MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT/SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
MOVING PARTY: Defendant Clarence Kerr
RESPONDING PARTY(S): Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant Clarence Kerr
PROOF OF SERVICE:
Defendant’s Evidentiary Objections
Pursuant to CCP § 437c(q), the Court only rules upon the objections asserted against evidence which the Court deems to be material to the disposition of this matter, as follows:
Declaration of Maxine Bahns
No. 1: OVERRULED. Best Evidence Rule was repealed in 1998. Objection goes to weight.
No. 2: OVERRULED. Sufficient foundation as to the emails forwarded to Bahns.
No. 3: OVERRULED. The lack of authentication may be remedied before trial. Sweetwater Union High School Dist. v. Gilbane Building Co. (2019) 6 Cal.5th 931, 947-49. See No. 1 above.
Nos. 4 - 7: OVERRULED. See above objections.
Motion for Summary Judgment
As discussed below, Defendant has not demonstrated that he is entitled to judgment as to all remaining causes of action asserted against him. Accordingly, the motion
Hearing Date
June 24, 2019
Type
Other Non-Personal Injury/Property Damage tort (General Jurisdiction)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT/SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
MOVING PARTY: Defendant Clarence Kerr
RESPONDING PARTY(S): Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant Clarence Kerr
PROOF OF SERVICE:
Defendant’s Evidentiary Objections
Pursuant to CCP § 437c(q), the Court only rules upon the objections asserted against evidence which the Court deems to be material to the disposition of this matter, as follows:
Declaration of Maxine Bahns
No. 1: OVERRULED. Best Evidence Rule was repealed in 1998. Objection goes to weight.
No. 2: OVERRULED. Sufficient foundation as to the emails forwarded to Bahns.
No. 3: OVERRULED. The lack of authentication may be remedied before trial. Sweetwater Union High School Dist. v. Gilbane Building Co. (2019) 6 Cal.5th 931, 947-49. See No. 1 above.
Nos. 4 - 7: OVERRULED. See above objections.
Motion for Summary Judgment
As discussed below, Defendant has not demonstrated that he is entitled to judgment as to all remaining causes of action asserted against him. Accordingly, the motion