Motion for Summary Judgment
Within five (5) days, Plaintiff shall file and serve a Doe amendment on Form L-0132 to add Shelby American, Inc. as a defendant.
Plaintiff shall provide notice.
306 Giannone vs. Before the court is a motion for summary judgment Chaba Thai (Motion) filed by defendant Chaba Coworking Corporation Suites, Inc., dba Chaba Traditional Thai & Sport Massage (Defendant) on plaintiff Brian Giannone’s (Plaintiff) complaint. The Motion is GRANTED.
Objections to Plaintiff’s Declaration: Overrule as to Nos. 1-2 (Defendant did not produce the deposition testimony which allegedly contradicted Plaintiff’s statements and Plaintiff made declaration based on personal experience).
Sustain as to No. 3 (Lack of foundation, speculation, calls for expert testimony).
Objections to Pretty Declaration: Not material to the disposition of the motion. (Code Civ. Proc.. § 437c, subd. (q).)
The sole cause of action is negligence. “The elements of a cause of action for negligence are well established. They are '(a) a legal duty to use due care; (b) a breach of such legal duty; [and] (c) the breach as the proximate or legal cause of the resulting injury.' ” (Ladd v. Cty. of San Mateo (1996) 12 Cal. 4th 913, 917.) There is an “obligation to conform to a certain standard of conduct for the protection of others against unreasonable risks.” (McGarry v. Sax (2008) 158 Cal. App. 4th 983, 994 (McGarry).) A duty exists under the general negligence principles. (Civil Code § 1714; McGarry, supra, 158 Cal. App. 4th at 994.)
Under Code of Civil Procedure section 437c, subdivision (p)(2), Defendant has the initial burden of showing there is no merit to one or more elements of negligence. Defendant did not conclusively negate the elements of duty and breach, however Defendant met its initial burden as to causation.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
As to causation, Defendant met its initial burden by producing the expert declaration of orthopedic surgeon Jeffrey E. Deckey, M.D. (Deckey), who opined that to a reasonable degree of medical probability that nothing Defendant or the massage therapist did or did not do caused or contributed to Plaintiff’s alleged injuries. (Deckey Decl. ¶ 9.) Because medical causation in this matter is beyond common experience, expert testimony was required to create a triable issue of fact. (Webster v. Claremont Yoga (2018) 26 Cal.App.5th 284, 290.) Plaintiff failed to produce admissible expert evidence rebutting Deckey’s opinions. Defendant established Plaintiff cannot prove causation, an essential element of negligence.
Defendant shall give notice.
307 Passi vs. Zhou Before the Court at present are: (1) the Demurrer filed on 1/2/26 by Defendants Xiao Yang and Geng Guanjin (Yang/Guanjin); and (2) the Demurrer filed on 1/5/26 by Defendant Fengsuo Zhou (Zhou). Both Demurrers are directed to the Third, Fourth and Fifth Causes of Action in the First Amended Complaint (FAC), as filed on 12/2/25 by Plaintiff Jouni Passi (Plaintiff). The Yang/Guanjin Demurrer is SUSTAINED with 15 days leave to amend. The Zhou Demurrer is MOOT.
All three of the causes of action at issue appear to be based on allegations of fraud, but Plaintiff has failed to plead facts sufficient to support a fraud claim.