santa clara county superior court tentative rulings

HELEN THERESA GIVENS V. ROY ANTHONY GIVENS, ET AL. 18CV328572, 19CV343607], REPRESENTACIONES Y CONTROL ADMINSTRATIVO S.A. DE C.V. VS YAANA TECHNOLOGIES, LLC. Which Will do Business in California Tentative Ruling by Phone: (707) 521-6606 - between the hours of 2 pm - 4 pm the day before the hearing. HANS SAN JOSE HOSPITALITY LLC V. LE HOLDINGS (BEIJING) CO., LTD., ET AL. 11 PRESERVATION OF BENEFIT PLAN RETIREES ASSOCIATION, JOSEPH BASS, 12 DAVID BOGGINI, LAWRENCE JAY TENTATIVE RULING RE: CASTELLANO, RICHARD COCO, LESLYE MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON 13 CORSIGLIA, HARRY FREITAS, MICHAEL THE PLEADINGS GIUSTI, LINDA HORWEDEL (THE On the afternoon of the court day before each calendar, the judges I. Filter by a specific county without spaces. 4 I. Superior Court, 16 Faulkner v. McAfee, Inc., Santa alendar Line 3 BELL INVESTMENT PARTNERS, LLC V. DD STONEBROOK DRIVE, LLC, ET AL. 23 This is a putative class action. FLORENCE TING V. ALAN WONG, MARIPOSA HEIGHTS CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, ET AL. MIRIAM GREEN V. CITY OF PALO ALTO, ET AL. LACY V. HARMAN INTERNATIONAL INDUSTRIES, INC. (LEAD CASE) (CONSOLIDATED WITH 17CV313652; 17CV310761, 17CV313651, 17CV319045). V. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, ET AL. Currently before the Court are the demurrer and motion to strike by defendant General Motors LLC (Defendant). V. NGUYEN, ET AL. (Id.) SHOKOUFEH AZIMA V. CSI MEDICAL GROUP, ET AL. 14 16 corporation; PINNER USA, INC., a New Jersey 12 Coordination Proceeding Special Title (Rule JUDICIAL COUNCIL COORDINATION 3.550) PROCEEDING NO. JULIA POTTER ET AL VS STANFORD HEALTH CARE, GREEN VALLEY CORPORATION V. YUTAKA MATSUMOTO. Messages shall be brief, no longer than 30 seconds. The Court now issues its tentative ruling as follows: I. Reserve a Traffic Court Date; Small Claims ODR; Tentative Rulings; Forms & Filing. 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. MY CRAWFISH, INC., ET AL. 12 ALORICA INC., a Delaware corporation, 13 Plaintiff, TENTATIVE RULING RE: DEMURRER TO FORTINET INC.S 14 vs. FIRST AMENDED CROSS- COMPLAINT 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 Tentative Rulings. 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. ADVANCED ENGINEERING SERVICES, LLC V. LUMASENSE TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ET AL. Tentative rulings will be accessible on the link below after 3:00 pm on the court day preceding the scheduled hearing. VINCENT MCPHILLIP VS NICOLAS KOKKALIS ET AL. 15 FORTINET INC., a Delaware corporation, and V. ART OF REFLEXOLOGY MILPITAS, LLC, ET AL. The above-entitled action comes on for hearing before the Honorable Thomas E. Kuhnle 20 on September 7, 2018, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 5. 21 I. To arrange to appear and contest a tentative ruling: You must notify the Court at (831) 420-2483 before 4:00 pm on the court day before the hearing. Civil Tentative Rulings. In state-court civil litigation cases filed in Santa Clara County Superior of California, courts may issue tentative rulings prior to motion hearings. Background . SOUTH BAY PIPING INDUSTRY LABOR MANAGEMENT TRUST V. PACIFIC PLUMBING &. 16 corporation; JEFFREY S. SIMENDINGER, CHARMIE RUFFY V. ISLAND HOSPITALITY MANAGEMENT, INC., ET AL. 23 This action arises from a dispute over the settlement of an earlier lawsuit. RAMIREZ V. RENESAS ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC. MIRNA YANEZ RIVERA V. FLAGSHIP FACILITY SERVICES, INC., ET AL. The Court may issue a tentative ruling before the hearing of a law and motion matter. 2) Violation of Civil Code 2923.5 LAGOS V. THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY, ET AL. 17 corporation; RICHARD A. VOSS, an individual; I. The Court now issues its tentative ruling as 22 follows: A tentative ruling is the proposed ruling of the court. SANDRA LAUDONIU, ET AL. Adding your team is easy in the "Manage Company Users" tab. This is a lemon law action. V. ALLIED CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT, INC., ET AL. ANDRES ALEJANDRO MERCADO V. SECURITY INDUSTRY SPECIALISTS, INC., ET AL. INTRODUCTION SINCO TECHNOLOGIES PTE LTD V. SOON, ET AL. smanoukian@scscourt.org 15 LCC WAREHOUSE III LLC VS. 5150 ECR GROUP LLC. Messages shall be brief, no longer than 30 seconds. COMPANY, INC.; MATTHEW 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. corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, RETIREE JOSEPH HORWEDEL), WILLIAM SHUFF V. STEVENS CREEK QUARRY, INC., ET AL. to Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint Tentative rulings for certain departments are available this website, on the pages linked below. Factual and Procedural Background Proposed orders submitted after the date of the hearing may experience delays in processing and are subject to the requirements under CRC 3.1312. Thank you for visiting the Superior Court's Tentative Ruling web page for Department 3, Complex Civil Litigation, Judge Patricia M. Lucas presiding. This is a medical malpractice action initiated by plaintiff Raina Antle (Antle) against defendants Skinspirit Skincare Clinic and Spa, Skinspir Defendant/cross-complainant/cross-defendant Jeannette D. Kennedy, as Trustee of the Jeannette D. Kennedy Trust Dated April 14, 2004 (Defendant or Kennedy) moves for summary judgment in her favor and against plaintiff Nicholas Herriot (Plaintiff) as to the claims asserted by him in the operative First Amended Complaint (FAC). Search public court records from the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara online for free with easy to use case search tools for finding court cases and case summaries by case number, case name, party, attorney, judge, docket entry, filing date, courthouse, case type, party type, party representation, and more. STEPHEN KUBIAK, ET AL. The above-entitled action comes on for hearing before the Honorable Thomas E. Kuhnle 2 on October 5, 2018, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 5. Footnote 19: Defendants. DATE: 3 June 202. 22 According to the allegations of the Complaint, f alendar Line 3 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. 6 Plaintiff Helen Givens (Plaintiff) brings this action against her former husband, Roy Givens (Husband) and several other defendants for damages associated with domestic violence and financial abuse. TENTATIVE RULING RE: PETITION CASES FOR COORDINATION AND MOTION California Rule of Court 3.1308, Local Rule 4.05.3. Plaintiff asserts that he is entitled to recover reasonable attorney fees under a settlement 9 COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Background 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 MICHAEL TYLER AND MONICA SJOBLOM-TYLER V. MANJIT WALIA, BARTHI KASHYAP, ET AL. determine whether or not an appearance is required. For directions on how to appear through MS Teams, please refer to the courtsCivil Independent Calendar Hearingswebpage. Complex Civil Litigation matters are heard Wednesdays at 1:30 p.m. or as specially set by the Court. V. CITY OF SAN JOSE, ET AL. V. RADE PROPERTIES, LLC ET AL. WILLIAMSON V. MOSAIC DANCE AND FITNESS, LLC, ET AL. RESPONSES LUSAMERICA FOODS. Tentative rulings may be accessed on the V. STEPHEN LAM, ET AL. 5 53 and 916-874-7848 for Department 54. vs. GEOFFREY WEIGAND V. SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT, ET AL. 22 I. LTD V. VASILY TROMFIMCHUCK ET AL, DAVID BAEZ ET AL VS CALIFORNIA MEDICAL BOARD. GARDEN CITY, INC. V. ERIC SWALLOW, ET AL. : 19CV359530 TRISTA THOMAS V. FORD MOTOR COMPANY ET AL. Local Forms; Judicial Council Forms; Self-Prep and File; Fee Schedule; Self-Help. SOSA V. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC., ET AL. 17 DGDG 1, LLC; DGDG 2, LLC; DGDG 3 -3 V. MCGEE AIR SERVICES, INC., ET AL. Superior Court (1986) . 16 vs. 25 According to the allegations of the 8 COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA TAITT V. FIRST COAST SECURITY SERVICES, INC. PHILLIP MARTIN V. BAKEMARK USA, LLC, ET AL. GUYSI V. BOMBARDIER TRANSPORTATION SERVICES USA CORPORATION ET AL. On February 5, 2016, plaintiff Monique M. Davilla (Davilla), individually and on behalf of A.E.D., a minor, and others filed a complaint in Alameda County Superior Court a 9 COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Where appearance has been requested or invited by V. ARVIND SRINIVASAN, ET AL. I. The Court now issues its tentative ruling as 21 follows: . NICHOLAS VINCENT SERIO VS. CITY EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT 9 COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA Local Rule 1.06 (B). by clicking the Inbox on the top right hand corner. 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 KAM HONG LUI, ET AL. 16 CENTER; NEW WORLD HEALTH STAFFING Factual and Procedural Background -2 by clicking the Inbox on the top right hand corner. This is a lemon law action brought by Plaintiffs Brian Crook and Donna Bloom (Plaintiffs) against Defendants Ford Motor Company and Santa Margarita Ford (Defendants). 720 9th Street AXIS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION V. ALMADEN TOWER VENTURE, LLC, ET AL. 22 I. INTRODUCTION . SHANNON SANCHEZ V. ABACUS BUSINESS CORPORATION GROUP, INC., ET AL. 5 You will need the free Adobe Acrobat Reader to view and print certain rulings. 2021 Superior Court of California, County of San Diego. inclusive, Background JILL STEARNS V. GULESSERIAN BROS., INC., ET AL. To clear your cache hold down the CTRL and F5 buttons at the same time. CALIFORNIA SPINE AND NEUROSURGERY INSTITUTE V. AETNA, INC., ET AL. 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. Case no. 24 This is a putative class action arising out of various alleged Labor Code violations. MARIIA KRAVCHUK VS TAYLOR MORRISON OF CALIFORNIA, LLC. To access the online tentative rulings, click on the appropriate link, below. TENTATIVE RULING RE: MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT. 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: V. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC., ET AL. in his officia alendar Line 8 Plaintiff Elle W. Ko (Ko) was sexually assaulted at defendant Shawn Mackenzies (Mackenzie) business, Vivre Fitness, by an employee named Delmar Richard Robertson (Robertson). I. 16 a Delaware limited liability company; and DOES BAYKHURAZOV V. FRIENDFINDER NETWORKS, ET AL. 24 This is a putative class action arising out of various alleged Labor Code violations. JANE DOE V. UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, ET AL. 9 AOHC is the defendant in the UD action and the plaintiff in al. Parties may appear remotely using Zoom. ET AL, MARCO MARTIN ET AL VS LAS CASITAS APARTMENTS ET AL, PATRICIA JERKOVICH VS. IGNATIUS AZZARELLO ET AL. http://www.scsCourt.org If you wish to keep the information in your envelope between pages, SPIELBAUER LAW OFFICE V. MIDLAND FUNDING LLC, ET AL. Your recipients will receive an email with this envelope shortly and 12 Trellis, a legal research platform, aggregates Santa Clara County County tentative rulings and all tentative rulings in California. CABLE NEWS NETWORK, INC. V. THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY, ET AL. 12 ALEXANDER CHARLES and HENRY MULAK, as individuals, 13 TENTATIVE RULING RE: MOTION Plaintiffs, FOR JUDGMENT ON THE 14 PLEADINGS INSTITUTE FOR BUS. Footnote 17: Defendants. SAETERN, ET AL. I. is required. Last. v. Arvind Srinivasan, et al. Tongtai filed its underlying complaint against Nano, Nanos CEO defendant Xiang Zhen Qi (Qi), and Nanos CFO defendant Qi Jiang. V. COVIDIEN LP, ET AL. 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. Unless notification to the probate clerk has been given as provided above, the tentative rulings shall become the rulings of the court at 3:15 p.m. on the day of the hearing. David Iubelt (Plaintiff) slipped and fell in a puddle of water purportedly created by a leak in the roof at Norman Y. Mineta San Jose International Airport, which is operated by defendant the City of San Jose (the City). will be able to access it on trellis. CHAI V. NATIONAL ENTERPRISE SYSTEMS, INC. GUZIK TECHNICAL ENTERPRISES V. KEYSIGHT TECHNOLOGIES, INC. RONALD PATRICK V. FERRARI OF NORTH AMERICA, ET AL. 22 I. Please wait a moment while we load this page. will be able to access it on trellis. 18 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). The Court now issues its tentative ruling as 21 follows: If you are unable to access the Court's public access site and need the tentative ruling read Motion to Quash Service of Summons and Complaint and Dismiss for Failure to Timely Serve INTELLISOFT, LTD. V. ACER AMERICA CORPORATION, ET AL. Factual OF THE PARTY CONTESTING THE TENTATIVE RULING OR; 2. January 16, 2023. Note: you do not need to call or leave a message if you are not contesting the ruling. of its intention to appear. YOU MUST CALL (650) 261-5102 BEFORE 4:00 P.M. WITH THE CASE NAME, NUMBER, AND THE NAME OF THE PARTY CONTESTING. corporation; BOMBARDIER MASS TRANSIT If you are seeing last week's tentative rulings, you may need to refresh your browser or force your browser's cache to clear. This is a lemon law case. In December 2016, Nguye and 6 Sacramento Superior Court You will lose the information in your envelope, https://www.sccgov.org/sites/scc/Documents/home.html. 7 SERENOVA LLC V. ALLIED DISPATCH SOLUTIONS, INC., ET AL. Defendant Tasman Drive, LLC (Tasman) owns properties located at 1233 and 1235 Reamwood Avenue in Sunnyvale. This is a personal injury action. Tentative rulings issued by Department 3 will be accessible on this page after 2:00 p.m. on the court day preceding the scheduled hearing. The Court now issues its tentative ruling 22 as follows: The underlying action in this case arises from a loan whereby Plaintiff Westlake Flooring Company LLC dba Westlake Flooring Services (Plaintiff) agreed to finance the vehicle inventory of Defendant Friendly Wholesalers of California dba See Mo Cars (Friendly Wholesalers) under a Loan and Security Agreement. If you do not so notify the parties and court, the tentative ruling shall become the final ruling. 1 17 PETRA GODINEZ JOSE RODRIGUEZ FLORENTINO GAYOSO VS. EL POLLO LOCO. : 20CV368229 Pacific Office Designs, Inc. v. Spot On Consulting Group, et al. CORPORATION; and DOES 1 to 100, inclusive, Background The parties reached a settlement, which the Court preliminarily approved in an order filed on January 11, 2021. CHAI V. VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, ET AL. (Bank). Civil Index. V. KATHY KEJIE ZHANG, PAMELA SHERE CHAMBERS V. MERCHANTS & MEDICAL CREDIT CORPORATION, INC., ET. 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. 16 INC.; LANGAN ENGINEERING AND 3) Violation of Civil Code 2923. Background If the tentative ruling does not require appearances, and is accepted, no appearance is necessary. try clicking the minimize button instead. Messages shall be brief, no longer than 30 seconds. RETAIL, INC., ET AL. 4 Adding your team is easy in the "Manage Company Users" tab. BACKGROUND Consequently, Trellis makes the information and legal analyses contained in Santa Clara County County tentative rulings searchable for attorneys, parties, and the public. ALIVIA STRICKLIN V. FIRST ALARM SECURITY & PATROL, INC., ET AL. Civil Order to Show Cause ext. ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC.; and On February 16, 2021, plaintiff Ronald Patrick (plaintiff) filed the present motion to compel defendant Anthonys Auto Craft, Inc.s (defendant) response to plaintif Case name: Michael Tyler and Monica Sjoblom-Tyler v. Manjit Walia, Barthi Kashyap, et al. 1) Violation of Civil Code 2923.4; ruling, and you have not previously been informed that you are excused from the calendar, 1 through 10, inclusive, The original complaint in this action (for violation of statutory obligations) was filed in this Court on September 18, 2019. may be downloaded from the Court's SILVIA HERNANDEZ V. WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, ET AL. INTRODUCTION 38). 21 I. All parties appearing on the Law and Motion Agency (9th Cir. DAVID MAAS, BARRY NG, ANITA PHAGAN, The court will not be able to provide copies of the rulings once they have been replaced on the website. (First Amended Complaint (FAC), 5.) The 25 Third Amended Complaint, whic al. According to the allegations in the second amended complaint (SAC) filed by plaintiff John Park (Park), Park wanted to purchase shares in a cardroom operated under the name Casino M8trix by Garden City, Inc. (Garden City). Defendants Motion for Summary Adjudication V. CITY OF SANTA CLARA, ET AL. Of Santa Clara County v. City Title Ins. Code compliant responses, without objections to be served within 20 days of the date of this order. Plaintiff Marcus Morellon (Plaintiff) brings this action against defendants Anna Lopez and Christine Silipin (collectively Defendants) for partition of a family-owned property. RAMIREZ, ET AL. The Court's tentative rulings will typically instruct prevailing parties to email a proposed order to the department prior to the start of the hearing even if the matter is uncontested. Factual and Procedural Background Santa Clara Valley Transp. Several of the defendants in these consolidated actions have made cross-c DEMURRER (Complaint, BC-1 and Exh. Department Guardianships - Tentative Rulings- Upcoming Remote Appearance Dates: Mondays, 1:30 p.m. calendar1:30 PM - Phone #: 1-(877) 873-8017 - Access Code Department Probate - Tentative Rulings Department Other - Tentative Rulings 2009 Superior Court of Shasta County Contact| Site Map| Jobs| ADA| Disclaimer Tentative Rulings of the Superior Court of California, County of San Mateo. 408.882.2296 (fax) INTRODUCTION 18 LOCO, LLC; W.K.S. Footnote 18: 19 First The Court now issues its tentative ruling as 21 follows: 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. 23 I. JOHNATHAN E. LOOPER V. SKANSKA USA INC., ET AL. BRIAN PETERS V. RFI ENTERPRISES, INC., ET AL. The Court now issues its tentative ruling as 27 follows: 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. Background However, this tentative ruling information is usually taken down from the court's website after several days or weeks. 8 CASE NO. Probate Tentative Rulings. Any party desiring to be heard, must call the Law and Motion Oral Argument Request Line All Tentative Rulings may be accessed below. Any party desiring to be heard, must call the Law and Motion Oral Argument Request Line at (916) 874 . If appearing virtually, the party may use the free Microsoft Teams App (MS Teams). Factual and Procedural Background 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. Before the Court is Plaintiffs motion for approval of a settlement, which is unopposed. According to the allegations of the operative first amended complaint (FAC), Plaintiff and Defendant were coworkers at East Side Union High Schoo Motion to Compel Arbitration BBBB BONDING CORPORATION V. ASHLEY PILLING-MILLER, ET AL. Department D. Vacant-Assigned Judge. JOHNSON V. DRILL TECH DRILLING & SHORING, INC. BONNIE KESSNER, ET AL. If no party has requested oral argument, appearances are not required and the tentative ruling will be adopted as the ruling of the Court. (See Fourth First On this page, you will find every civil tentative ruling from Santa Clara County Superior. CASE NO. See Rules 3.1308(a)(1) and 3.1312, California Rules of Court. The above-entitled action comes on for hearing before the Honorable Thomas E. Kuhnle 21 on September 14, 2018, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 5. INTRODUCTION This is an action for wrongful termination/constructive di -6 ABRAHAM OSEGUERA, ET AL. 12 FRANKLIN AMOG, as an individual and on behalf of all others similarly situated, 13 TENTATIVE RULING RE: MOTION Plaintiff, FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF 14 CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT vs. will be able to access it on trellis. SHAREHOLDER LITIGATION (CONSOLIDATED ACTION) (FORMERLY GREENBERG V. MCAFEE), SAN FRANCISCO PIZZA, INC., ET AL. FORREST HUFF V. SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES USA, INC., ET AL. 16 SERVICES USA CORPORATION, a Delaware 2023 Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara, Small Claims Online Dispute Resolution (ODR), and the name of the attorney, including phone number and area code. (First Amended Complaint (FAC), 17.) Notice of non-opposition filed. LEEDEMAN V. SUNRISE CREDIT SERVICES, INC. These consolidated actions arise out of an April 17, 2015 incident in which a motor vehicle driven by Defendant Sima Hariran struck and injured Plaintiff Stephen Weekly (and others) as he was exiting a Trader Joes store located at 22310 Homestead Road, Los Altos, California. vs. DATE: 15 April 2021 TIME: 9:00 am LINE NUMBE . If you were scheduled for a court appearance during the COVID-19 Pandemic, and your hearing did not take place, please continue to check this system for updates on your new court appearance date. 24 KHAN V. ARENA HOTEL INVESTMENTS, INC., ET AL. Messages shall be brief, no longer than 30 seconds. the ruling of the court, unless a party desiring to be heard so advises the department make a tentative ruling on the merits of this matter by 2:00 p.m., the court day v. The Ranch Golf Club, et al. Department 53: 916-874-7858. LEE WEBSTER V. PLATINUM PARKING MANAGEMENT, LLC, ET AL. CASE NO. 1 You may make your notification to the Court by leaving a message when prompted to do so at the end of the recorded greeting. INTRODUCTION II. You may make your notification to the Court by leaving a message when prompted to do so at the end of the recorded greeting. V. TASMAN DRIVE, LLC, ET AL. AND . JAMES MARSHALL V. PACIFIC SCIENTIFIC ENERGETIC MATERIALS COMPANY. ALYSHA ALAWI, A MINOR V. ST. TIMOTHYS LUTHERAN CHURCH, AMY PEDERSON, ET AL. The claims relate t . Currently before the Court is the demurrer by defendants Aenta, Inc., Aetna Life Insurance Company, and SAP America, Inc. (SAP America) (collectively, Defendants) to the first amended complaint (FAC) of plaintiff California Spine and Neurosurgery Institute (Plaintiff). (Brennon B. v. Superior Court of Contra Costa County (Cal. 50, inclusive, For information about getting help through the Self Help Center/Family Law Facilitators Office click here. () The court strongly advises that you save your tentative rulings for later use in preparing your order after hearing. WESTLAKE FLOORING COMPANY LLC V. FRIENDLY WHOLESALERS OF CAL. 1 This is a products liability, fraud, and medical malpractice case. RONALD BALANAG, ET AL. You may make your notification to the Court by leaving a message when prompted to do so at the end of the recorded greeting. Gloria Estillore (Plaintiff) brings this action against Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc., U.S. Bank N.A., as trustee on behalf of the holders of J.P. Morgan Alternative Loan Trust 2007-A2 mortgage pass through certificates, and Peter Carey (Defendants) for damages associated with wrongful foreclosure. Messages shall be brief, no longer than 30 seconds.