On July 07, 2020 a
Motion-Secondary
was filed
involving a dispute between
Estate Of Moises Hernandez, Sr., By And Through Its Successor In Interest Justine,
Guillen, Yadira,
Hernandez Jr., Moises,
Hernandez, Justine,
Hernandez Moreno, Jesus Alberto,
Hernandez Moreno, Mayra Candelaria,
and
Apostolic Assembly Of The Faith In Christ Jesus, A California Corporation,
San Diego Gas & Electric Company A California Corporation,
Sempra Energy A California Corporation,
for PI personal injury not MV
in the District Court of San Bernardino County.
Preview
WILLIAM M. LOW (Bar No. 106669)
SUPERIOR
Fl L E
3013121 C
wlow@higgslaw.com COUNTY 0F SP: P‘ 4
JACOB T. SPAID (Bar No. 298832) CIVIL i): ws'QN
spaidj@higgslaw.com
HIGGS FLETCHER & MACK LLP L‘s 21 2523
401 West A Street. Suite 2600
San Diego. California 92101-7910
Telephone: (619)236-1551 ew
Facsimile: (619) 696-1410 S ephame Reed. Deputy
KIMBERLI C. RAINES (Bar No. 204969)
kraincs@sdgc.com
SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY
8330 Century Park Court, 2nd Floor
San Diego, CA 92123-1530
Telephone: (858) 654-1647
Attorneys for Defendant SAN DIEGO GAS &
10 ELECTRIC COMPANY
11 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
12 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, SAN BERNARDINO JUSTICE CENTER
13
14 ESTATE OF MOISES HERNANDEZ, SR., Case No. CIVDS 2014862
by and through its successor in interest
15 JUSTINE HERNANDEZ; JUSTINE SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC
HERNANDEZ. an individual; MOISES COMPANY’S OBJECTIONS TO
16 HERNANDEZ, JR., an individual; YADIRA EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT
GUILLEN, an individual; MAYRA OF PLAINTIFFS’ OPPOSITION TO
17 CANDELARIA HERNANDEZ MORENO. an MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT,
individual; JESUS ALBERTO HERNANDEZ OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY
18 MORENO, an individual, ADJUDICATION
19 Plaintiffs,
DATE: August 25, 2023
20 v. TIME: 8:30am
PLACE: Dept. S30
21 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC
COMPANY. a California Corporation; DEPT.: S-30
22 SEMPRA ENERGY, a California JUDGE: Hon. Brian S. McCarvillc
Corporation; and APOSTOLIC ASSEMBLY
23 OF THE FAITH IN CHRIST JESUS, a ACTION FILED: July 7, 2020
California Corporation, dba North Coast TRIAL DATE: October 9, 2023
24 Fellowship; and DOES l through 100,
/
inclusive,
/LA‘
25
Defendants.
26
27
‘\
\
28 ///
NV
H1005 FLEICHER dz 11811760.]
MACK LLP
Avmuvvs n LAw SDG&E‘s OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED ISO PLAINTIFFS‘ OPPOSITION TO MSJ/MSA
CAN Dlum
Defendant SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY (“SDG&E“) respectfully
submits the following objections to evidence submitted by Plaintiffs ESTATE OF MOISES
HERNANDEZ, SR.. by and through its successor in interest JUSTINE HERNANDEZ; JUSTINE
HERNANDEZ, an individual; MOISES HERNANDEZ, JR., an individual; YADIRA GUILLEN,
an individual; MAYRA CANDELARIA HERNANDEZ MORENO, an individual; JESUS
ALBERTO HERNANDEZ MORENO, an individual (collectively, “Plaintiffs“), in suppon of
their Opposition to SDG&E’s Motion For Summary Judgment, Or In The Alternative, Summary
Adjudication.
OBJECTIONS TO THE DECLARATION OF MARC ECKSTEIN, M.D.
10 As a preliminary matter, SDG&E objects t0 the entirety ofthc Declaration 0f Marc
11 Eckstein, M.D., submitted in support of Plaintiffs‘ Opposition to SDG&E’s Motion.
12 Dr. Eckstein’s Declaration is submitted as to Plaintiffs’ new allegation that SDG&E was
13 somehow negligent in responding to the accident. That theory 0f negligence is not set forth at any
14 point in Plaintiffs’ Complaint, or in Plaintiffs’ discovery responses. Accordingly, that issue is not
15 before the Court on SDG&E’S Motion, and Dr. Eckstein's Declaration is irrelevant and improper.
16 “The pleadings delimit the issues t0 be considered on a motion for summary judgment.”
17 (Laabs v. City 0f Victorville (2008) 163 Cal.App.4th 1242, 1253.) “A defendant moving for
18 summary judgment need address only the issues raised by the complaint; the plaintiff cannot bring
19 up new, unpleaded issues in his or her opposing papers." (Gov 't
Emps. Ins. Co. v. Superior Cour!
20 (2000) 79 Cal.App.4th 95, 98 n.4 [citing Mars v. Wedbush Morgan Securities, Inc. (1991) 231
21 Cal.App.3d 1608. l6l3-l4].) Plaintiffs improperly attempt to avoid summary judgment by
22 changing the clear allegations ofthcir Complaint, which they also confirmed in discovery
23 responses.
24 In their Complaint, Plaintiffs allege that while Mr. Hernandez “was in the process of
25 inspecting / maintaining / trimming trees," he “came into contact with an energized overhead
26 electric power line, causing [him] to sustain fatal injuries.” (Decl. William M. Low Supp. Mot.
27 (“Low Dccl.“), Ex. 1 (“CompL”), W13-14.) Plaintiffs further allege SDG&E “negligently,
28 carelessly, recklessly, or in some other actionable manner, failed to warn [Mr. Hernandez] ofthc
HICGS FLETCHER k
MACK LLI’
Anolsns u LAW 1181 1760.1 2
Preview
WILLIAM M. LOW (Bar No. 106669) SUPERIOR Fl L E 3013121 C wlow@higgslaw.com COUNTY 0F SP: P‘ 4 JACOB T. SPAID (Bar No. 298832) CIVIL i): ws'QN spaidj@higgslaw.com HIGGS FLETCHER & MACK LLP L‘s 21 2523 401 West A Street. Suite 2600 San Diego. California 92101-7910 Telephone: (619)236-1551 ew Facsimile: (619) 696-1410 S ephame Reed. Deputy KIMBERLI C. RAINES (Bar No. 204969) kraincs@sdgc.com SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY 8330 Century Park Court, 2nd Floor San Diego, CA 92123-1530 Telephone: (858) 654-1647 Attorneys for Defendant SAN DIEGO GAS & 10 ELECTRIC COMPANY 11 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 12 COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, SAN BERNARDINO JUSTICE CENTER 13 14 ESTATE OF MOISES HERNANDEZ, SR., Case No. CIVDS 2014862 by and through its successor in interest 15 JUSTINE HERNANDEZ; JUSTINE SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC HERNANDEZ. an individual; MOISES COMPANY’S OBJECTIONS TO 16 HERNANDEZ, JR., an individual; YADIRA EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT GUILLEN, an individual; MAYRA OF PLAINTIFFS’ OPPOSITION TO 17 CANDELARIA HERNANDEZ MORENO. an MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, individual; JESUS ALBERTO HERNANDEZ OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY 18 MORENO, an individual, ADJUDICATION 19 Plaintiffs, DATE: August 25, 2023 20 v. TIME: 8:30am PLACE: Dept. S30 21 SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY. a California Corporation; DEPT.: S-30 22 SEMPRA ENERGY, a California JUDGE: Hon. Brian S. McCarvillc Corporation; and APOSTOLIC ASSEMBLY 23 OF THE FAITH IN CHRIST JESUS, a ACTION FILED: July 7, 2020 California Corporation, dba North Coast TRIAL DATE: October 9, 2023 24 Fellowship; and DOES l through 100, / inclusive, /LA‘ 25 Defendants. 26 27 ‘\ \ 28 /// NV H1005 FLEICHER dz 11811760.] MACK LLP Avmuvvs n LAw SDG&E‘s OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED ISO PLAINTIFFS‘ OPPOSITION TO MSJ/MSA CAN Dlum Defendant SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY (“SDG&E“) respectfully submits the following objections to evidence submitted by Plaintiffs ESTATE OF MOISES HERNANDEZ, SR.. by and through its successor in interest JUSTINE HERNANDEZ; JUSTINE HERNANDEZ, an individual; MOISES HERNANDEZ, JR., an individual; YADIRA GUILLEN, an individual; MAYRA CANDELARIA HERNANDEZ MORENO, an individual; JESUS ALBERTO HERNANDEZ MORENO, an individual (collectively, “Plaintiffs“), in suppon of their Opposition to SDG&E’s Motion For Summary Judgment, Or In The Alternative, Summary Adjudication. OBJECTIONS TO THE DECLARATION OF MARC ECKSTEIN, M.D. 10 As a preliminary matter, SDG&E objects t0 the entirety ofthc Declaration 0f Marc 11 Eckstein, M.D., submitted in support of Plaintiffs‘ Opposition to SDG&E’s Motion. 12 Dr. Eckstein’s Declaration is submitted as to Plaintiffs’ new allegation that SDG&E was 13 somehow negligent in responding to the accident. That theory 0f negligence is not set forth at any 14 point in Plaintiffs’ Complaint, or in Plaintiffs’ discovery responses. Accordingly, that issue is not 15 before the Court on SDG&E’S Motion, and Dr. Eckstein's Declaration is irrelevant and improper. 16 “The pleadings delimit the issues t0 be considered on a motion for summary judgment.” 17 (Laabs v. City 0f Victorville (2008) 163 Cal.App.4th 1242, 1253.) “A defendant moving for 18 summary judgment need address only the issues raised by the complaint; the plaintiff cannot bring 19 up new, unpleaded issues in his or her opposing papers." (Gov 't Emps. Ins. Co. v. Superior Cour! 20 (2000) 79 Cal.App.4th 95, 98 n.4 [citing Mars v. Wedbush Morgan Securities, Inc. (1991) 231 21 Cal.App.3d 1608. l6l3-l4].) Plaintiffs improperly attempt to avoid summary judgment by 22 changing the clear allegations ofthcir Complaint, which they also confirmed in discovery 23 responses. 24 In their Complaint, Plaintiffs allege that while Mr. Hernandez “was in the process of 25 inspecting / maintaining / trimming trees," he “came into contact with an energized overhead 26 electric power line, causing [him] to sustain fatal injuries.” (Decl. William M. Low Supp. Mot. 27 (“Low Dccl.“), Ex. 1 (“CompL”), W13-14.) Plaintiffs further allege SDG&E “negligently, 28 carelessly, recklessly, or in some other actionable manner, failed to warn [Mr. Hernandez] ofthc HICGS FLETCHER k MACK LLI’ Anolsns u LAW 1181 1760.1 2