Judge: James A. Mangione, Case: 37-2023-00018072-CU-OE-CTL, Date: 2023-08-04 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - August 03, 2023

08/04/2023  09:00:00 AM  C-75 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:James A Mangione

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Other employment Motion Hearing (Civil) 37-2023-00018072-CU-OE-CTL WEINDEL VS PACIFIC BUILDING GROUP [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED:

Defendant Pacific Building Group's Motion for Terminating Sanctions is denied.

A moving party will prevail on a CCP § 128.7 motion only if they prove the complaint's allegations and claims are totally and completely without merit at the time the complaint was filed. It requires an extremely high burden of proof, with its applicability lying only with truly egregious behavior. (San Diegans for Open Government (2016) 247 Cal. App. 4th 1306, 1318-19 (superseded by statute on other grounds).) In ruling on a 128.7 motion, the Court is forbidden from weighing evidence. If the party opposing the motion demonstrates there is some evidence regardless of strength or weight to support the alleged claims, then the motion should be denied. (Ponce v Wells Fargo Bank (2018) 21 Cal. App. 5th 253, 263.) 'A trial court is to apply an objective standard in making its inquiry concerning the attorney's or party's allegedly sanctionable behavior in connection with a motion for sanctions brought under section 128.7. [Citations.] Thus, for example, whether an action is frivolous under section 128.7 is measured by an objective standard.' (Optimal Markets, Inc. v. Salant (2013) 221 Cal.App.4th 912, 921.) 'A claim is objectively unreasonable if any reasonable attorney would agree that it is totally and completely without merit.' (Peake v. Underwood (2014) 227 Cal.App.4th 428, 440 (quotation marks and alterations omitted).) Critically, the enforceability of the Release Agreement itself is not at issue in the instant motion and therefore, is not addressed by the Court. To prevail on the instant motion, Defendant must show that 'any reasonable attorney' would agree that an argument premised on the unenforceability of the Release Agreement under Government Code § 12964.5(b)(4) is 'totally and completely without merit.' Stated differently, if any reasonable attorney would agree that Government Code § 12964.5(b)(4) could render the Release Agreement unenforceable, sanctions are not warranted under CCP § 128.7.

The Court finds there is good cause to consider Plaintiff's surreply. (Guimei v. General Electric Co. (2009) 172 Cal.App.4th 689, 703 (consideration of surreply and supporting documents is within the Court's discretion); see also San Diego Superior Court Local Rule 4.23.5(A) (requiring a showing of good to consider any late-filed or surreply papers).) Defendant's request for monetary sanctions is denied.

All requests for judicial notice are granted. All evidentiary objections are overruled.

The minute order is the order of the Court.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

2995869  11