How to Get Admitted Pro Hac Vice

Useful Rulings on Application to be Admitted Pro Hac Vice

Recent Rulings on Application to be Admitted Pro Hac Vice

VELAZQUEZ VS KIA MOTORS AMERICA INC.

Plaintiff Francisco Velazquez’s Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice as to Kim D. Stephens, Gregory F. Coleman, Paul C. Peel, Jason T. 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

    Jun 20, 2021

JAMES WILLIAM TENEROWICZ VS ERROL SPIRO, ET AL.

PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION (filed 8/31/2020) Application of Amelia H. Marquis for pro hac vice admission The unopposed application of Amelia H. Marquis to appear as counsel pro hac vice for defendants is GRANTED. The court finds that the application meets the requirements of Calif. Rules of Court 9.40. The court intends to sign and file the proposed order lodged with the moving papers. Notice of ruling by moving party.

  • Hearing

    Sep 29, 2020

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

EDITH ANNE PETRUCCI ET AL VS 7 ELEVEN DISTRIBUTION COMPANY

.: BC695450 Hearing Date: September 25, 2020 [TENTATIVE] order RE: APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER PERMITTING caitlin martini mika AS COUNSEL PRO HAC VICE Caitlin Martini Mika (“Mika”) applies as counsel pro hac vice for Defendants Nu Mark LLC and 7-Eleven Distribution Company. Her application is unopposed.

  • Hearing

    Sep 25, 2020

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

PITRE VS. WAL-MART STORES, INC.

Roth to Appear as Counsel Pro Hac Vice The unopposed application of Jacob M. Roth for pro hac vice admission is GRANTED. The application complies with the requirements of CRC 9.40.

  • Hearing

    Sep 25, 2020

BIRD RIDES INC VS TALON AUTO ADJUSTERS

TENTATIVE RULING: The UNOPPOSED Application for Admission Pro Hac Vice of JEFFREY LANDIS is GRANTED.

  • Hearing

    Sep 24, 2020

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

O'CONNOR VS AIMCO SUNSET ESCONDIDO LLC

Ellenbecker pro hac vice is conditionally granted. See Cal. R. Ct. 9.40. Movant's application is granted subject to Movant filing by the hearing date: (1) proof of service by mail in accordance with California Code of Civil Procedure § 1013a of a copy of the application and of the notice of hearing of the application on the State Bar of California at its San Francisco office; and (2) evidence that Mr. Ellenbecker paid the State Bar of California the requisite fee with his application. See Cal. R.

  • Hearing

    Sep 24, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

VARUNA ENTERTAINMENT, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL. VS PREMA BALL, ET AL.

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE Justin P. Bagdady (“Movant”) applies to the Court for admission pro hac vice to appear in this action on behalf of Plaintiffs Varuna Entertainment, Inc. and Ali Bazzy (jointly, “Plaintiffs”). The application is submitted with a declaration by Movant made under penalty of perjury. The application is unopposed.

  • Hearing

    Sep 24, 2020

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

DANIEL CASTELLON VS VICTORIA'S SECRET STORES, LLC

F-47 Date: 9/23/20 Case #19CHCV00792 APPLICATION TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE Application filed on 3/5/20. MOVING PARTY: Defendant Victoria Secret Store, LLC RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff Daniel Castrellon NOTICE: The application was served on Plaintiff at his address of record without the apartment number (i.e., #6).

  • Hearing

    Sep 23, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

CENTENNIAL REAL ESTATE ACQUISITION, LLC, A TEXAS LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS EYE MALL MEDIA (USA) LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

Shaftel to Appear as Counsel Pro Hac Vice OPPOSITION: None filed as of September 18, 2020 REPLY: No opposition filed TENTATIVE: Defendant’s Application for Hal S. Shaftel to Appear as Counsel Pro Hac Vice is GRANTED. Defendant is to give notice. Hal S. Shaftel now applies to appear as counsel pro hac vice for Defendant. The application is unopposed. CLIENT: Defendant, Eye Mall Media (USA), LLC PROOF OF SERVICE: OK CONDITIONS: 1.

  • Hearing

    Sep 23, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

IDUVINA ARTEAGA VS 1 THROUGH 100 DOES

Powers seek to be admitted before the Court pro hac vice, in order to represent Defendant Conmed.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

BR MARKETING, INC. V. RUSKEY

Olona to Appear as Counsel Pro Hac Vice and Take Part in Case with Local Counsel Thomas A. Moore (Application), filed on 2-18-20 under ROA No. 541, is CONTINUED to 11-3-20 at 9:00 a.m. in Department C19. The Application has established that the Applicant (Richard C. Olona) meets the eligibility requirements of California Rules of Court, rule 9.40 (a), (b), and (d). (See Olona Decl. and Moore Decl.)

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

DAN OLEARY ET AL VS THE DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY

Stofko, Esq. to Be Admitted as Counsel Pro Hac Vice The court considered the moving papers. RULING The application is GRANTED. The court ORDERS that Christopher D. Stofko to appear as counsel pro hac vice for defendant The Sherwin-Williams Company. DISCUSSION Attorney Christopher D. Stofko requests leave to appear as counsel pro hac vice for defendant The Sherwin-Williams Company.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

ALVAREZ V. SANTOS, ET AL.

Motions: Applications for Pro Hac Vice – Mary Quinn Cooper and Andrew Richardson Tentative Ruling: To grant the applications of Mary Quinn Cooper and Andrew Richardson to appear as counsel pro hac vice. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 9.40.)

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Products Liability

COURTNEY SCHEUERMAN VS ELSA ZEVALLOS, ET AL.

CASE NO: 20STCV14499 [TENTATIVE] ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO PERMIT COUNSEL TO APPEAR PRO HAC VICE WITHOUT PREJUDICE Dept. 31 1:30 p.m. September 21, 2020 Plaintiff seeks an order permitting attorney Simeon Osborn to appear as counsel pro hac vice in this action. The applicant establishes that counsel is licensed in the State of Washington and is in good standing, and the applicant establishes that he does not regularly work or live in California.

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

U.S. BANK, N.A., AS SECURITIES INTERMEDIARY FOR VIVA CAPITAL 3 L.P, ET AL. VS ESTATE OF ROLAND GLEN HOEFER, BY ITS EXECUTOR, ROLAND J. HOEFE

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: (3) APPLICATIONS FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE Harry S. Davis applies to the Court for admission pro hac vice to appear in this action on behalf of Plaintiffs U.S. Bank N.A., as Securities Intermediary for Viva Capital 3 L.P., and Viva Capital 3 L.P. (jointly, “Plaintiffs”). The application is submitted with a declaration by Mr. Davis. The application is unopposed. Joseph M. Kelleher and Brian D.

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

MACDONALD VS GROUP 341, LLC

Moore to appear pro hac vice is granted.

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

JOANNE CAPRIOTTO, INDIVIDUALLY AS SURVIVING SPOUSE MICHAEL CAPRIOTTO, DECEASED, ET AL. VS ROBINSON HELICOPTER COMPANY, INCORPORATED, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

20STCV19549 JOANNE CAPRIOTTO vs ROBINSON HELICOPTER COMPANY Applications to Appear Pro Hac Vice TENTATIVE RULINGS: The applications of Andrew C. Robb, Anita Porte Robb, Brittany Sanders Robb, and Gary C. Robb to appear pro hac vice are GRANTED as the court finds counsel complied with the requirements of CRC 9.40. Moving parties to give notice.

  • Hearing

    Sep 21, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Products Liability

NGAMJIRAPHAK VS. CHOWDHURY

King to be admitted pro hac vice to represent plaintiffs Prince Ngamjiraphak and Amul Thakraal in this action are granted. The applicants have complied with CRC Rule 9.40. Plaintiffs are ordered to give notice of the ruling unless notice is waived.

  • Hearing

    Sep 18, 2020

GEORGE GOMEZ VS AXALTA COATING SYSTEMS, LLC, ET AL.

THREE APPLICATIONS FOR PRO HAC VICE ADMISSION The UNOPPOSED applications of Robert J. Flora, Esq., Monique M. Weiner, Esq., and Adriana M. Houlton, Esq. to appear as counsel pro hac vice in this action on behalf of defendant E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company are GRANTED. The Court finds that the applications comply with all requirements of Cal. Rule of Court 9.40 and that the applicants have provided sufficient proof of service on the State Bar and payment of the requisite fee.

  • Hearing

    Sep 18, 2020

ARANGO VS. SCHLUMBERGER TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION

The unrefuted failure of Defendant’s pro hac vice counsel to respond to Plaintiff’s counsel’s many efforts to contact him (February, March, May and July of 2020) is not acceptable. Among other things, this motion potentially could have been avoided if contact had been made.

  • Hearing

    Sep 18, 2020

JASON ALAN VS. AUSTIN CAPITAL BANK SSB

Per CRC 9.40(a), no person is eligible to appear as counsel pro hac vice under this rule if the person is: (1) A resident of the State of California; [Resident of Houston, TX; ¶1 of declaration.

  • Hearing

    Sep 17, 2020

F. KEWELL VS. T. KEWELL.

HEARING ON APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION PRO HAC VICE FILED BY PLAINTIFF * TENTATIVE RULING: * Craig Keller’s application to be admitted pro hac vice as counsel for plaintiff is granted.

  • Hearing

    Sep 16, 2020

MARIA L ARTEAGO VS AFSHIN FARZADMEHR ET AL

Visokey to appear as counsel Pro Hac Vice are continued to 9-22-20 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 28, Spring Street Courthouse.Department 28 is closed for motions on 9-14-20.

  • Hearing

    Sep 14, 2020

ASSEMI BROTHERS V. WONDERFUL PISTACHIOS AND ALMONDS

Motion: Plaintiffs’ Renewed Application to Appear as Counsel Pro Hac Vice Tentative Ruling: To grant the application for attorney John C. Richter to appear as counsel pro hac vice. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 9.40(c).)

  • Hearing

    Sep 14, 2020

PRICE V. NORTHERN TRUST CO.

Rake's unopposed Application to Appear Pro Hac Vice is granted as prayed. Mr. Rake is to submit a formal order that sets out verbatim the tentative ruling herein for all five matters and complies with California Rule of Court 3.1312 and is thereafter to prepare, file and serve notice of order. This is the Court's tentative ruling.

  • Hearing

    Sep 11, 2020

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 154     last » 

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

Please wait a moment while we load this page.