MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

(CCP § 437c)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Defendant Hay Krisster Tanning’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.

ANALYSIS:

Background

On September 20, 2018, Plaintiff Stephanie Riley (“Plaintiff”) filed an action for general negligence and premises liability against Defendants Monsereat Lara (“Lara”) and Hay Krisster Tanning (“Tanning”) (collectively “Defendants”). On February 6, 2019, Defendant Tanning filed an Answer.

On October 7, 2019, Defendant Tanning filed the instant Motion for Summary Judgment (the “Motion”). To date, no opposition or reply briefs have been filed.

Legal Standard

“[A] defendant moving for summary judgment or summary adjudication “has met his or her burden of showing that a cause of action has no merit if that party has shown that one or more elements of the [plaintiff's] cause of action ... cannot be established....” (§ 437c, subd. (o)(2); Union Bank v. Superior Court, supra, 31 Cal.App.4th at p. 585, 37 Cal.Rptr.2d 653.) Once the mo