Elder Justice Prosecutor Samples
Requests Court dismiss all claims against all defendants or, in the alternative, strike allegations from third amended complaint because: claim for breach of fiduciary duty reiterates joint venture question; constructive fraud claim is not viable; conversion claim fails to identify specific funds; elder financial abuse and intentional infliction of emotional distress claims are unsustainable; claims for dissoluntion of joint venture and accounting lack merit; claims against Sadhana Temple fail to identify individals allegedly making statements
Recommends Court sustain motion to dismiss each claim because: statute of limitations bars causes of action; claims cannot be brought on vicarious liability theory; claims lack valid legal theory; causes of action are remedies unsupported by tort claims
Submit Jointly: 1. Jurisdiction & Service; 2. Facts; 3. Legal Issues; 4. Motions; 5. Amendment of Pleadings; 6. Evidence Preservation; 7. Disclosures; 8. Discovery; 9. Class Actions; 10. Related Cases; 11. Relief; 12. Settlement and ADR; 13. Consent to Magistrate Judge For All Purposes; 14. Other References; 15. Narrowing of Issues; 16. Expedited Trial Procedure; 17. Scheduling; 18. Trial; 19. Disclosure of Non-Party Interested Entities or Persons; 20. Other
Requests Court deny motion to dismiss or, in the alternative, grant leave to amend complaint because: complaint has pled sufficient facts; plaintiff has satisfied pleading requirements for financial elder abuse
Recommends Court grant motion because: first cause of action fails to state claim for breach of covenant; second cause of action fails to state claim for promissory estoppel; third cause of action fails to state claim of wrongful foreclosure; fourth cause of action fails to state claim for breach of contract; fifth cause of action fails to state claim for reformation of contract; sixth cause of action fails to state claim for relief; seventh cause of action fails to state claim for elder financial abuse; eigth cause of action fails to state negligent misrepresentation; ninth cause of action fails to state meritorious antecedent claims for unfair competition
Requests Court deny motion or, in the alternative, grant leave to amend complaint because: defendants failed to screen pursuant to Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act; defendants failed to stabilize disabled and impaired adult; defendants abused dependent adult; plaintiffs can provide additional material facts
Requests Court deny motion because facts alleged regarding plaintiff's elder abuse and identity theft are relevant, significant to cause of action, and probative value exceeds prejudicial effect
Alleges: First Cause of Action - Financial Elder Abuse; Second Cause of Action - Economic Duress (Extortion, Fraud); Third Cause of Action - Constructive Trust; Fourth Cause of Action - Declaratory Relief Against All Defendants; Fifth Cause of Action - Breach of Contract - Specific Performance; Sixth Cause of Action - Violations of Business and Professions Code Section 17200; Rico Claims Seventh Cause of Action - Racketeer Influenced & Corrupt Organizations Act 18 U.S.C.
Requests Court deny motion because: there are issues of material fact; defendant retained personal property of elder adult for wrongful use; defendant knew claim denial was a financial hardship
Requests Court dismiss third amended complaint and grant motion to strike without leave to amend because: first claim fails to demonstrate Truth In Lending Act violation supports extended right of rescission; second claim fails to identify controversy in loan accounting; third claim fails to prove interest rate under ten percent is not usurious; Home Owners' Loan Act preempts fifth claim for financial elder abuse; seventh claim for Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations lacks particularity
Requests Court dismiss complaint without leave to amend because: plaintiff fails to allege being elder adult; California Financial Information Privacy Act does not create right of action for individual consumers; plaintiff has no private right of action to sue; claims are insufficiently pled; plaintiff fails to allege predicate violation; tort does not apply to a lender-borrower relationship; statute does not provide private right of action; no facts suggest loan documents void or voidable; declaratory and injunctive relief are not causes of action
Requests Court grant motion to dismiss and strike portions of amended complaint because: claims for relief are based on inapplicable laws; aiding and abetting claim fails to allege defendant aided and abetted any action; claims from non-disclosure of commissions or imposition of surrender charges are not explicated; financial abuse claim under Elder Abuse Act is time-barred
Requests Court deny motion to dismiss and strike parts of complaint because: qualified immunities are surmounted by defendants' violation of established care custodian duties; qualitifed immunities are surmounted by defendants' violation of mandatory duties to provide emergency and continuing medical care; cause of action for deliberate indifference is valid; attorney's fees may be awarded
Requests Court grant summary judgment because: Veterans Administration acted within standard of care; court lacks elder abuse jurisdiction
Requests Court grant motion to dismiss and to strike without leave to amend because: plaintiffs fail to allege required elements of fraud; plaintiffs fail to plead facts sufficient for financial elder abuse allegation; plaintiffs' unfair competition allegation is factually unsupported; plaintiffs are not entitled to punitive and exemplary damages; financial elder abuse statutes do not authorize damages for physical abuse and neglect; no statute authorizes recovery of attorney fees for fraud; plaintiffs' facts fail to support restitution or injunctive relief entitlement
Argues Court must remand because judgment should reflect interest accruing on day city took possession
Argues Court must uphold judgment because: companies were closely held family businesses; appellant did not cooperate with discovery or experts; decision was based on substantial credible evidence
Argues Court must bar claims because: at-will employment lacks a written contract; one-year statute of limitations applies for employment claims
Argues Court must affirm decision because: claim is not breach of contract action; wrongful termination is public policy violation; public policy supports three-year statute of limitations employment claims
Argues Court must bar claims because: appellee had no written employment contract; wrongful termination claim is subject to one-year statute of limitations; appellee filed claim more than one year after employment termination
Argues Court must affirm judgment because: accounts payable on death were never received; misuse of power of attorney violated fiduciary
Argues Court must reverse decision because: 2010 Will forfeiture clause should not be invoked; there is no estate interest remaining that requires a law firm retainer; a temporary administrator should be appointed during litigation
Argues Court must affirm determinations, reverse and render attorney's fees' denial because: 2010 Will forfeiture clause was properly enforced; court properly ruled law firm retainer for estate be paid; court properly refused to remove estate executor; 2010 Will provided attorney fees be assessed against a challenger
Argues Court must reverse decision because: court failed to recognize a good faith and probable cause contest exception; parties in interest were joined and a law firm retainer was unnecessary; executor was in an adverse position to the estate
Argues Court must not assess fault as to plaintiffs' judgment because: statutes do not apply to allocation of fault to a non-party; proof not established for jury to conclude fault; statutes do not establish authority to assess claims of intentional torts, negligence, breach of contract, and breach of fiduciary duties