SEAN BUGAYONG VS. CALCARE HOME HEALTH CARE & HOSPICE, INC

18-CIV-00715 SEAN BUGAYONG VS. CALCARE HOME HEALTH CARE & HOSPICE, INC., ET AL.

SEAN BUGAYONG CALCARE HOME HEALTH CARE & HOSPICE, INC.
RHONDA D. KRAEBER

CALCARE HOME HEALTH CARE & HOSPICE, INC AND TABASUM DURANI’S DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT TENTATIVE RULING:

Defendants CALCARE HOME HEALTH CARE & HOSPICE, INC. and TABASUM DURANI have not complied with the meet-and-confer requirements of Code Civ. Proc. §§ 430.41(a) and 435.5(a), which provide that before filing a demurrer or motion to strike, the moving party shall meet and confer in person or by telephone with the party who filed the pleading that is subject to the demurrer or motion to strike, for the purpose of determining whether an agreement can be reached that would resolve the objections to be raised in the demurrer or motion to strike.

The hearing on the demurrer is therefore continued to February 1, 2019 at 9:00 a.m. in the Law and Motion Department so that the parties may meet and confer. Defendants are required to file, no later than five days prior to the new hearing date, a Code-compliant declaration stating either: (1) the parties have met and conferred in person or by telephone and (a) the parties have resolved the objections raised in the demurrer and motion to strike, which shall be taken off calendar or (b) the parties did not reach an agreement resolving the objections raised; or (2) the party who filed the pleading subject to demurrer and motion to strike failed to respond to the meet and confer request or otherwise failed to meet and confer in good faith. If Defendants fail to file and serve the declaration demonstrating compliance with these requirements, the demurrer and motion to strike will be stricken as procedurally improper.

If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court, pursuant to Rule 3.1308(a)(1), adopted by Local Rule 3.10, effective immediately, and no formal order pursuant to Rule 3.1312 or any other notice is required as the tentative ruling affords sufficient notice to the parties.

18-CIV-00715 SEAN BUGAYONG VS. CALCARE HOME HEALTH CARE & HOSPICE, INC., ET AL.

SEAN BUGAYONG CALCARE HOME HEALTH CARE & HOSPICE, INC.
RHONDA D. KRAEBER

CALCARE HOME HEALTH CARE & HOSPICE, INC AND TABASUM DURANI’S MOTION TO STRIKE PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT TENTATIVE RULING:

Defendants CALCARE HOME HEALTH CARE & HOSPICE, INC. and TABASUM DURANI have not complied with the meet-and-confer requirements of Code Civ. Proc. §§ 430.41(a) and 435.5(a), which provide that before filing a demurrer or motion to strike, the moving party shall meet and confer in person or by telephone with the party who filed the pleading that is subject to the demurrer or motion to strike, for the purpose of determining whether an agreement can be reached that would resolve the objections to be raised in the demurrer or motion to strike.

The hearing on the demurrer is therefore continued to February 1, 2019 at 9:00 a.m. in the Law and Motion Department so that the parties may meet and confer. Defendants are required to file, no later than five days prior to the new hearing date, a Code-compliant declaration stating either: (1) the parties have met and conferred in person or by telephone and (a) the parties have resolved the objections raised in the demurrer and motion to strike, which shall be taken off calendar or (b) the parties did not reach an agreement resolving the objections raised; or (2) the party who filed the pleading subject to demurrer and motion to strike failed to respond to the meet and confer request or otherwise failed to meet and confer in good faith. If Defendants fail to file and serve the declaration demonstrating compliance with these requirements, the demurrer and motion to strike will be stricken as procedurally improper.

If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the Court, pursuant to Rule 3.1308(a)(1), adopted by Local Rule 3.10, effective immediately, and no formal order pursuant to Rule 3.1312 or any other notice is required as the tentative ruling affords sufficient notice to the parties.

Copy the code below to your web site.
x 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *