What are judicial and non-judicial forfeiture?

Useful Rulings on Judicial and Non-Judicial Forfeiture

Recent Rulings on Judicial and Non-Judicial Forfeiture

1-25 of 10000 results

PRICE VS THE CITY OF ANAHEIM

As a preliminary matter, the Court GRANTS the Plaintiffs’ and the City’s requests for judicial notice; OVERRULES Plaintiffs’ objections to the Engstrom Declaration; and SUSTAINS objection nos. 1, 5, 7 and 9 to the Belmar Declaration and OVERRULES all remaining objections. GENERAL LAW A party seeking a preliminary injunction must show an imminent threat of irreparable harm should the preliminary injunction not issue. (Korean Philadelphia Presbyterian Church v.

  • Hearing

PERSOLVE LEGAL GROUP, LLP VS LETICIA HERNANDEZ

Yes Mandatory Judicial Council Form CIV-100/Form CIV-105. (CRC 3.1800(a).) Yes Relief sought is within amount of prayer of complaint or statement of damages. (Due Process; Greenup v. Rodman (1986) 42 Cal.3d 822, 824 No Summary of the case. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(1).) Yes Declarations in support of the judgment. (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.

  • Hearing

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

Yes Mandatory Judicial Council Form CIV-100. (CRC 3.1800(a).) Yes Relief sought is within amount of prayer of complaint or statement of damages. (Due Process; Greenup v. Rodman (1986) 42 Cal.3d 822, 824.) Yes Summary of the case. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(1).) Yes Declarations in support of the judgment. (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.

  • 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.

Yes Mandatory Judicial Council Form CIV-100. (CRC 3.1800(a).) Yes Relief sought is within amount of prayer of complaint or statement of damages. (Due Process; Greenup v. Rodman (1986) 42 Cal.3d 822, 824. N/A--UD Summary of the case. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(1).) Yes Declarations in support of the judgment. (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.

  • Hearing

MARK LIU VS XUEFAN LIU

Yes Mandatory Judicial Council Form CIV-100. (CRC 3.1800(a).) Yes Relief sought is within amount of prayer of complaint or statement of damages. (Due Process; Greenup v. Rodman (1986) 42 Cal.3d 822, 824.) Yes Summary of the case. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(1).) Yes Declarations in support of the judgment. (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.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

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

Yes Mandatory Judicial Council Form CIV-100. (CRC 3.1800(a).) Yes Relief sought is within amount of prayer of complaint or statement of damages. (Due Process; Greenup v. Rodman (1986) 42 Cal.3d 822, 824.) Yes Summary of the case. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(1).) Yes Declarations in support of the judgment. (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.

  • Hearing

GRDSHP OF SCOTT

Proposed Order on Judicial Council Form GC-224 that contains specific, non- conclusory findings and the basis for each finding; factual basis must specifically state grounds of abuse, neglect and/or abandonment. Order must contain findings that (1) reunification with ward’s parents is not viable; and, (2) it is not in the ward’s best interest to return to his country of origin or last habitual residence and the reason for not returning.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

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

In a demurrer proceeding, the defects must be apparent on the face of the pleading or via proper judicial notice. (Donabedian v. Mercury Ins. Co. (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 968, 994.) “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.)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

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

Waiver of Bond by Heir or Beneficiary on mandatory Judicial Council Form DE-142 by trustee of trust. PrC § 8481 5. Lodge Original Will (w/legal process). PrC § 8200 6. Evidence to overcome presumption of revocation by the fact that the original cannot be located. PrC § 6124 7. Proof of mailing notice that will is lost. PrC § 1202 8. Proof of Subscribing Witness Form DE-131. PrC § 8220. 9.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

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

Capacity Declaration (Judicial Council Form GC-335) to show whether proposed conservatee lacks capacity to give informed medical consent. PrC § 1890 2. Order Appointing Probate Conservator Form GC-340 (adopted 1-15-16) The Court is waiting for these items: 1. Court Investigator’s Report 2. Leland Snow to appear or doctor’s declaration stating inability to appear or waiver by counsel 3. Report of Atty.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

RE: PET’N FOR COMPENSATION

Summary of Account on mandatory Judicial Council Form GC-400/GC-405 9. Verified declaration by petitioner to specify payee of unknown disbursements of $20,738.35. 10. Verified declaration by petitioner to clarify payment to Lake County for property tax. Accounting does not include real property located in Lake County. 11. Summary of Account that complies with PrC § 1061(b).

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

CHANGLIANG DAI VS THOMAS CHEN, ET AL.

Yes Mandatory Judicial Council Form CIV-100. (CRC 3.1800(a).) Yes Relief sought is within amount of prayer of complaint or statement of damages. (Due Process; Greenup v. Rodman (1986) 42 Cal.3d 822, 824.) Yes Summary of the case. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(1).) Yes Declarations in support of the judgment. (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.) N/A __ _______ Interest computations.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

MATTER OF THE YOUNG REVOCABLE TRUST

Have a Judicial Council Form Notice of Hearing and copy of petition mailed to all persons entitled to receive notice and file a Proof of Service with court. 3. Submit Order Terminating Guardianship Form GC-260 The Court is waiting for these items: Response from guardian Note: Letters of Guardianship issued to maternal grandfather, Paul E. McCants, Sr. 7-22- 2020.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

CONSERVATORSHIP OF LOUIS SMITS

Determination of Conservatee’s Appropriate Level of Care filed on mandatory Judicial Council Form GC-355. PrC § 2352.5 (due within 60 days of appointment) 8. Proof of mailing Order and Notice of Conservatee’s Rights (due within 30 days of issuance of Order) PrC § 1830(c) 9. Proposed Order Note: Court will re-review bond calculation upon receipt of corrected accounting. LYNN A MEISCH JENNIFER E McGUIRE RICHARD A. MEISCH JONATHAN T.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

ESTATE OF JAMES EDWARD WILLIAMS

Waiver of Bond by Heir or Beneficiary on mandatory Judicial Council Form DE-142. PrC § 8481 or bond in the amount of $570,000 2. Order for Probate DE-140 IRMA J WILLIAMS KATHLEEN A HUNT JAMES EDWARD WILLIAMS PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need: 1. Order for Probate DE-140 ANDREW W EVANS ANN HARDING BATTIN WALLACE RAY EVANS

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    Fenstermacher

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

RE: PET’N FOR LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION, NO WILL, IAEA

Proof of mailing Judicial Council Form Notice of Hearing to all persons entitled to receive notice 5. Proposed Order BEVERLY BALAGTAS RODRIGUEZ EDWARD W SUMAN ESTER CRUZ CRUZ HENRY DE GUZMAN CRUZ EDWARD W SUMAN MAXIMINA CASTILLO YOLANDA CRUZ CAYABYAB EDWARD W SUMAN BEVERLY BALAGTAS RODRIGUEZ PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Superseded by Line # 29.A.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

JANE DOE VS ALBERT GANJIAN, ET AL.

Judicial Assistant is directed to give notice to Plaintiff, who upon receipt of this notice, is ordered to give notice to all parties of record.

  • Hearing

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC VS NEW CENTURY MORTGAGE CORPORATION, A CALIFORNIA COR~ORATION

Yes Mandatory Judicial Council Form CIV-100. (CRC 3.1800(a).) Yes Relief sought is within amount of prayer of complaint or statement of damages. (Due Process; Greenup v. Rodman (1986) 42 Cal.3d 822, 824.) No Summary of the case. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(1).) Yes Declarations in support of the judgment. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(2).) N/A Attorney fees if supported by contract, statute or law. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(9); Local R. 3.2; open book – CC 1717.5.) N/A ______ Interest computations.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

LUZ BELTRAN, ET AL. VS NICHOLAS SCHWARTZ, ET AL.

Yes Mandatory Judicial Council Form CIV-100. (CRC 3.1800(a).) Yes Relief sought is within amount of prayer of complaint or statement of damages. (Due Process; Greenup v. Rodman (1986) 42 Cal.3d 822, 824.) Yes Summary of the case. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(1).) Yes Declarations in support of the judgment. (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.) N/A___________ Interest computations.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

VANESSA MARIE SORENSEN VS UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., A CORPORATION, ET AL.

Judicial Assistant is directed to give notice to Plaintiff, who upon receipt of this notice, is ordered to give notice to all parties of record.

  • Hearing

RE: 1ST & FNL RPT OF ADMNTR, PET’N FOR ITS SETTLEMENT, FNL DIST

Have a Judicial Council Form Notice of Hearing and copy of petition mailed to all persons entitled to receive notice, except guardian who has responded, and file a Proof of Service with court. Notes: 1. Letters of Guardianship issued to family friend Jeti Hanna 10-10-14. 2. Objection filed by guardian 9-30-19.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

CONS OF NIKHIL KULKARNI

Have a Judicial Council Form Notice of Hearing and copy of petition mailed to all persons entitled to receive notice and file a Proof of Service with court. The Court is still waiting for: Report of court-appointed counsel Oliver Greenwood Notes: 1. Letters of Guardianship issued to great-grandparents Guadalupe and Arnoldo Ruiz 10-29-08. 2.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    Fenstermacher

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

JASON STANDIFORD VS CALIFORNIA SPECIALTY INSULATION, INC.

Defendant seeks a judicial determination that Allied has a duty to defend and indemnify Defendant. Now, Alied demurs to Defendant’s cross-complaint. The demurrer is sustained without leave to amend. LEGAL STANDARD “It is black letter law that a demurrer tests the legal sufficiency of the allegations in a complaint.” (Lewis v. Safeway, Inc. (2015) 235 Cal.App.4th 385, 388.) In ruling on a demurrer, the court must “liberally construe[]” the allegations of the complaint. (Code Civ. Proc., § 452.)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

FUNDATION GROUP LLC VS BINH NGUYEN, ET AL.

Yes Mandatory Judicial Council Form CIV-100. (CRC 3.1800(a).) Yes Relief sought is within amount of prayer of complaint or statement of damages. (Due Process; Greenup v. Rodman (1986) 42 Cal.3d 822, 824.) No Summary of the case. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(1).) Yes Declarations in support of the judgment. (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.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Collections

  • Sub Type

    Promisory Note

ADRIAN MADDEN VS GURUCUL SOLUTIONS, LLC

Request for Judicial Notice Defendant requests that the Court take judicial notice of the FAC. The Court DENIES Defendant’s request as superfluous. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1110(d).) Any party that wishes to draw the Court’s attention to a matter filed in this action may simply cite directly to the document by execution and filing date. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1110(d). B.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

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.