Construction and Subcontractor Contracts

Useful Rulings on Construction and Subcontractor Contracts

Recent Rulings on Construction and Subcontractor Contracts

1-25 of 10000 results

PRICE VS THE CITY OF ANAHEIM

There is a general rule against enjoining public officers or agencies from performing their duties. This rule would not preclude a court from enjoining unconstitutional or void acts, but to support a request for such relief the plaintiff must make a significant showing of irreparable injury.” (Tahoe Keys Property Owners' Assn., supra, 23 Cal.App.4th at 1471.)

  • Hearing

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY VS. SANTA ANA RV STORAGE, L.P.

On the other hand, CCP § 1263.320(a) provides that such a valuation includes a willing seller and willing buyer “each dealing with the other with full knowledge of all the uses and purposes for which the property is reasonably adaptable and available.” Here, the property in question is subject to a long-term lease. That lease undoubtedly is a characteristic/feature of the Property that a willing buyer would take into account in formulating a price for the Property.

  • Hearing

T-12 THREE, LLC VS. TURNER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

(Civil Code § 1559 [“A contract, made expressly for the benefit of a third person, may be enforced by him at any time before the parties thereto rescind it.” (Italics added)].) Accordingly, MaryJane’s contract-based claims fail as a matter of law.

  • Hearing

THE CITIES OF DUARTE VS STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD AND CITY OF GARDENA VS REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD

The Court has also again reviewed CCP § 1094.5 (the section invoked by Petitioners) regarding judgment on a writ. The relevant subsection is (f) which reads: (f) The court shall enter judgment either commanding respondent to set aside the order or decision, or denying the writ.

  • Hearing

VELAZQUEZ VS KIA MOTORS AMERICA INC.

Dennett and Adam A. Edwards The pro hac vice applications of Adam A. Edwards, Gregory Coleman, Jason T. Dennett, Kim D. Stephens, and Paul C. Peel do not address whether the applicants are: (1) regularly employed in the State of California or (2) regularly engaged in substantial business, professional, or other activities in the State of California. CRC, Rule 9.40(a)(2) and (3).

  • Hearing

PERSOLVE LEGAL GROUP, LLP VS LETICIA HERNANDEZ

(CRC 3.1800 (a)(2).) N/A Attorney fees if supported by contract, statute or law. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(9); Local R. 3.214; open book – CC 1717.5.) Yes _________ _ Interest computations. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(3); 10% for contracts - Civ. Code 3289.) Yes Memorandum of costs and disbursements. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(4); JC Form CIV-100 item 7.) Yes Declaration of nonmilitary status for each defendant. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(5); JC Form CIV-100 item 8.) Yes Proposed form of judgment. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(6).)

  • Hearing

MICHAEL PHAM, BY AND THROUGH HIS GUARDIAN AD LITEM, JOSEPH PHAM, ET AL. VS SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, ET AL.

The Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings will not be heard on this date in Department 28. No further hearings will be heard in Department 28, Spring Street Courthouse, as of 11/13/20. See below.AFTER REVIEW OF THE COURT FILE, THE COURT MAKES THE FOLLOWING ORDER: Department 28 of the Personal Injury Court has determined that the above entitled actio...

  • Hearing

CEMEX USA, INC. VS ATILANO, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

(CRC 3.1800 (a)(2). Yes Attorney fees if supported by contract, statute or law. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(9); Local R. 3.214; open book – CC 1717.5.) Yes_________ _ Interest computations. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(3); 10% for contracts - Civ. Code 3289.) Yes Memorandum of costs and disbursements. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(4); JC Form CIV-100 item 7.) Yes Declaration of nonmilitary status for each defendant. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(5); JC Form CIV-100 item 8.) Yes Proposed form of judgment. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(6).)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

717 NOGALES, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS NEW DIAMOND TRUCKING, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION AND, ET AL.

(CRC 3.1800 (a)(2).) Yes Attorney fees if supported by contract, statute or law. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(9); Local R. 3.214; open book – CC 1717.5.) N/A _________ _ Interest computations. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(3); 10% for contracts - Civ. Code 3289.) Yes Memorandum of costs and disbursements. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(4); JC Form CIV-100 item 7.) Yes Declaration of nonmilitary status for each defendant. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(5); JC Form CIV-100 item 8.) Yes Proposed form of judgment. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(6).)

  • Hearing

MARK LIU VS XUEFAN LIU

(CRC 3.1800 (a)(2).) N/A Attorney fees if supported by contract, statute or law. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(9); Local R. 3.214; open book – CC 1717.5.) Yes _________ Interest computations. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(3); 10% for contracts - Civ. Code 3289.) Yes Memorandum of costs and disbursements. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(4); JC Form CIV-100 item 7.) Yes Declaration of nonmilitary status for each defendant. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(5); JC Form CIV-100 item 8.) Yes Proposed form of judgment. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(6).)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

MICHAEL PHAM, BY AND THROUGH HIS GUARDIAN AD LITEM, JOSEPH PHAM, ET AL. VS SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, ET AL.

The Motion for Summary Judgment will not be heard on this date in Department 28. No further hearings will be heard in Department 28, Spring Street Courthouse, as of 11/13/20. See below.AFTER REVIEW OF THE COURT FILE, THE COURT MAKES THE FOLLOWING ORDER: Department 28 of the Personal Injury Court has determined that the above entitled action is comp...

  • Hearing

PRIME STAFF INC VS PARTNERSHIP STAFFING SOLUTIONS LLC

Plaintiff filed a statement of damages (§ 425.11) before a default judgment was entered against defendant for $24,040,272 damages. The Court of Appeal held CCP 580 limited the trial court's jurisdiction and that the default judgment could not exceed the amount demanded in the complaint. “[C]ourts have subjected section 580 to a ‘strict construction.’ [Citation.] Strictly construed, serving a statement of damages cannot satisfy section 580 in an action not involving personal injury or wrongful death.”

  • Hearing

AVITUS INC. VS ANDIAMO MANAGEMENT COMPANY, A CORPORATION, ET AL.

(CRC 3.1800 (a)(2).) Yes Attorney fees if supported by contract, statute or law. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(9); Local R. 3.214; open book – CC 1717.5.) Yes _________ _ Interest computations. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(3); 10% for contracts - Civ. Code 3289.) Yes Memorandum of costs and disbursements. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(4); JC Form CIV-100 item 7.) Yes Declaration of nonmilitary status for each defendant. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(5); JC Form CIV-100 item 8.) Yes Proposed form of judgment. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(6).)

  • Hearing

HASMIK KANATARYAN, ET AL. VS CHARLENE SARSTEDT, ET AL.

No further hearings are in Dept. 28, Spring StreetAFTER REVIEW OF THE COURT FILE, THE COURT MAKES THE FOLLOWING ORDER:Department 28 of the Personal Injury Court has determined that the above entitled action is complicated based upon the number of pretrial hearings and/or the complexity of the issues presented.AT THE DIRECTION OF DEPARTMENT 1:This case is hereby transferred and reassigned to the following Independent Calendar Court in THE NORTH CENTRAL DISTRICT, JUDGE CURTIS A. KIN presiding in DEPT.

  • Hearing

GRDSHP OF SCOTT

Do one or the other, but not both: (1) Have a copy of the Notice of Hearing and Petition Form GC-210 served by mail on maternal grandparents and sibling, and file Proof of Service or have each person sign a consent and waiver form (GC-211); OR (2) If a person cannot be found, submit a declaration (GC-02) explaining what efforts have been made to find that person. CRC 7.52 3. File a verified declaration to include Addendum to UCCJEA Form GC-120, not attached as indicated 4.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

HAI YING RUAN, ET AL. VS CUONG THOAI DIEP, ET AL.

A demurrer tests the pleadings alone and not the evidence or other extrinsic matters. Therefore, it lies only where the defects appear on the face of the pleading or are judicially noticed.” (SKF Farms v. Superior Court (1984) 153 Cal.App.3d 902, 905.) “The only issue involved in a demurrer hearing is whether the complaint, as it stands, unconnected with extraneous matters, states a cause of action.” (Hahn, supra, 147 Cal.App.4th at 747.)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

RE: FIRST AND FINAL REPORT OF CO-EXECUTORS ON WAIVER OF ACCOUNT

SILVERMAN PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Petition Approved Proposed Order Submitted No Appearance Required CASSANDRA L GREEN JOHN A MANGINI ETHEL L. SMITH PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION SHARON L. ANDERSON PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Moving paper is in Vol. 1 Need appearances to report status, including 9-1-2020 order to meet and confer Note: Objection filed by John Martini, Richard Martini and David Martini 10-15-2019.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

PETITION OF TRAVEON C GAINS

Per 12-10-19 minute order, court ordered a Petition for Final Distribution to be filed and calendared for 2-25-20.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

RE: PET’N TO COMPEL TIMOTHY MARTINI TO ACCT; RPT ACTS COMPEL

Please fax a copy to Probate Examiners as a courtesy to the court. ITALO FERRANDO TINA FERRANDO GRAHAM ELIZABETH E TRUTNER PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Petition Approved Proposed Order Submitted No Appearance Required AUDREY CELESTINE CAESAR YERDUA CAESAR-KAPTOECH JILL BATES-MOORE

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

RE: FIRST STATUS REPORT OF THE EXECUTOR'S ADMINISTRATION

PrC § 215, 9202(a); i.e., did predeceased spouse receive Medi-Cal benefits? 4. Compliance with CRC 7.250 regarding any acts taken under IAEA w/notice of proposed action. (Specifics needed including date was given and date action was taken) 5. Verified declaration by petitioner to include date of each receipt, and itemized expenses re: sale of real property. Reference to closing statement is insufficient. PrC §§ 1062(a) and (b) 6.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

RE: PET’N FOR CONSTRUCTION OF TRUST INSTRUMENT & CONFIRMATION

FILED ON 06/22/20 BY PAUL A. JOHNSON PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need appearances Note: Per 10-20-2020 minute order, court ordered responses to be filed by 11-13-2020; replies by 11-30-2020. None has been filed. PAUL A. JOHNSON MATTHEW S TOTH THE ARTHUS E. IRMA S. JOHNSON PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Unable to review. File is unavailable at this time. Need: 1.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

RE: PET’N FOR COMPENSATION

File a verified declaration to specify plan of distribution, including approximate amount of cash and number of shares of each security to be distributed to each beneficiary. LR 7.307(a) 3. Submit a proposed Order LIESL RITTS MATTHEW RITTS ROSEMARIE RITTS PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Rasilio Surio, husband, still must do the following: 1. Have a copy of the Citation Form GC-320 personally served on conservatee.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

PETITION OF CHE ANDREA TRAVERS

RE: OSC RE: NAME CHANGE FILED BY CHE' TRAVERS PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Che Travers still must do the following: File a Proof of Publication of Order to Show Cause For Change of Name CHE ANDREA TRAVERS PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Meiasha Davis, mother, still must do the following: Have a copy of the Order to Show Cause personally served on each father and file a Proof of Service with the court or file a verified declaration

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE

CRANDELL SHEILA CRANDELL KONSTANTINE A DEMIRIS

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

FALISHA PORTER VS PHARMAVITE, LLC

What if she was asked to be a witness in a claim against another co-employee? The court can envision many situations which are unrelated to issues of her damages in this case and her representations to this employer upon which it relied in hiring her. Further discussion is required.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 400     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we load this page.