Kaiser Foundation Health Plan vs. Sharp Memorial Hospital
Motion to seal
Motion type
Parties
Ruling
In addition, as Judgment Debtors’ counsel was not served with the subpoenas (ROAs 2041 and 2047, at ¶¶ 4, 5), notice for the subpoenas also was defective. The motions to quash are therefore GRANTED.
Both sides’ sanctions requests are DENIED. Although Judgment Debtors are the prevailing parties on these motions, neither included a proper sanctions request in their notice of motion to identify against whom sanctions are sought, in what amount, and on what authority. Assertions unsupported by legal authority are presumed to lack merit. (Atchley v. City of Fresno (1984) 151 Cal.App.3d 635, 647.) All requests for sanctions on these motions are therefore DENIED.
Counsel for Judgment Debtors is ordered to give notice of these rulings.
16. Kaiser Check back later for a tentative ruling on the motions to Foundation seal that are on calendar. The court will endeavor to have Health Plan vs. a tentative ruling posted prior to the hearing. Sharp Memorial Hospital
17.
18.
19.
20.
Cited authorities
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Ask about this ruling
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”