12 Cited authorities

Fontaine v. Superior Court (CashCall, Inc.)
175 Cal.App.4th 830 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009) Cited 16 times
No. H033811. June 10, 2009. Appeal from the Superior Court of Santa Clara County, No. CV113767, Mary Jo Levinger, Judge. Consumer Law Center, Frederick William Schwinn, Raeon R. Roulston; and Ronald Wilcox for Petitioner. No appearance for Respondent. Finlayson, Augustini Williams and Michael Raymond Williams for Real Parties in Interest. OPINION BAMATTRE-MANOUKIAN, Acting P.J. I. INTRODUCTION Petitioner Paul Fontaine obtained a loan for personal, family or household use from real party in interest
Mission Imports, Inc. v. Superior Court
31 Cal.3d 921 (Cal. 1982) Cited 44 times
Holding that an "action for trademark infringement sounds in tort"
California v. Superior Court
150 Cal.App.4th 826 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007) Cited 9 times
Interpreting venue provision relating to actions against public officers; statute’s reference to "the county in which the cause, or some part of the cause, arose" means where the injury occurred, not where the agency decision was made
Edwards v. Pierson
156 Cal.App.2d 72 (Cal. Ct. App. 1957) Cited 11 times
In Edwards v. Pierson (1957) 156 Cal.App.2d 72, 75 [ 318 P.2d 789], the court stated: "The burden rests upon one who seeks a change of venue under Code of Civil Procedure, section 397, subdivision 3, to prove that both the convenience of witnesses and the ends of justice will be promoted thereby. [Citations.] This he must do through affidavits which contain something more than generalities and conclusions.
J.C. Millett Co. v. Latchford-Marble Glass
144 Cal.App.2d 838 (Cal. Ct. App. 1956) Cited 12 times
Docket No. 16819. October 8, 1956. APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco denying a change of venue. Frank T. Deasy, Judge. Reversed. George H. Emerson for Appellants. Leon A. Blum and J. Albert Hutchinson for Respondents. PETERS, P.J. This is an appeal by the corporate and individual defendants from an order denying their motions for a change of venue. The action was brought in San Francisco by a San Francisco corporation and partnership against three
Willingham v. Pecora
44 Cal.App.2d 289 (Cal. Ct. App. 1941) Cited 25 times
In Willingham v. Pecora, 44 Cal.App.2d 289, 295 [ 112 P.2d 328], it was held that both of the conditions — convenience of witnesses and the ends of justice — must occur and that the moving party has the burden of proving that both conditions will be met.
Monk v. Ehret
192 Cal. 186 (Cal. 1923) Cited 42 times
In Monk v. Ehret (1923) 192 Cal. 186, 219 P. 452, the high court considered whether a false imprisonment claim based on allegations of physical restraint by the defendant, is an action " ‘for injury to person’ " which can be brought " ‘where the injury occurs.’ "
Juneau v. Juneau
45 Cal.App.2d 14 (Cal. Ct. App. 1941) Cited 13 times
Docket No. 2554. May 22, 1941. APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, denying a change of place of trial. Arthur L. Mundo, Judge. Reversed. Action for divorce in which after an interlocutory decree of divorce was set aside defendant filed an answer and cross-complaint together with a notice of motion for change of venue. Order denying motion reversed. John Eley, Jr., for Appellant. John J. Brennan for Respondent. GRIFFIN, J. It appears from a bill of exceptions settled and
Lakeside Ditch Co. v. Packwood Canal Co.
50 Cal.App. 296 (Cal. Ct. App. 1920) Cited 19 times
In Lakeside Ditch Co. v. Packwood C. Co., 50 Cal.App. 296 [ 195 P. 284, 286], the court uses language which, while it may not have been necessary to the decision therein, is quite persuasive upon the question before us.
Rule 4 - Summons
Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 Cited 72,489 times 129 Legal Analyses
Holding that if defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on a motion, or on its own following notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made by a certain time
Section 395 - Action for injury to person or personal property or death from wrongful act or negligence; offer or provision of goods, services, loans or extension of credit for family or household use
Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 395 Cited 471 times
Assuming that that section applies to corporations
Section 396 - Appeal or petition not filed in proper state court; appeal or petition transferred to court having jurisdiction
Cal. Code Civ. Proc. § 396 Cited 221 times
Affording the municipal court sufficient jurisdiction to transfer the case to the superior court

Opposition Objections

12 Cited authorities

Holding that an "action for trademark infringement sounds in tort"

Interpreting venue provision relating to actions against public officers; statute’s reference to "the county in which the cause, or some part of the cause, arose" means where the injury occurred, not where the agency decision was made

In Willingham v. Pecora, 44 Cal.App.2d 289, 295 [ 112 P.2d 328], it was held that both of the conditions — convenience of witnesses and the ends of justice — must occur and that the moving party has the burden of proving that both conditions will be met.

In Monk v. Ehret (1923) 192 Cal. 186, 219 P. 452, the high court considered whether a false imprisonment claim based on allegations of physical restraint by the defendant, is an action " ‘for injury to person’ " which can be brought " ‘where the injury occurs.’ "

In Lakeside Ditch Co. v. Packwood C. Co., 50 Cal.App. 296 [ 195 P. 284, 286], the court uses language which, while it may not have been necessary to the decision therein, is quite persuasive upon the question before us.

Holding that if defendant is not served within 90 days after the complaint is filed, the court—on a motion, or on its own following notice to the plaintiff—must dismiss the action without prejudice against that defendant or order that service be made by a certain time

Assuming that that section applies to corporations

Affording the municipal court sufficient jurisdiction to transfer the case to the superior court