SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER MINUTE ORDER

TIME: 02:00:00 PM JUDICIAL OFFICER PRESIDING: Geoffrey T. Glass CLERK: Mary Lou Correa REPORTER/ERM: Christine L. Belasco CSR# 6189 BAILIFF/COURT ATTENDANT: Gracie Valenzuela DATE: 03/14/2011 DEPT: C33

CASE NO: 30-2010-00381664-CU-FR-CJC CASE INIT.DATE: 06/17/2010 CASE TITLE: Taitz, Dr. vs. Dunn CASE TYPE: Fraud CASE CATEGORY: Civil - Unlimited EVENT ID/DOCUMENT ID: 71173083,85774556 EVENT TYPE: Motion to Compel Deposition (Oral or Written) MOVING PARTY: Orly Taitz, Dr. CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion to Compel Deposition (Oral or Written), 02/18/2011 EVENT ID/DOCUMENT ID: 71180200,85572839 EVENT TYPE: Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings MOVING PARTY: Damon Dunn CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, 01/27/2011

APPEARANCES Orly Taitz, Dr., self represented Plaintiff, present. Brian T. Hildreth, from Bell, McAndrews & Hiltachk, LLP, present for Defendant(s) telephonically.
Tentative Ruling posted on the Internet. 1. Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings The court is inclined to grant Defendant's Motion of Judgment on the Pleadings. First, the complaint fails to state a cause of action because it is not clear set forth what causes of action plaintiff intends to plead. The complaint fails to comply with CRC 2.112 which requires that causes of action be separately numbered and state their nature. In addition, to the extent plaintiff is seeking to contest the results of the election, the contest is moot by virtue of the fact that the General Election has been held. As to plaintiff's claims of fraud, there does not appear to be any private right by a losing candidate to sue the winning candidate to recover for monies expended in running for election based on election improprieties, even those characterized as "fraud." Defendant's Request for Judicial Notice is granted as to Requests 1 and 3-5. It is denied as to Request 2. The court, in its discretion, has considered the opposition despite the fact that it exceeds the page limit set forth in CRC 3.1113(d) and defendant's claims that it was not received the day after service. However, the court has not considered the sur-reply submitted by plaintiff on 3-11-11. 2. Motion to Compel Attendance at Deposition The court is inclined to deny this motion.

DATE: 03/14/2011 DEPT: C33

MINUTE ORDER

Page 1 Calendar No.

CASE TITLE: Taitz, Dr. vs. Dunn Court heard argument from counsel.

CASE NO: 30-2010-00381664-CU-FR-CJC

The Court takes the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Pursuant to CCP 438 under submission. The Motion to Compel Attendance at Deposition is denied for lack of proper service.

DATE: 03/14/2011 DEPT: C33

MINUTE ORDER

Page 2 Calendar No.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful