(Source:  Superior Court of California, Sacramento County, website, http://www.saccourt.com/)
 

98AS05067 INTEL CORPORATION VS. KOUROSH KENNETH HAMIDI, ET AL
Nature of Proceeding: MOTION TO STRIKE
Filed By: JACOBS, MICHAEL A.
 

Intel's Motion is DENIED.

Intel Corporation's Notice of Motion is for "summary judgment in favor of Intel and against (Defendant) because (defendant) committed trespass to Intel's chattels . . . ." Defendant, in opposition papers,notes that the motion does not address Count 2 of the Complaint (Nuisance); and defendant addresses the motion as a motion for summary adjudication as to Count One. Presumably, this is a waiver by defendant of any application of the principle that a party cannot notice a motion for summary judgment, and based on such notice secure a summary adjudication of a single count. Application of waiver here would not be prejudicial to defendant, as the moving papers in all respects except the notice of motion and continual reference to summary "judgment" make clear that the evidence and arguments are addressed only to Count One. Were that the only procedural hiatus, the Court would properly proceed to adjudicate the motion. But, the Complaint herein seeks both permanent injunctive relief and damages as to Count One. The moving papers and separate statement do not address the question of damages; Plaintiff has neither dismissed nor waived nor abandoned its damage claim. The granting of a summary adjudication must fully dispose of a cause of action. Because the moving papers make no attempt to address the damage claims related to Count One, the burden never shifted to Defendant to come forward with evidence. The Court cannot say as a matter of law that Plaintiff is entitled to judgment on Count One.

The minute order is effectively immediately; no formal order or notice is required, the tentative ruling providing sufficient notice.