JAMES MARSHALL V. PACIFIC SCIENTIFIC ENERGETIC MATERIALS COMPANY. Judge William J. Monahan discloses he has an inactive real estate brokers license. January 16, 2023. A: click . (Complaint, IT-1.) (Bank). 15 KEYSIGHT TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Filter by a specific county without spaces. COMPANY, INC.; MATTHEW Background According to the allegations of the first amended complaint (FAC), patient (Patient) was a beneficiary of a health plan sponsored, administered and provided by defendants Flextronics International USA, Inc. (Flex) and Blue Cross of California (Blue Cross) (collectively, Defendants). ruling, and you have not previously been informed that you are excused from the calendar,
Defendants motion followed Newarks -4 24 http://www.scsCourt.org REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER OF SAN JOSE, ET AL. Case no. 18 LOCO, LLC; W.K.S. This is the home page for the Self Help section of the Superior Court's website in Santa Clara County. 7 SHAREHOLDER LITIGATION, 13 TENTATIVE RULING RE: MOTION Consolidated action, including: FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS 14 Greenberg v. McAfee, Inc., Santa Clara County ACTION SETTLEMENT Superior Court, 15 Colwell v. McAfee, Inc., Santa Clara County V. PAUL ALEXANDER DASILVA, ET AL. SHUFF, ET AL. This is highly valuable data that reveals how judges think on substantive legal issues. We're sorry your court map could not be found. ARTEM KOSHKALDA VS REBELLOS TOWING SERVICES, INC. Probate Tentative Rulings. The Court now issues its tentative ruling as 22 follows: BELINDA JONES AND DESMOND JONES V. FCA US, LLC, ET AL. 14 BENEFICIARY OF DECEASED CITY Accessing the tentative rulings at the public kiosks located, in Self-Help Services, Room 101 of the Gordon D. Schaber Courthouse or Room 212 of the Hall of Justice Building. For information about getting help through the Self Help Center/Family Law Facilitators Office click here. 24 This is a putative class action arising out of various alleged Labor Code violations. Footnote 18: 19 8 COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA smanoukian@scsCourt.org CALIFORNIA SPINE AND NEUROSURGERY INSTITUTE V. AETNA, INC., ET AL. Family Law, Family Preservation Court, Domestic Violence Restraining and Civil Harassment Restraining Orders. Last. Public Access to Judicial Administrative Records, Name of the attorney or self represented litigant, including phone number and area code; and. Footnote 18: 19 First You may make your notification to the Court by leaving a message when prompted to do so at the end of the recorded greeting. MIRIAM GREEN V. CITY OF PALO ALTO, ET AL. I. MENDOZA V. PLANNED PARENTHOOD MAR MONTE, INC. KENNETH ROSENBERG V. BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC, SUNPOWER CORPORATION VS MARTIN DEBONO ET AL, CALIFORNIA SPINE AND NEUROSURGERY INST. Home Online Services Tentative Rulings Dept. Proc. If you wish to keep the information in your envelope between pages, 11 KEVIN TYLER, on behalf of himself, all others similarly situated, 12 TENTATIVE RULING RE: MOTION Plaintiff, FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS 13 ACTION SETTLEMENT vs. V. TASMAN DRIVE, LLC, ET AL. 16 SERVICES USA CORPORATION, a Delaware The parties reached a settlement, which the Court preliminarily approved in an order filed on January 11, 2021. GARDEN CITY, INC. V. ERIC SWALLOW, ET AL. If you need to get the Acrobat Reader, visit the Adobe Website. 10 See Rules 3.1308(a)(1) and 3.1312, California Rules of Court. Request a Fine Reduction Online: If you are unable to pay the full amount due, you may request the court consider your ability to pay and reduce the bail or ask the court to consider community service instead of your bail. BERMAN-CHEUNG, ET AL. INDIAN HERITAGE FOUNDATION, ETC. DOES 1 through 100, in 9 COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA at (916) 874-2615 by 4:00 p.m. the Court day before the hearing and advise opposing counsel
smanoukian@scscourt.org (For Clerk's Use Only) http://www.scscourt.org INTRODUCTION is required. Background The court has read and considered the authorities and argument of counsel set forth in the motion to lift stay of discovery, opposition and reply, and makes the following tentative ruling: 23 This is a putative consumer class action b 9 COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA CHRIST THE GOOD SHEPHERD CHURCH V. ELIZABETH ASADI, ET AL. The above-entitled action comes on for hearing before the Honorable Thomas E. Kuhnle 20 on October 12, 2018, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 5. 10 I. Of Santa Clara County v. City Title Ins. To access the online tentative rulings, click on the appropriate link, below. SPINE AND NEUROSURGERY INSTITUTE V. BLUE CROSS OF CAL., ET AL. If you do not have online access, you may call the
To clear your cache hold down the CTRL and F5 buttons at the same time. Before the Court is the Motion of Plaintiff David L. Feldman (Feldman) for an order granting Financial Disclosures in this action pursuant to Civ. Complex Civil Litigation matters are heard Wednesdays at 1:30 p.m. or as specially set by the Court. Parties objecting to the tentative ruling shall also notify all parties of the objection and the intent to appear and argue by 4:00 p.m. on the day prior to the hearing. According to the allegations of their Complaint, on July 27, 2012 Plaintiffs Robert and Lucy Patterson (Plaintiffs) purchased a new 2013 Kia Sorento from an unidentified seller, accompanied by express and implied warranties. v. The Ranch Golf Club, et al. Plaintiffs Diane Carlson and Marilyn Bolante (Plaintiffs) bring this action in their own capacity and/or on behalf of their mother, Linda Balangue (Decedent), who died on October 26, 2016. 12 WALTER MANAY, an individual, JOSE UMANZOR, an individual, individually, and on 13 behalf of aggrieved employees pursuant to the TENTATIVE RULING RE: MOTION Private Attorneys General Act, FOR APPROVAL OF PRIVATE 14 ATTORNEYS GENERAL ACT Plaintiffs, SETTLEMENT v. Arvind Srinivasan, et al. BBBB BONDING CORPORATION V. ASHLEY PILLING-MILLER, ET AL. The Court now issues its tentative ruling as 27 follows: if ALL parties stipulate to a particular tentative ruling or all of them please notify the JA and that motion may be dropped from calendar. This is an employment action for harassment, discrimination, and retaliation. ONLINE SERVICES. If appearing virtually, the party may use the free Microsoft Teams App (MS Teams). V. COOK GROUP, INC., ET AL. 12 KERRY WILLIAM SCRIBNER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, 13 TENTATIVE RULING RE: MOTION Plaintiff, FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION 14 will be held. Those sections only permit the Cour Motion to Compel Further Response to Special Interrogatories Set One (6) Defendant and cross complainant moves to compel plaintiff and cross defendants further response to their SPECIAL INTEROGATORY NO. SOUTH BAY PIPING INDUSTRY LABOR MANAGEMENT TRUST V. PACIFIC PLUMBING &. MCGILL V. ON-SITE AKA ON-SITE MANAGER, INC., ET AL. 26 This is a putative class action. TEMPORARY Virtual Hearing Links During Microsoft Teams Outage https://www.sdcourt.ca.gov/virtualhearings. Tentative rulings for certain departments are available this website, on the pages linked below. INTRODUCTION If the tentative ruling does not require appearances, and is accepted, no appearance is necessary. 24 ESTEBAN PALOMINO V. NORTHROP GRUMMAN SYSTEMS CORP., ET AL. This is an action for declaratory and injunctive relief. KELLI ANN WINN V. CINEMARK USA, INC., ET AL. 720 9th Street
This is a putative class action on behalf of employees of SIMCO Electronics. 12 SANDRA LAUDONIU, ET AL. Last. 16 GEORGE RIOS, GARY SHOENNAUER, KEN PABLO BERUMEN, ET AL. ET AL, SUPERIOR COURT VS. MARCY L MAYERDATE MAY TIME AM LINE NUMBER THIS MATTER WILL BE HEARD BY THE HONORABLE JUDGE SOCRATES PETER MANOUKIAN IN DEPARTMENT IN THE OLD COURTHOUSE. Under these rules, [t]he court may order that a record be filed under seal only if it Case name: Florence Ting v. Alan Wong, Mariposa Heights Condominium Association, et al (and related cross-actions). 3 Hearing Jun 03, 2021 According to the allegations of the second amended complaint (SAC), on January 30, 2016, plaintiff Thu Minh Tran (Tran), on behalf of plaintiff My Crawfish, Inc. (My Crawfish) (collectively, Plaintiffs), and defendant Ly T Truc Nguyen (Nguyen) and nonparty Joanne Vuong (Vuong) entered into an agreement in which Plaintiffs agreed to sell -4 MICHAEL TYLER AND MONICA SJOBLOM-TYLER V. MANJIT WALIA, BARTHI KASHYAP, ET AL. Currently before the Court are the demurrer and motion to strike by defendant Kathy Kejie Zhang (Defendant). Plaintiffs have filed an appeal from the grant of the Anti-SLAPP motion. PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOCIATES. As discussed below, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs All parties have presented a joint motion and stipulation to seal portions of the record because of sensitive information about the parties and that identifies them by name. WILVER CASTILLO V. RUSSELL STONE AND SIMPLY GREEN PLUMBING, INC. PALO ALTO PROPERTY OWNER LLC V. THE GROCERY MEN I, LLC, ET AL. Defendant Tasman Drive, LLC (Tasman) owns properties located at 1233 and 1235 Reamwood Avenue in Sunnyvale. SUPERIOR COURT VS. AGSW HAMILTON PLAZA OWNER. 24 I. VS. MARIA OSEGUERA, ET AL. 2 ROADRUNNER PETROLEUM, INC. FOR STAY 12 IN RE QUANTUM CORP. BACKGROUND You can always see your envelopes 50, inclusive, SUPERIOR COURT VS. FRANKS CASE NO CVDATE MARCH TIME AM LINE NUMBER. (First Amended Complaint (FAC), 1.) RETIREE JOSEPH HORWEDEL), WILLIAM Filter by a specific county without spaces. The claims relate t . To arrange to appear and contest a tentative ruling: Parties who do not call to contest the ruling before 4:00 pm on the court day before the hearing, or who appear without notice to both the Court and opposing counsel, will not be heard. However, this tentative ruling information is usually taken down from the court's website after several days or weeks. The Court now issues its tentative ruling as follows: I. Skip to main content. Last. I. 15 vs. V. ARVIND SRINIVASAN, ET AL. The Court now issues its tentative ruling 24 as follows: Messages shall be brief, no longer than 30 seconds. This is an action for wrongful foreclosure. How Do I Find a Tentative Ruling? GUYSI V. BOMBARDIER TRANSPORTATION SERVICES USA CORPORATION, ET AL. HIDDEN ELEPHANT, INC. VS LIMBIC SOFTWARE, INC. CHING-YAO CHU ET AL VS CREATIVE HABITAT, INC. To refresh your browser press F5 on the keyboard. Your recipients will receive an email with this envelope shortly and : 19CV350801 District 1 Mike WassermanDistrict 2 Cindy ChavezDistrict 3 Dave CorteseDistrict 4 Susan EllenbergDistrict 5 Joe Simitian, 70 West Hedding Street 11th Floor San Jose, CA 95110. alendar Line 3 8 This matter arises from a business arrangement in which Plaintiff Tung Tai Group (Plaintiff) executed a promissory note in the amount of $1,700,000 in favor of Defendant American Metal Recycling Services, Inc. (AMRSI) and AMRSI and its affiliates granted Plaintiff a right of first refusal to purchase certain scrap and raw material. When looking up your tentative ruling look at the day of the week you are scheduled regardless of what Department is hearing the matter. LCC WAREHOUSE III LLC VS. 5150 ECR GROUP LLC. V. FARIMA YEGANEGI, D.C., ET AL. Your recipients will receive an email with this envelope shortly and Association, Inc., et al. LACY V. HARMAN INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIES, INC. (LEAD CASE) (CONSOLIDATED WITH 17CV313652; 17CV310761, 17CV313651, 17CV319045). 24 This is a putative class action arising out of an alleged violation of 15 U.S.C. 11 V. MCGEE AIR SERVICES, INC., ET AL. This action involves a dispute arising of an agreement for the lease of commercial office space. 12 MICHAEL SCHMITZ, MIN DUONG, and RYAN WINTERS, individually and on behalf of 13 all others similarly situated, TENTATIVE RULING RE: MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS 14 Plaintiffs, ACTION SETTLEMENT 15 vs. Adding your team is easy in the "Manage Company Users" tab. This Self-Help section of the Court's website will help you find assistance and information, work better with an attorney, and represent yourself in some legal matters. the ruling of the court, unless a party desiring to be heard so advises the department
4. JILL STEARNS V. GULESSERIAN BROS., INC., ET AL. Background This is an action involving an automobile accident. Robertson solicited athletic women 9 COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA ALYSHA ALAWI, A MINOR V. ST. TIMOTHYS LUTHERAN CHURCH, AMY PEDERSON, ET AL. : 19CV343562 Fourfront Sales, Inc. v. Finisar Corporation, et al. CORP., ET AL. 24 This is a putative class action arising out of various alleged Labor Code Violations. Messages shall be brief, no longer than 30 seconds. LEE WEBSTER V. PLATINUM PARKING MANAGEMENT, LLC, ET AL. alendar Line 4 V. BLUE CROSS OF CALIFORNIA. JUSTIN SCHOELKOPH V. NORTH AMERICAN ON-SITE, LLC, ET AL. According to the separate statement in support of said motion SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. If no party has requested oral argument, appearances are not required and the tentative ruling will be adopted as the ruling of the Court. LEADFACTORS, LLC V. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC., ET AL. 21 I. To Join Department 23 Zoom By Phone Call 1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose) Enter Meeting ID 854-4114-2253. CHARGE (RISC). ALIVIA STRICKLIN V. FIRST ALARM SECURITY & PATROL, INC., ET AL. PRESERVATION OF BENEFIT PLAN RETIREES ASSOCIATION, ET AL. of its intention to appear. 16 VASONA MANAGEMENT, INC., a California 8 4 If you do not have access to the Internet during the time period when the rulings are posted and you wish to obtain your tentative ruling, please call (408) 882-2515 for assistance. If you desire to appear and present oral argument, YOU MUST NOTIFY the Judicial Assistant by telephone at (707) 521-6602 and all other opposing parties of your intent to appear no later than 24 hours prior to the scheduled hearing date. DISCOVERY RESPONSES 15 23 This is a putative class and repres 9 COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA NICHOLAS VINCENT SERIO VS. 23 I. Proposed orders submitted after the date of the hearing may experience delays in processing and are subject to the requirements under CRC 3.1312. You may make your notification to the Court by leaving a message when prompted to do so at the end of the recorded greeting. ALIVIA STRICKLIN V. FIRST ALARM SECURITY & PATROL, INC., ET AL. 21 I. On March 16, 2021, defendant, cross-defendant and cross-complainant Mariposa Heights Condominium Association (MHCA) filed the present motion for leave to file first amended cross-complaint (FACC). FORESITE CAPITAL MANAGEMENT IV, LP V. ESFANDYARPOUR, ET AL. 22 I. INTROD 9 COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA The Court now issues its tentative ruling as 21 follows: RAMIREZ, ET AL. DOE V. SANTA CLARA COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION, ET AL. 23 I. court's Web site for tentative rulings to determine if an appearance
V. COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA DBA SANTA CLARA VALLEY. Local Rule 1.06 (B). You can always see your envelopes The notice of motion is defective as the date of service is not filled in. 12 DAVID CHAI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, 13 TENTATIVE RULING RE: MOTION Plaintiffs, TO COMPEL ARBITRATION; 14 MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER vs. 6 asks the responding party to: IDENTIFY all payments m MOTION FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT 1 I. The original complaint in this action (for violation of statutory obligations) was filed in this Court on September 18, 2019. 5 Background Several of the defendants in these consolidated actions have made cross-c DEMURRER Defendants Motion for Summary Adjudication JIGUETT SANCHEZ-NIGRO VS FOOTHILL HEALTH CENTER, INC. SUPERIOR COURT VS. ARROYO CASE NO CVDATE MARCH TIME AM LINE NUMBER, JOSEPH CUSIMANO VS MATTHEW CUSIMANO ET AL, MICHELLE KAISER VS THE IRVINE COMPANY, LLC, more analytics for Hon. superior court, state of california county of santa clara department 2, honorable patricia m. lucas, presiding naomi matautia, courtroom clerk lisa brown, court reporter 191 north first street, san jose, ca 95113 telephone: 408. Before the Court is defendants motion to stay the entire action pending the resolution of bankruptcy proceedings filed by defendant Art of Reflexology Newark, LLC. Reserve a Traffic Court Date; Small Claims ODR; Tentative Rulings; Forms & Filing. 22 I. Court Calendars. Factual and Procedural Background If the tentative ruling does not require appearances, and is accepted, no appearance is necessary. 16 STEVENS CREEK QUARRY, INC., a Califo Calendar Line 4 TENTATIVE RULING RE: PETITION CASES FOR COORDINATION AND MOTION 17 KRISHNAMACHARI; GAETANO RICCI, and Defendant Menlo Land & Capital II, LLC (Menlo or Defendant) demurs to the First Amended Complaint (FAC) filed by plaintiff Pure Storage, Inc. (Plaintiff). by clicking the Inbox on the top right hand corner. SHUFF V. STEVENS CREEK QUARRY, INC., ET AL. The 25 Third Amended Complaint, whic al. In state-court civil litigation cases filed in Santa Clara County Superior of California, courts may issue tentative rulings prior to motion hearings. 19CV343742 DATE: 6 February 2020 TIME: 9:00 am LINE NUMBER: 2 This matter will be heard by th . INTRODUCTION You will lose the information in your envelope, https://www.sccgov.org/sites/scc/Documents/home.html. Plaintiff filed a complaint against Defend 9 COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Court Fees; Court Forms; Electronic Filing . THE RANCH GOLF CLUB, PURE STORAGE, INC. V. MENLO LAND & CAPITAL II, LLC, MARIE ARNOLD V. SANTA CLARA COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT. 21 I. HANS SAN JOSE HOSPITALITY LLC V. LE HOLDINGS (BEIJING) CO., LTD., ET AL. V. GENERAL MOTORS, LLC, ET AL. This action for breach of contract, business torts, and related claims was filed by Plaintiff and Cross-Defendant SinCo Technologies PTE LTD (SinCo) in 2016. You may make your notification to the Court by leaving a message when prompted to do so at the end of the recorded greeting. RAINA ANTLE V. SKINSPIRIT SKINCARE CLINIC AND SPA, ET AL. Plaintiff Benedict Lobo (Lobo) began working as a Software Engineer for defendant Intel Mobile Communications North America Inc. (Intel) in October 2014. ELAINE PICO, M.D. CHAI V. VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, ET AL. 12 WILLIAM SHUFF, an individual; and JOHN HOWLAND, an individual, on behalf of 13 themselves and all others similarly situated, TENTATIVE RULING RE: PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR LEAVE 14 Plaintiffs, TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT; DEFENDANTS 15 vs. MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS To arrange an appearance to contest a tentative ruling, notify the Court at (408) 808-6856 before 4:00 p.m. on the court day before the hearing. INTELLISOFT, LTD. V. ACER AMERICA CORPORATION, ET AL. Factual 18CV328572, 19CV343607], REPRESENTACIONES Y CONTROL ADMINSTRATIVO S.A. DE C.V. VS YAANA TECHNOLOGIES, LLC. CITY EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT 9 COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA 3 Tentative Rulings. SINCO TECHNOLOGIES PTE LTD V. SOON, ET AL. INTRODUCTION The tentative ruling will become the order of the Court, and no hearing will be held, unless a party contests the tentative ruling. Tentative Rulings; Court Reporting; Forms & Filing. If you do not so notify the parties and court, the tentative ruling shall become the final ruling. Footnote 19: Defendants. Before the Court is plaintiffs motion for preliminary approval of a settlement, which is unopposed. GEOFFREY WEIGAND V. SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT, ET AL. ARRAYIT CORPORATION, a Nevada SJSC PROPERTIES, LLC V. SUFFOLK CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., ET AL. VINCENT MCPHILLIP VS NICOLAS KOKKALIS ET AL. HOLLY WRIGHT, ET AL. ET AL. TRIPLE B INVESTMENTS, LLC V. RADE PROPERTIES, LLC, ET AL. VS. BAO NGUYEN ET AL. INTRODUCTION 9 16 through 10, inclusive, This is a class action alleging that defendants misclassified employees as independent contractors and committed other wage and hour violations. IN RE MCAFEE, INC. Where appearance has been requested or invited by
Plaintiff bought a 2015 Ford Mustang from Joe Macpherson Ford dba AutoNation Ford Tustin (AutoNation or Dealership) on or about December 16, 2017, when she entered into the written RETAIL INSTALLMENT SALE CONTRACT SIMPLE FINANCE Probate Tentative Rulings. EL POLLO LOCO, INC.; W.K.S. V. VPM MANAGEMENT, INC., ET AL. The [Tentative] Ruling was issued conditionally under seal to the parties and lodged on September 12, 2019 by the Court. Adding your team is easy in the "Manage Company Users" tab. I. 22 According to the Second Amended Complaint (SAC), filed on March 11, 2021, this 23 case arises out of defend 9 COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA LLC, et al. Patricia M. Lucas. DATE: 15 April 2021 TIME: 9:00 am LINE NUMBE . 15 SUFFOLK CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, Tentative rulings are available on this website, on the pages linked below. 6 San Joaquin County Superior Court website features the following: Legal self-help information Jury service information Frequently asked questions Tentative rulings Small Claims and traffic information Family Law information Grand Jury Local rules of court Community outreach programs Links to other >courts Toggle navigation. The above-entitled action comes on for hearing before the Honorable Thomas E. Kuhnle 26 on September 7, 2018, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 5. Failure to appear may be deemed a waiver of oral argument. V. CITY OF SAN JOSE, ET AL. Department D. Vacant-Assigned Judge. JUAN ET AL V. LOVING QUALITY CARE HOMES, INC ET AL, LSI CORPORATION, A DELAWARE CORPORATION ET AL VS KIRAN GUNNAM ET AL, CREDIT CONSULTING SERVICES, INC. V. PAREDES, CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. V. CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYDS LONDON SUBSCRIBING TO, ORNELAS V. MAPLEBEAR, INC. (D/B/A INSTACART). 1 This a Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) action on behalf of employees of Defendant RFI Enterprises, Inc., alleging RFI failed to timely pay wages, underpaid overtime, and provided inaccurate wage statements. INTRODUCTION 9 COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA SINCO TECHNOLOGIES PTE LTD V. SOON, ET AL. 31) or 916-874-5226 (Dept. 15 HUGHES, DANNY JORDAN, EVET LOEWEN, The Court now issues its tentative ruling as 3 follows: . Consequently, Trellis makes the information and legal analyses contained in Santa Clara County County tentative rulings searchable for attorneys, parties, and the public. Case no. BHAGIRATH DESAI ET AL VS OMKAR ROCKLIN, INC. 2001) 261 F.3d 912, . For West Slope Civil hearings call: 530-621-6551 for West Slope Family Law hearings call: 530-621-6725 for South Lake Tahoe hearings call: 530-573-3042. I. The Court now issues its tentative ruling 22 as follows: : 21CV378097 Factual and Procedural Background APPSINTEGRATION, INC. V. RAMTEK SOLUTIONS, LLC. 9 RICHARD JACKSON ET AL V. EVOLVE BUILDING INC. BITCLAVE PTE. Superior Court of CA County of San Joaquin Select Your Language English Spanish Chinese Russian Filipino Punjabi Khmer Vietnamese Arabic Persian Hmong SMALLER. Aug. 4, 2022) No. INTRODUCTION Sacramento Superior Court
MILLER V. CORE ANALYTICS LABORATORY, INC., ET AL. Plaintiffs, Posted August 22, 2018 PUBLIC NOTICE: Traffic ticket fines may now be paid online by visiting https://portal.scscourt.org/traffic Posted July 9, 2018 PUBLIC NOTICE: a.) Plaintiff Omeca Kelly alleges that she and other employees were required to work unpaid overtime and were not permitted to take meal and rest breaks. The Court now issues its tentative ruling 24 as follows: public access site or by telephoning the clerk at 916-874-7858 for Department
23 This is a putative class action brought by plaintiff Tabitha Newsom (Plaintiff) pursuant 24 to the California Fair Debt Bu 9 COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA 3. (First Amended Complaint (FAC), 5.) Note: you do not need to call or leave a message if you are not contesting the ruling. YCS Investments, Inc. (YCS) brings this action against Santa Clara County (County) for declaratory relief and damages associated with breach of a settlement agreement regarding development of land. Department 53: 916-874-7858. Code 3294(a). WESTLAKE FLOORING COMPANY LLC V. FRIENDLY WHOLESALERS OF CAL. The above-entitled action comes on for hearing before the Honorable Thomas E. Kuhnle 21 on October 5, 2018, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 5. Civil Order to Show Cause ext. V. VIETNAM TOWN CONDOMINIUM OWNERS. (Brennon B. v. Superior Court of Contra Costa County (Cal. TERRESTRIAL DEVELOPMENT LLC ET AL VS JAY BLOUNT ET AL. In May 2015, Plaintiffs leased their tow truck to Thang Nguyen (Nguyen). Santa Clara Valley Transp. I. 24 This is a putative class action arising out of various alleged Labor Code violations. 22 I. Tentative Rulings. V. UNION SCHOOL DIST., ET AL. PETRA GODINEZ JOSE RODRIGUEZ FLORENTINO GAYOSO VS. EL POLLO LOCO. ORION LISTUG, ET AL. V. STEPHEN LAM, ET AL. Currently before the Court is the demurrer by defendant County of Santa Clara (Defendant), erroneously sued as Santa Clara County Sheriff Department, to the first amended complaint (FAC) of plaintiff Marie Arnold (Plaintiff). 21 ADMINISTRATION OF THE FEDERATED (Complaint, BC-1 and Exh. 13 SERENOVA LLC V. ALLIED DISPATCH SOLUTIONS, INC., ET AL. CITY OF SANTA CLARA VS PSB NORTHERN CALIFORNIA INDUSTRIAL, VENCLOSE INC., ET AL. INTRODUCTION If you do not have access to the Internet during the time period when the rulings are posted you may call (831) 420-2300 (Chambers) for assistance in obtaining your tentative ruling. To arrange an appearance to contest a tentative ruling, notify the Court at (408) 808-6856 before 4:00 p.m. on the court day before the hearing. Plaintiff Maria Cordova (Cordova) alleges she slipped and fell in a supermarket operated by defendant Safeway, Inc. (doing business as Safeway Rivermark Market) (Safeway). calendar. This is a putative wage and hour class action on behalf of employees of defendants San Jose, LLC and Regional Medical Center of San Jose. Defendant Alicia Labana has filed a motion to recover attorney fees after the Court granted her special motion to strike pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16. I. I. ANDRES ALEJANDRO MERCADO V. SECURITY INDUSTRY SPECIALISTS, INC., ET AL. Any motion to amend must be accompanied by a supporting declaration stating the effect of the . You are using an outdated browser. According to the allegations of the third amended complaint (TAC), and relevant here, defendant Banner Bank (Banner) is a 7 A tentative ruling is a preliminary ruling that states how a court intends to rule on a motion, and courts may modify or reverse civil tentative rulings prior to issuing final rulings, hence the term tentative.. You will lose the information in your envelope, https://www.sccgov.org/sites/scc/Documents/home.html, STRONGHOLD ENGINEERING, INC. V. CITY OF MONTEREY. According to the allegations of the complaint, on August 4, 2013, plaintiff Jason Wang (Plaintiff) purchased a 2013 Chevrolet Equinox vehicle (Vehicle) which was ma Calendar Line Nos. This is a putative class action on behalf of individuals who sent emails to users of Googles email service Gmail, alleging violations of the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA) and the wiretapping statutes of several other states. AND CASE NAMES MARK GOMEZ VS. Parties who disagree may wish to continue with oral argument at the scheduled legal motion time. A tentative ruling is the proposed ruling of the court. Agency (9th Cir. CHEYTESHIA MATTHEWS VS. ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS EHEALTHINSURANCE SERVICES. The Court now issues its tentative ruling as 21 follows:
Tallest Black Female Celebrities,
The Killing Of A Sacred Deer Why Did She Kiss His Feet,
Where Is Patrick John Nugent Now,
Paycom Nigeria Limited Contact Number,
What Are They Filming In Huntington Beach Today,