The Regents of the University of California, UC Irvine Medical Center vs. Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc.

Ybarra’s current financial condition during the Trial-a prerequisite under California law for any punitive damages award-and as the jury’s punitive damages award was excessive and improper.”

(ROA 473, at p. 3, lines 8-16; ROA 476, at p. 3, lines 11-19; ROA 469, at p. 3, lines 13-21.)

Moving Defendants fail to support their arguments. There is no apparent defect in the verdict and the evidence presented at trial appears sufficient to support the verdict rendered by the jury.

The court further notes that Moving Defendants failed to submit the trial record, which the court is required to review if a new trial is granted based upon the ground of insufficiency of the evidence. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 657 [“A new trial shall not be granted upon the ground of insufficiency of the evidence to justify the verdict ..., unless after weighing the evidence the court is convinced from the entire record, including reasonable inferences therefrom, that the ... jury clearly should have reached a different verdict or decision.”]; see also Lane v. Hughes Aircraft Co. (2000) 22 Cal.4th 1152A, as modified (May 10, 2000) [“there must be substantial evidence in the record to support [the] reasons [for granting a new trial]”].) Here, Moving Defendants merely submit a copy of the Judgment.

In sum, each motion is DENIED. Plaintiff to give notice.

9 Vanderham vs. Demurrer (re Complaint) Pryor OFF-CALENDAR. (See 7/1/26 Minute Order [vacating hearing after moving party filed notice of withdrawal].)

10 The Regents of the Demurrer (re Complaint) University of Motion to Strike Portions Of Complaint California, UC Irvine Medical Center vs. Kaiser

Foundation Health OFF-CALENDAR. (See 6/29/26 Minute Order [vacating Plan, Inc. hearing for both motions after the filing of a Notice of Settlement of Entire Case].)

11 Oei vs. Abinante Demurrer Motion to Strike

1. Demurrer

The court OVERRULES in part, and SUSTAINS in part, Defendant MATTHEW ABINANTE’s (“Abinante”) demurrer to the third, fourth, fifth, seventh, and ninth causes of action of the Complaint filed by Plaintiff KEVIN OEI. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10(e), (f).) Specifically, the general demurrer to the fourth cause of action is SUSTAINED with 30 days leave to amend and the demurrer to the remaining causes of action are OVERRULED. The court GRANTS 30 days leave to amend.

The Complaint asserts the following causes of action: (1) breach of contract (2) common count: goods and services rendered (3) unjust enrichment; (4) conversion; (5) accounting; (6) involuntary dissolution (7) removal of director; (8) enforcement of inspection rights; and (9) violation of Penal Code, § 496

The first, second, and sixth causes of action are asserted against ASCADA HEALTH PC (“Ascada”) only. The ninth cause of action is asserted against Defendant MATTHEW ABINANTE (“Abinante”) only. The remaining causes of action (i.e., the third, fourth, fifth, seventh and eighth causes of action) are asserted against both named defendants, Ascada and Abinante.

3rd C/A (unjust enrichment)

By way of the third cause of action for unjust enrichment, Plaintiff appears to seek disgorgement of monetary

21