Estate of Suzette Hoffman vs. Simon Property Group, Inc.

Motion for Summary JudgmentAdjudication

Cal. Super. - 4th Dist.October 30, 2017

Jeffrey M. Soll, Esq., SBN 246462 GOLDMAN, MAGDALIN & KRIKES, LLP 6300 Canoga Avenue, Suite 1400 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 Tel: (818) 755-0444 Fax: (818) 755-0434 Attorneys for Defendant/Cross-Defendant/Cross-Complainant, UNITED SITE SERVICES OF CALIFORNIA, INC. SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ORANGE — CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER ESTATE OF SUZETTE HOFFMAN, a deceased individual through Administrator ROGER HOFFMAN; ROGER HOFFMAN, an individual; TERESA HOFFMAN, an individual; HEATHER GIBBS, an individual: and MICHELLE HOFFMAN, an individual Plaintiffs, VS. SIMON PROPERTY GROUP, INC; THE MILLS AT SIMON PROPERTY GROUP, INC; ORANGE CITY MILLS LIMITED PARTNERSIIIP; MOOREFIELD CONSTRUCTION, INC; and DOES 1 to 50, Inclusive, Defendants. AND ALL RELATED CROSS-ACTIONS. TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT on May 13, 2019 at 1:30 p.m. as soon thereafter as thi matter may be heard in Department C-34 of the Orange County Superior Court located at 700 Civic ELECTROMICALLY FILED Superior Court of California, County of Orange 02/22/2019 at 01:11:00 FM Clerk of the Superior Court By Jeannette Dowling. Deputy Clerk CASE NO: 30-2017-00952381-CU-PO-CIC DEFENDANT UNITED SITE SERVICES OF CALIFORNIA, INC’S NOTICE OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION Date: May 13, 2019 Time: 1:30 p.m, Dept: C-34 Reservation ID #72926510 DEFENDANT UNITED SITE SERVICES OF CALIFORNIA, INC'S NOTICE OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION ce ~N OO a As W N = 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Center Drive West, Santa Ana, California 92701, defendant United Site Services of California, Inc) (hereafter referred to as “UNITED SITE SERVICES") will and hereby does move the Court for an Order granting Summary Judgment, or in the alternative, Summary Adjudication, in its favor as to all causes of action in the Complaint brought by plaintiffs and Cross-Complaint brought by Simon Property Group and Orange City Mills. This Motion is made pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 437(c) on the grounds that there is no triable or genuine issue of material fact as to any of the causes of action in the Complaint, or Cross- Complaint requesting implied indemnity, and that UNITED SITE SERVICES is entitled to Judgment as a matter of law, Specifically the grounds of the Motion arc as follows: 1: The Work Completed and Accepted Doctrine applies to UNITED SITE SERVICES who had completed its portion of the work at the project according to the owner/general contractor's plans and specifications several months prior to the incident which was accepted by both the owner and general contractor and therefore no duty was owed as a matter of law by UNITED SITE SERVICES; os There is no triable issue or genuine issue of material fact as to the First Cause of Action for Premises Liability against UNITED SITE SERVICES because it did not own, possess, or control the subject premises where the incident occurred; 3. There is no triable issue or genuine issue of material fact as to the First Cause of Action (General Negligence), Second Cause of Action (Survival Action), or Third Cause of Action (Wrongful Death) because (1) UNITED SITE SERVICES did not owe a legal duty as a matter of law under the Work Completed and Accepted Doctrine and/or legal doctrine of misfeasance vs. nonfeasance; (2) UNITED SITE SERVICES did not breach any legal duty because there is no evidence that the temporary fencing was negligently installed and/or any breach under the doctrine of misfeasance vs, nonfeasance; and (3) UNITED SITE SERVICES involvement with the subject premises was not a 2s DEFENDANT UNITED SITE SERVICES OF CALIFORNIA, INC'S NOTICE OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY | JUDGMENT, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION substantial factor in causing harm to the plaintiffs as a matter of law; 4. There is no triable or genuine issue of material fact as to the Fourth and Fifth Causes of Action for Civil Code Section 51, 52, and 54 Violations because (1) UNITED SITE SERVICES did nof own, lease, or operate the alleged non-compliant accommodation; (2) the PLAINTIFF was not denied full and equal access to the subject premises because there were ADA handicapped parking spots and handicapped ramps available at the subject premises that were available for use by PLAINTIFF; (3) there is no evidence that UNITED SITE SERVICES denied or discriminated against PLAINTIFF as a matter of law; and (4) there is no evidence that UNITED SITE SERVICES was a substantial factor in causing harm as a matter of law, This Motion is based on this Notice, the Memorandum of Points and Authorities Filed herewith, the Declaration of Jeffrey M. Soll in support thercof, Lodgment of Exhibits and all exhibits and declarations attached thereto, the Separate Statement of Undisputed Facts, and all pleadings, records, and papers on file in this action, and on any such further oral and documentary evidence as may be presented at the time of hearing on this Motion. DATED: February 22, 2019 GOLDMAN, MAGDALIN & KRIKES LLP By: \ ‘Yh ay Jéffrey 7 4 + Esq. - “Attorneys fot Defendant/Cross-Defendant/Cross- Complainant UNITED SITE SERVICES OF CALIFORNIA, INC. Sigs DEFENDANT UNITED SITE SERVICES OF CALIFORNIA, INC'S NOTICE OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION