: 10820Justice CenterDrive PO Box 619072 Roseville, CA 95678 Roseville, CA 95661 11/27/2018 Sohey! Tahsildoost 15901 Hawthorne blvd Suite 270 LAWNDALE CA 90260 Re: King, Anna P. vs. Hyundai Motor America S-CV-0038637 DOCUMENT: C) Complaint/Petition/Cross-Complaint/Amended (J Answer/Responsive 7 Default [] Notice of Deposit of Jury Fees Motion/OSC/Demurrer CL]Proof of Service CJ Judgment/Order L] Request for Dismissal ] Request for Trial Setting (UD) L] Notice of Entry of Dismissal C} Abstract/Writ C] Substitution of Attorney CJ Notice of Unavailability of Counsel Other: (Motion documents for () Check # for $ hearing currently reserved for 12-18- 18) YOUR PAPERS WERE NOT FILED; REASONS FOR REJECTION: No filing fee/incorrect filing fee was tendered. The correct filing fee is$500.00 L per person. (] Proof of service must include a cover page with the case name, case number and name of the party filingthe proof of service. C1 Incorrect case number listed [No case number listed. LJ Papers were submitted to the wrong county. CJ No signature on papers. CJ No original signature on papers and papers are not marked as filed by facsimile or electronic filing. CJ)Conformed copy of Request for Entry of Dismissal must be attached to Notice of Entry of Dismissal. C1)Your papers do not comply with CRC §3.250. C] First pages of papers must include allthe information required by CRC §2.111(1), including the name, address, bar number (ifapplicable), telephone number, and fax number and email address (ifavailable) of the attorney or party presenting the papers. C Your papers are not in proper filing format . CRC §2.118(a) and §2.100-2.117. the Judgment must be submitted. LJ]Must answer as named in complaint/cross-complaint L) Your name and/or law office does not appear as the Attorney of Record. L) Per CRC §3.250(a)(21) Notice of Deposit of Jury Fees are not to be filed with the Court. C1]Notices of Unavailability (AKA Tenderloin Notices) for civil filing are no longer accepted. Carl v. Superior Court (Coast Community College Dist.) (2007) 157 Cal. App. 4" 73. OTHER: Please review dates as one states December 18, 2019, but upon further review it states December 18, 2018. LJ Documents were placed in pick-up basket at the Historic Courthouse as no envelope was provided (Local Rule 10.9(N). C} Documents were placed in pick-up basket at the Gibson Courthouse as no envelope was provided (Local Rule 10.9(N). CL)Documents were placed in pick-up basket at the Tahoe Courthouse as no envelope was provided (Local Rule 10.9(N). C2 You may wish to obtain information from the law library or from an attorney or other professional. Jake Chatters, Clerk of the Superior Court E. Cavazos, AO, Deputy Clerk qx Pa Vgscrat Sohey! Tahsildoost (Bar No. 271294) Kainoa Aliviado (Bar No. 308382) THETA LAW FIRM, LLP i) 15901 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 270 Lawndale, CA 90260 Telephone: (424) 297-3103 Facsimile: (424) 286-2244 Attorneys for defendant Hyundai Motor America Que] a SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF PLACER ANNA P. KING, Case No.: S-CV-0038637 Plaintiff, DEFENDANT HYUNDAI MOTOR So AMERICA’S MOTION FOR VS. DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY See ADJUDICATION TO BE HEARD LESS HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA, a THAN 30 DAYS BEFORE TRIAL OR IN a California Corporation, and DOES | THE ALTERNATIVE TO ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE; MEMORANDUM OF NS through 10, inclusive, POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; NS DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO; NS Defendants. [PROPOSED] ORDER Nee Dept.: 40 Judge: Commissioner Michael A. Jacques Date: December 18, 2019 NS Time: 8:30 a.m. es Complaint Filed: October 28, 2016 Trial Date: February 4, 2019 ee ee TO THE COURT AND TO PLAINTIFF AND PLAINTIFF’S ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on December 18, 2018 at 8:30 a.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard in Department 40 of the above-titled Court located at 10820 Justice Center Drive, Roseville, CA 95678, there will be a hearing on defendant Hyundai Motor America’s (“HMA”) motion for HMA’s motion for summary adjudication (“MSA”) to be heard less than 30 days before trial on January 8, 2019 as originally scheduled or in the alternative, for M \KING, ANNA\MOTIONS\MOTION TOADVANCE MSAHEARING\MTN REMSA I HEARING DATEDOCX DEFENDANT HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA’S MOTION FOR DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION TG BE HEARD LESS THAN 30DAYS BEFORE TRIAL OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO; [PROPOSED] ORDER an order advancing the hearing date to January 3, 2019. Asa last resort, ifneither of the other options are available, HMA would request that the shortest possible trialcontinuance be granted so as to allow HMA’s MSA to be heard 30 days before trial. This motion for summary adjudication is based on this notice, the attached memorandum of points and authorities, the accompanying declaration of Kainoa Aliviado, all pleadings, documents and records on fileherein, together with such oral and documentary evidence as may be presented with this motion for summary adjudication and at the hearing. Pursuant to Local Rule 20.2.3, the court will issue a tentative ruling for this matter on the court day before the hearing. The tentative ruling will be available after 12:00 noon as an audio recording accessible at (916) 408-6480; the tentative ruling will also be available at the court’s website, www.placer.courts.ca.gov. The tentative ruling shall become the final ruling on the matter and no hearing will be held unless oral argument istimely requested or the tentative ruling indicates otherwise. Requests for oral argument must be made by calling (916) 408-6481 no later than 4:00 p.m. on the court day prior to the hearing. Dated: November 21, 2018 THETA LAW FIRM, LLP SOHEYL TAHSILDOOST Attorneys for Defendant Hyundai Motor America MAKING, ANNA\MOTIONS\MOTION TO ADVANCEMSAHEARING\MTNREMSA HEARINGDATE DOCX DEFENDANT HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA’S MOTION FOR DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION TO BE HEARD LESS THAN 30 DAYS BEFORE TRIAL OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO; [PROPOSED] ORDER MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES 1. INTRODUCTION Nw This is a“Lemon Law” case brought against Defendant Hyundai Motor America (“HMA”) by Plaintiff Anna P. King (“Plaintiff”) concerning Plaintiff's 2010 Hyundai Tucson (“subject vehicle’) that Plaintiff purchased on February 19, 2010. On October 19, 2018, HMA timely served Plaintiff via personal service, with HMA’s Motion for Summary Adjudication (“MSA”). (Aliviado Decl. § 2.) Trial in this matter isset for February 4, 2019. U/d.) HMA’s MSA is setto be heard on January 8, 2018, which is less than 30 days before trial,as January 8, 2018 was the earliest available hearing date for HMA’s MSA to be heard. (/d., § 3.) HMA brings the instant motion for an order allowing the MSA to be heard as currently scheduled on less than 30 days’ notice on January 8, 2019 or, in the alternative, to have the Court advance the hearing to January 4, 2019, which is 30 days before trial while stillproviding Plaintiff with the required 75-day notice. HMA timely filed and served itsMSA to provide Plaintiff with sufficient notice to have the MSA heard on either January 3rd or January 8". Moreover, case law is clear that where a party timely filesand serves a motion for summary adjudication, the motion must be heard, irrespective of a court’s hearing availability and local rules and/or practices. Because HMA properly filed and served itsMSA, the MSA must be heard and HMA’s motion should be granted. 2 STATEMENT OF FACTS Prior to serving the MSA, HMA’s counsel attempted to obtain a hearing date that would be 30 days before trialand that would provide Plaintiff with sufficient notice. (Aliviado Decl. § 3.) Upon contacting the Court, HMA’s counsel was informed that the earliest hearing date available was January 8, 2019 so HMA’s counsel scheduled the motion for that date. (/d.) January 8, 2019 is less than 30 days before trial,specifically, 27 days before trial.(/d.) HMA’s MSA was served with sufficient time to be heard on January 2-4, 2019, however these dates were unavailable. (/d.) Plaintiff was personally served on October 19, 2018. (/d. § 2.) The Court clerk informed HMA’s counsel that allmotions for summary judgment and/or summary M\KING,ANNA\MOTIONS\MOTION TO ADVANCEMSAHEARING\MTNREMSA HEARING DATEDOCX DEFENDANT HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA’S MOTION FOR DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION TO BE HEARD LESS THAN 30DAYS BEFORE TRIAL OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO; [PROPOSED] ORDER adjudication are heard on Tuesday, for odd numbered cases and Thursday for even numbered cases. (/d.§ 3.) Trial is set for February 4, 2019. (/d.) 3 ARGUMENT A. Applicable Law Requires the Motion for Summary Adjudication Be Heard Under applicable law, HMA’s MSA must be heard. The time limits for filing and serving a motion for summary judgment and/or summary adjudication isset forth inCode Civil Procedure § 437c. Specifically, § 437c(a)(2) provides that “[n]Jotice of the motion and supporting papers shall be served on allother parties to the action at least 75 days before the time appointed for the hearing.” HMA has provided Plaintiff with sufficient 75-day notice for any date from January 2,2019 on. As such, there is no prejudice to Plaintiff with respect to Plaintiff's ability to oppose the MSA. Additionally, § 437c(a)(3) provides that a motion for summary judgment and/or summary adjudication “shall be heard no laterthan 30 days before the date of trial.” (C.C.P. § 437c(a)(3).) HMA concedes that, as currently scheduled, the MSA will be heard less than 30 days before trial,however, the reason for this isthat the Court did not have a suitable date available. It iswell-settled law that a motion for summary judgment and/or summary adjudication that is timely served within the time limits ofCalifornia Code of Procedure § 437c, must be heard, regardless of whether the Court has a hearing date available. (Sentry Ins. v. Superior Court (1989) 207 Cal.App.3d 526, 529, citing Wells Fargo Bank v. Superior Court (1989) 206 Cal.App.3d 918.) Local rules and practices may not be applied so as to prevent the hearing of such a motion. (Sentry Ins. (1989) 207 Cal.App.3d at 529.) HMA’s MSA was timely served to provide Plaintiff with atleast 75 days’ notice inorder to have the MSA heard 30 days before trial on or before January 4, 2019. While HMA is aware of and respects this Court’s policy to hear odd number cases such as this one on Tuesdays, the holding in Sentry Ins. v. Superior Court is clear that this cannot be grounds to prevent a motion for summary judgment/summary adjudication from being heard. Therefore, HMA’s MSA must be heard. /I/ M \KING, ANNA\MOTIONS\MOTION TO ADVANCEMSAHEARING\MTNREMSA QHEARINGDATEDOCX DEFENDANT HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA’S MOTION FOR DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION TO BE HEARD LESS THAN 30 DAYS BEFORE TRIAL OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO; [PROPOSED] ORDER B. Good Cause Exists to Hear the Motion Less than 30 Days Before Trial Furthermore, § 437c(a)(3) allows for a motion for summary adjudication to be heard less than 30 days before trial “unless the court for good cause orders otherwise.” There isgood cause for this Court to allow the MSA to be heard on January 8, 2019, since, as stated above, the MSA was timely filed and served, which coincides with this State’s public policy interest in deciding cases on their merits. In addition, the MSA will narrow the issues for trialand allow the parties to conduct a more focused trial preparation. There isalso little,ifany prejudice, to Plaintiffin hearing the MSA on January 8, 2019 as itis the very next date that this Court hears motions for summary adjudication and is a full 27 days before trial,providing Plaintiff with sufficient time to prepare for trial. Furthermore, ifthe MSA isgranted, it will reduce the scope of Plaintiffs trial preparation, as stated above. For allthese reasons, good cause exists to grant the instant motion and hear the MSA on January 8, 2019. C: Alternatively the Motion for Summary Adjudication Should Be Advanced to January 4, 2019 or the Trial Should be Continued As an alternative to hearing the MSA on January 8, 2019, HMA requests that the Court allow the MSA hearing to be advanced to January 3, 2019. This would stillprovide Plaintiff with the requisite 75-day notice and allow the MSA to be heard 30 days before trial. Moreover, this Court hears motions for summary adjudication on Thursday. HMA would also accept have the MSA heard on January 4, 2019. As a final alternative, HMA would request this Court order trialcontinued by the shortest amount of time possible to allow HMA’s MSA to be heard 30 days before trial, however, this is the least desirous result. /// /// /// HI M/ M \KING, ANNA\MOTIONS\MOTION TO ADVANCEMSAHEARING\MTNREMSA SHEARINGDATEDOCX DEFENDANT HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA’S MOTION FOR DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION TO BE HEARD LESS THAN 30DAYS BEFORE TRIAL OR INTHE ALTERNATIVE TO ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO; [PROPOSED] ORDER IV. CONCLUSION For allthe foregoing reasons, HMA asks this Court to grant itsmotion to allow HMA’s tw MSA to be heard on January 8, 2019 or to grant alternative reliefas requested and/or as deemed appropriate by this Court. Dated: November 21, 2018 THETA LAW FIRM, LLP / ee Lo? SOHEYL TAHSILDOOST Attorneys for Defendant Hyundai Motor America MAKING, ANNA\MOTIONS\MOTION TOADVANCE MSAHEARING\MTNREMSA G HEARING DATE DOCX DEFENDANT HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA’S MOTION FOR DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION TO BE HEARD LESS THAN 30 DAYS BEFORE TRIAL OR INTHE ALTERNATIVE TO ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO; [PROPOSED] ORDER DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO I,Kainoa Aliviado, declare as follows: tO I. I am an associate inthe law firm of Theta Law Firm, LLP, attorneys of record for Defendant Hyundai Motor America. If called as a witness, I could and would competently testify under oath to the following facts of which I have personal knowledge. Ds On October 19, 2018, HMA timely served Plaintiff via personal service, with HMA’s Motion for Summary Adjudication (“MSA”). Trial in this matter isset for February 4, 2019. 3. Prior to serving the MSA, my office attempted to obtain a hearing date that would be 30 days before trial and that would provide Plaintiff with sufficient notice. Upon contacting the Court, we were informed that the earliest hearing date available was January 8, 2019 so HMA’s counsel scheduled the motion for that date. January 8, 2019 isless than 30 days before trial,specifically, 27 days before trial. My office had the MSA was served with sufficient time to be heard on January 2-4, 2019, but again, the Court informed us these dates were unavailable. The Court clerk informed our office that all motions for summary judgment and/or summary adjudication are heard on Tuesday, for odd numbered cases and Thursday for even numbered cases. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on November 21, 2018 atLawndale, California. 7 — f Ma ee Ley ao 7 a KAINOA ALIVIADO 25 26 2/ M \KING, ANNA\MOTIONS\MOTION TOADVANCE MSAHEARING\MTNREMSA HEARING DATEDOCX DEFENDANT HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA’S MOTION FOR DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION TO BE HEARD LESS THAN 30 DAYS BEFORE TRIAL OR INTHE ALTERNATIVE TO ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO; [PROPOSED] ORDER Prepared By: Sohey! Tahsildoost (Bar No. 271294) Kainoa Aliviado (Bar No. 308382) NO THETA LAW FIRM, LLP 15901 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 270 Lawndale, CA 90260 Telephone: (424) 297-3103 Facsimile: (424) 286-2244 Attorneys for defendant Hyundai Motor America SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF PLACER ANNA P. KING, Case No.: S-CV-0038637 a Plaintiff, [PROPOSED] ORDER Ss SS VS. Ss Dept.: 40 a HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA, a Judge: Commissioner Michael A. Jacques a California Corporation, and DOES | Date: | December 18, 2019 a through 10, inclusive, Time: 8:30 a.m. a as Defendants. Complaint Filed: October 28, 2016 as Trial Date: February 4, 2019 Na a Nee TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: The Court having read, considered and heard argument on Defendant Hyundai Motor America’s noticed motion to have Defendant’s motion for summary adjudication heard on January 8, 2019, less than 30 days before the February 4, 2019 trialdate or, in the alternative, to advance the hearing date for Defendant’s motion for summary adjudication from January 8, 2019 to January 3 or 4, 2019, or for an order continuing trial for to allow HMA’s motion to be heard 30 days before trial: IT IS ORDERED that Defendant’s motion isgranted. [ ] Defendant’s motion for summary adjudication shall be heard on in Department at a.m./p.m. All associated deadlines shall be calculated from the new hearing date, per applicable rules and law, as if the M.\KING, ANNA\MOTIONS\MOTION TOADVANCE MSAHEARING\MTN REMSA QHEARINGDATE DOCX DEFENDANT HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA’S MOTION FOR DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION TO BE HEARD LESS THAN 30DAYS BEFORE TRIAL OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO; [PROPOSED] ORDER motion were properly filed and served to be heard on said date. [OR] Ww [ | The Court will hear Defendant’s motion for summary adjudication on and will continue the trialto: in Department at a.m./p.m. All deadlines associated with Hyundai Motor America’s motion for summary adjudication shall be calculated from the new hearing date, per applicable rules and law, as ifthe motion were properly filed and served to be heard on said date. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT M\KING,ANNA\MOTIONS\MOTION TOADVANCE MSAHEARING\MTNREMSA QHEARINGDATE.DOCX DEFENDANT HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA’S MOTION FOR DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION TO BE HEARD LESS THAN 30 DAYS BEFORE TRIAL OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO; [PROPOSED] ORDER PROOF OF SERVICE (Code Civ. Proc., § 1013a(3) Revised 5-1-88) I am over the age of 18, not a party to this action, and employed inthe county where this mailing tO occurred.’ My business address is 15901 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 270, Lawndale, CA 90260. On November 21, 2018 | served the following documents described as DEFENDANT HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA’S MOTION FOR DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION TO BE HEARD LESS THAN 30 DAYS BEFORE TRIAL OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO; [PROPOSED] ORDER on interested parties in this action by placing original/true copies thereof insealed envelopes addressed as follows: Steve Mikhov Bryan C. Altman Amy Morse Altman Law Group Knight Law Group 10250 Constellation Blvd. #2500 10250 Constellation Blvd. #2500 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Los Angeles, CA 90067 (310) 277-8481 Phone (310) 552-2250 Phone (310) 277-8483 Fax (310) 552-7973 Fax xX BY MAIL: I deposited such envelope inthe mail at Lawndale, California. The envelope was mailed with proper postage thereon fully prepaid. |am "readily familiar" with the firm's practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Said mailing is deposited with the United States Postal Service on that same day in the ordinary course of business and there is delivery service by United States mail atthe place so addressed. | am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid ifpostal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit. L | BY PERSONAL SERVICE: I delivered such envelope by hand to the individual(s) listed on the above service list. LC] BY ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION: Icaused to be electronically transmitted such document referenced above to the individual(s) listed on the above service list. [ ] BY FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION: I transmitted the facsimile to the individual(s) listed on the above service listatthe facsimile number listedthereon. The telephone number on the facsimile machine I used is (424) 286-2244. The facsimile machine Iused complied with Rule 2.306 and no error was reported by the machine. Pursuant to Rule 2.306, Icaused the machine to print a transmission record of the transmission, a copy of which isattached to this declaration. C] BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY: Ienclosed the documents inan envelope or package provided by an overnight delivery carrier and addressed to the person at the above-address. | placed the envelope or package for collection and overnight delivery at an office or a regularly utilized drop box of the overnight delivery carrier. Ideclare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true and correct. Executed on November 21, 2018 at Lawndale, California. ge Steven Correa M\KING, ANNA\MOTIONS\MOTION TO ADVANCEMSAHEARING\MTNREMSA l QHEARING DATEDOCX DEFENDANT HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA’S MOTION FOR DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION TO BE HEARD LESS THAN 30 DAYS BEFORE TRIAL OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE TO ADVANCE THE HEARING DATE; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF KAINOA ALIVIADO; [PROPOSED] ORDER