Guadalupe Villalobos v. Ford Motor Company

carried on by the defendant with a willful and conscious disregard of the rights or safety of others." (College Hospital, supra, 8 Cal.4th at p. 725.) "The mere allegation an intentional tort was committed is not sufficient to warrant an award of punitive damages. Not only must there be circumstances of oppression, fraud or malice, but facts must be alleged in the pleading to support such a claim." (Grieves v. Superior Ct. (1984) 157 Cal.App.3d 159, 166, internal citations and footnotes omitted.)

Plaintiff does not allege any specific facts to show Defendant, through an officer, director, or managing agent, acted with oppression, fraud, or malice.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Defendant's demurrer to the sixth cause of action in the first amended complaint is sustained with leave to amend. The demurrer is otherwise overruled. Sustaining the demurrer renders the motion to strike moot. Plaintiff is to file an amended complaint within 20 days of notice of this order. Defendant is ordered to provide notice of the Court's ruling and to file proof of service of same.

DEPARTMENT | 415 | HEARING DATE | August 24, 2026 | CASE NUMBER |

| MOTION | Motion for Protective Order | MOVING PARTY | Defendant Ford Motor Company |

OPPOSING PARTY | None | MOTION

Plaintiff Guadalupe Villalobos ("Plaintiff") brough the instant action against Defendant Ford Motor Company ("Defendant"), alleging Plaintiff's vehicle, which Defendant manufactured, is defective. Defendant now moves for a protective order. Plaintiff has not opposed the motion.

Defendant cites no authority in its notice of motion which could support the relief Defendant seeks. As such, the Court cannot grant Defendant's motion. (See Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 1010 ["Notices must be in writing, and the notice of a motion, other than for a new trial, must state when, and the grounds upon which it will be made, and the papers, if any, upon which it is to be based"]; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1110(a) ["A notice of motion must state in the opening paragraph the nature of the order being sought and the grounds for issuance of the order"]; People v.

American Surety Insurance Co. (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 719, 726 [court concluded notice of motion made no reference to the fact of what the movant sought or the grounds for such relief, as required by rule 311(a) of the California Rules of Court, the predecessor to Rules of Court, rule 3.1110(a)].) Therefore, the motion is denied for lack of applicable authority.

Furthermore, Defendant seeks a protective order regarding discovery Plaintiff has not yet propounded. No authority permits Defendant to obtain a protective order regarding hypothetical future discovery. In any event, parties to litigation routinely stipulate to such a protective order, which the Court may then enter. However, in this case, the parties have not so stipulated. This ruling is without prejudice to Defendant's ability to move to seek protective orders with respect to more particularized discovery matters. Defendant is to give notice of the Court's ruling and to file proof of service of same. | Home -->)" -->