SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY v. JAMES A. KAY, JR.

(Stanley Mosk Courthouse: Dept. 729) August 25, 2026 DEPARTMENT 729 LAW AND MOTION RULINGS

All parties are urged to meet and confer with all parties concerning this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreed-upon resolution of their matter. If you are able to reach an agreement, please notify the courtroom staff in advance of the hearing if you wish to submit on the tentative ruling rather than argue the motion by notifying the court by e-mailing the court at: [email protected] . Do not click on the email address, either copy and paste it or type it into your email. Include the word "SUBMITS" in all caps and the Case Number in the Subject line. In the body of the email, please provide the date and time of the hearing, your name, your contact information, the party you represent, and whether that party is a plaintiff, defendant, cross-complainant, cross-defendant, claimant, intervenor, or non-party, etc.

Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may still appear at the hearing and argue the matter, and the court could change its tentative based upon the argument. Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue. If you submit, but still intend to appear, include the words "SUBMITS, BUT WILL APPEAR" in the Subject line. If you elect to argue your matter, you are urged to do so remotely, via Court-Connect.

If the moving party fails to appear and/or submit to the Court's tentative ruling, the Court will take the matter off calendar. Note that once the Court has issued a tentative, the Court has the inherent authority not to allow the withdrawal of a motion and to adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the court. If you submitted a courtesy copy of your papers containing media (such as a DVD or thumb drive), unless you request the return of the media in your papers, the court will destroy it following the hearing of your matter.

County of Los Angeles DEPARTMENT 729 TENTATIVE RULING SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY, vs. JAMES A. KAY, JR. | Case No.: 24STCV27313 Hearing Date: August 25, 2026 | Cross-Defendant Southern California Gas Company's motion for summary adjudication of the 5th and 6th causes of action in Cross-Complainant James A. Kay, Jr.'s Cross-Complaint is denied. Moving Defendants James A. Kay, Jr.'s and Communications Relay, Corp.'s motion for summary adjudication of the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd causes of action in Plaintiff Southern California Gas Company's First Amended Complaint is denied.

Cross-Defendant/Plaintiff Southern California Gas Company ("SoCalGas") ("Cross-Defendant/Plaintiff") moves for summary adjudication of the 5th and 6th causes of action in Cross-Complainant James A. Kay, Jr.'s ("Kay") ("Cross-Complainant/Defendant") cross-complaint ("XC"). (Notice of MSA XC; C.C.P. Sec.437c.)

Moving Defendants Kay and Communications Relay, Corp. ("CR Corp.") (collectively, "Moving Defendants") move for summary adjudication of Plaintiff's 1st, 2nd, and 3rd causes of action in Plaintiff's first amended complaint ("FAC"). (Notice of MSA FAC, pg. ii; C.C.P. Sec.437c.) Moving Defendants move on the basis that that there are no triable issues of material fact concerning Moving Defendants' continuing liability on a license agreement that expired in 2020 or with respect to Moving Defendants' occupancy of the Property which had ceased long before the expiration of that agreement. (Notice of MSA FAC, pg. ii.)

CRC Violations CRC, Rule 3.1350(d) provide s that when multiple causes of action, issues or defenses are presented for summary adjudication in one motion, each cause of action, issue or defense to which the motion is directed must have a separate section heading indicating the issue number, cause of action, and specifying the issue. The headings must be followed by two columns. (CRC, Rule 3.1350(d); see CRC, Rule 3.1350(h) [illustrating format for separate statements in a motion for summary adjudication].) Failure to comply with the requirements for filing a separate statement may in the trial judge's discretion constitute a sufficient ground for denial of the motion. (C.C.P. Sec.437c(b)(1).)

All of the separate statements submitted in support of the parties' MSAs are in violation of CRC, Rule 3.1350(h) because they fail to follow the format required for a motion for summary adjudication. The separate statements filed are formatted exclusively for motions for summary judgment. Accordingly, Cross-Defendant's and Defendants' MSAs are denied.

Conclusion

Cross-Defendant's motion for summary adjudication of the 5th and 6th causes of action in Cross-Complainants' XC is denied. Defendants' motion for summary adjudication of the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd causes of action in Plaintiff's FAC is denied. Moving Parties to give notice. Dated: August _____, 2026 | Hon. Daniel M. Crowley | Judge of the Superior Court | | Home