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

Plaintiffs Carolyn S. Watson and Laneisheia C. Howard’s Motion for Summary Judgment or, in the alternative, Summary Adjudication

Plaintiffs Carolyn S. Watson and Laneisheia C. Howard move for summary judgment or, in the alternative, summary adjudication against defendants Thai D. Tran and Tuyen Thi Mong Tran.  Defendants did not file an opposition.  For the following reasons, plaintiffs’ motion is granted.

A plaintiff seeking summary judgment meets its burden of showing that there is no defense to a cause of action if that party has proved each element of the cause of action entitling the party to judgment on the cause of action.  Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 437c(p)(1).  Once the plaintiff has met that burden, the burden shifts to the defendant to show that a triable issue of one or more material facts exists as to the cause of action or a defense thereto.  Id.

Plaintiffs’ complaint alleges causes of action breach of contract and declaratory relief.  Plaintiffs allege defendants breached a written agreement to sell plaintiffs a condominium.  Plaintiffs seek specific performance of the sales agreement. 

Plaintiffs have met their burden of showing that defendants have no defense to plaintiffs’ breach of contract cause of action by proving each element of the cause of action.  See Plaintiffs’ Separate Statement Nos. 1-6, 11 (and evidence cited therein).  Defendants did not file an opposition and thus have not carried their shifted burden of showing that a triable issue of one or more material facts exists as to plaintiffs’ breach of contract cause of action against defendants.  Plaintiffs’ motion for summary adjudication of their breach of contract cause of action is therefore granted.

Plaintiffs have also demonstrated they are entitled to the remedy of specific performance.  See Plaintiffs’ Separate Statement Nos. 7-10, 12 (and evidence cited therein).  Defendants did not file an opposition and thus have not demonstrated that specific performance of the sales agreement should not be ordered. 

Plaintiffs’ request for judicial notice is denied.  It is not necessary to seek judicial notice of documents in the court file for this case.

Plaintiffs to give notice.