Judge: Melissa R. Mccormick, Case: Meche v. Wang, Date: 2022-08-25 Tentative Ruling

Defendant Sobriety Support Solutions’ Motion for Summary Judgment

Defendant Sobriety Support Solutions moves for summary judgment against plaintiff Earl Meche’s complaint.  Plaintiff did not file an opposition.  For the following reasons, defendant’s motion is granted.

A defendant seeking summary judgment bears the burden of persuasion and burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence to negate the plaintiff’s claim.  It may do this by demonstrating the claim has no merit, that the plaintiff cannot prove an element of the claim, or that the defendant has a complete defense entitling it to judgment as a matter of law.  Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 437c(p)(2); Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 850-51. 

If a defendant does not meet this initial burden, the plaintiff need not oppose the motion and the motion must be denied.  Binder v. Aetna Life Ins. Co. (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 832, 840.  If the defendant meets this initial burden, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to produce evidence demonstrating the existence of a triable issue of material fact.  Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 437c(p)(2); Aguilar, 25 Cal.4th at 850-51.

Plaintiff’s complaint alleges two causes of action against defendant (negligence and premises liability) arising out of plaintiff’s alleged fall on April 16, 2019 at a property located in Dana Point, California. 

Defendant carried its burden of demonstrating plaintiff cannot prove his claims against defendant.  See e.g., Defendant’s Separate Statement Nos. 1-28 (and evidence cited therein).  Plaintiff did not oppose defendant’s motion and thus did not carry his shifted burden of showing a triable issue of one or more material facts.  See Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 437c(p)(2).  Defendant’s motion for summary judgment is granted.

Defendant to give notice.