Civil Bench Warrant - Failure to Comply

Useful Rulings on Civil Bench Warrant - Failure to Comply

Recent Rulings on Civil Bench Warrant - Failure to Comply

151-175 of 10000 results

EDEN DEVELOPMENT & CONSULTING INC VS MELISSA SANFORD ET AL

Based on the foregoing, the motion to be relieved is GRANTED. Counsel is not relieved as attorney of record until a proof of service is filed with this Court evidencing that the Order granting the motion to be relieved was served on the client, Eden Development & Consulting, Inc. Counsel must give notice of the scheduled OSC hearing to the client and all parties. The parties are strongly encouraged to attend all scheduled hearings virtually or by audio.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

WEI SI VS ALAN MENG TANG, ET AL.

LEGAL STANDARD Any party, within the time allowed to respond to a pleading, may serve and file a motion to strike the whole pleading or any part thereof. (Code Civ. Proc., § 435, subd. (b)(1); Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1322, subd. (b).)

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

WALTER D SOBERANIS SOLORZANO VS ELIZABETH KOUTURES ET AL

AT THE DIRECTION OF DEPARTMENT 1: This case is hereby transferred and reassigned to the following Independent Calendar Court in THE WEST DISTRICT, JUDGE MARK H. EPSTEIN presiding in DEPT. R of the Santa Monica Courthouse, for all purposes except trial. Department 1 hereby delegates to the Independent Calendar Court the authority to assign the case for trial to that Independent Calendar Court.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

OTILIA MEZA VS MICHELLE FRANCO, ET AL.

Defendant attempted to meet and confer further with Plaintiff and requested verifications for the three sets of discovery. To date, Plaintiff has not served verified responses. Defendant therefore seeks an order compelling Plaintiff to respond, without objections, to the outstanding discovery and to pay sanctions. An unverified response is tantamount to no response at all. (Melendrez v. Superior Court (2013) 215 Cal.App.4th 1343, 1348.) Defendant’s motions to compel are granted.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

IN THE MATTER OF: HUMBERTO STANLEY GUTIERREZ

The Court requested the petitioner to resubmit a Criminal History Assessment Form. Petitioner failed to comply. IF YOU ACCEPT THE COURT’S TENTATIVE RULING, NO APPEARNCE IS NECESSARY. SHOULD YOU DESIRE TO APPEAR AND BE HEARD, YOU ARE STRONGLY ENCOURAGED NOT TO APPEAR IN PERSON ON THE DATE OF THE HEARING. You may make a remote appearance by LACourtConnect. To register, please visit: https://www.lacourt.org/lacc/. If you do not appear, the petition will be dismissed without prejudice and you may reapply.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

DELARA NASSERI VS CAROLINE ZEYTUNTSYAN

Therefore, the motions to compel are granted. Defendant seeks sanctions against Plaintiff and her counsel in the total amount of $1,716. The Court finds that Plaintiff’s failure to respond to discovery is an abuse of the discovery process, warranting sanctions. The Court finds that the requested amount is fair and reasonable under the circumstances.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

IGNAT STEPANENKO VS JOHN ROE DDS ET AL

After failing to appear, Defendant attempted to meet and confer with Plaintiff as to why Plaintiff failed to appear for the deposition and as to the instant motion.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

AMERICAN EXPRESS NATIONAL BANK VS EDWARD GARRICK

SUBJECT: (1) Motion to Vacate Dismissal and Enter Judgment Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 664.6 Moving Party: Plaintiff American Express National Bank Resp. Party: None Plaintiff’s motion to vacate dismissal and enter judgment pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6 is GRANTED.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

  • Type

    Collections

  • Sub Type

    Promisory Note

TIMOTHY FRANKLIN V. KENNETH FRANKLIN

At the hearing on the motion to quash, the Court ordered the parties to meet and confer and file a joint statement, and continued the hearing. The joint statement filed by the parties sets forth the agreements reached by the parties and states that the parties have resolved their current pending discovery disputes. The motion to quash is now moot. The Case Management Conference remains on calendar by Zoom on September 22, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

MERCURY INSURANCE COMPANY VS JOSE RODRIGUEZ

Plaintiff’s attorney declares that he mistakenly believed a global settlement had been reached and dismissed this action prior to receiving Defendant’s first payment check. (Motion, Nivinskus Decl., ¶¶2-3 and Exh. 1.) Defense counsel has not responded to Plaintiff’s counsel’s efforts to resolve the issue. (Id. at ¶4 and Exh. 2.) Plaintiff, therefore, seeks to reinstate the case in order to continue its prosecution against Defendant.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

MARISOL GARCIA ET AL VS WEBER DISTRIBUTION LLC ET AL

Department 1 hereby delegates to the Independent Calendar Court the authority to assign the case for trial to itself, if it so chooses.Any pending motions or hearings, including trial and status conferences, will be reset, continued or vacated at the direction of the newly assigned Independent Calendar court.PLAINTIFF SHALL GIVE NOTICE TO ALL PARTIES OF RECORD.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

A misuse of the discovery process includes a failureto respond or to submit to an authorized method of discovery.” (Id.)

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

MERCURY INSURANCE COMPANY VS VIRGINIA SUMUANO PEREZ, ET AL.

The demurring party is required to meet and confer in person or telephonically at least five days before the responsive pleading is due. (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.41, subd. (a).) The Demurrers are not accompanied by declarations demonstrating any meet and confer effort. Second, the Demurrers are brought on the basis of failure to allege facts in support of a cause of action (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subd. (e)) and uncertainty (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.10, subd. (f)).

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

HAGOP OGANIAN VS ZABEL OGANIAN

.: BC689855 Hearing Date: September 22, 2020 [TENTATIVE] order RE: demurrer to first amended complaint NOTICE Judge Goorvitch was sworn-in as a Superior Court Judge on December 15, 2015. Prior to that time, Judge Goorvitch made the following campaign contributions to Michael N. Feuer: (1) $100 to Mr. Feuer’s 2008 campaign for the 42nd Assembly District on or about November 9, 2007; (2) $100 to Mr. Feuer’s 2010 campaign for the 42nd Assembly District on or about October 19, 2010; and (3) $100 to Mr.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

ANNA RIZHAVSKAYA VS AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR COMPANY, INC.

AHM fails to rebut this argument and legal authority in their reply. AHM’s arguments regarding Plaintiff’s failure to identify a dealership/agent is unpersuasive in that Plaintiff has alleged that the failure to disclose the defects in the Infotainment System is attributed to AHM as a manufacturer/distributor of the vehicle. (Compl. ¿1.) The failure to identify a dealer, therefore, would be of no consequence.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

KAREN PELLE V. MALIKA BK SINGH

Moreover, it is unclear to the Court whether Defendant has or intends to comply with certain of the discovery requests pertaining to the production of the jewelry at issue. The parties should come to the hearing prepared to discuss this issue. If Defendant does not appear at the hearing, the Court will entertain an appropriate motion for terminating sanctions from Plaintiff. Plaintiff’s motion will be denied without prejudice.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

IN THE MATTER OF: FREDDY GUILLERMO LOPEZ RIVAS

GRANT The Court intends to GRANT the Petition. PLEASE DO NOT APPEAR IN PERSON ON THE DATE OF THE HEARING. NO APPEARANCE IS NECESSARY. To obtain a Certified Copy of your Name Change Decree, please send a request with the required fee to Attn: Certification Unit, Los Angeles Superior Court, 111 North Hill Street, Room 112C, Los Angeles, CA 90012. Please include your name and Case Number on your request. The Court’s schedule of fees can be viewed at: https://www.lacourt.org/forms/Fees/

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

PNRW, LLC., A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, VS TROON, INC, ET AL.

failed to cooperate with counsel to respond to discovery and has become unresponsive; (6) Shamoeil has refused to sign a substitution of attorney form and has not returned phone calls; and (7) the attorney-client relationship has been damaged beyond repair.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

HAYK MELKUMYAN VS. ELMER A. DIAZ, ET AL

Discussion Plaintiff argues that there is no triable issue of material facts as to the contract-based and tort-based claims. In summary on the contract-based claims, Plaintiff provides evidence as to the parties’ entry into the note, Defendant’s breach in failing to repay, Plaintiff’s performance in funding the loan and Plaintiff’s damages.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

DANIEL MCCULLOUGH VS CITY OF LOS ANGELES, A PUBLIC ENTITY, ET AL.

.: 18STCV09107 Hearing Date: September 22, 2020 [Tentative] order RE: MOTION TO CONTEST APPLICATION FOR DETERMINATION OF GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT NOTICE Judge Goorvitch was sworn-in as a Superior Court Judge on December 15, 2015. Prior to that time, Judge Goorvitch made the following campaign contributions to Michael N. Feuer: (1) $100 to Mr. Feuer’s 2008 campaign for the 42nd Assembly District on or about November 9, 2007; (2) $100 to Mr.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

THEODORA PARNAVELAS, ET AL. VS KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC

Finally, although not relevant to the venue analysis, Plaintiffs’ own residence is in Orange County. There are no ties to Los Angeles County. Plaintiffs’ sole argument- that Los Angeles is the proper venue because Plaintiffs frequently drove to Los Angeles (without any legal authority)- is frivolous on its face. The motion is granted. II.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

MICHAEL MOLAYEM VS UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ET AL.

Plaintiff argues that Defendant Sajumon is subject to jurisdiction in California because he picked up Plaintiff and drove her to the airport, knowing that she was flying back to California. This does not constitute sufficient minimum contacts with the State of California. Plaintiff has no credible argument with respect to Defendant Lopez. Therefore, the motion is granted. CONCLUSION AND ORDER Defendants’ motions to quash service of the summons and complaint are granted.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

FRANCISCO VALDEZ VS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, ET AL.

AT THE DIRECTION OF DEPARTMENT 1: This case is hereby transferred and reassigned to the following Independent Calendar Court in THE CENTRAL DISTRICT, JUDGE JOHN DOYLE presiding in DEPT. 58 of the Stanley Mosk Courthouse, for all purposes except trial. Department 1 hereby delegates to the Independent Calendar Court the authority to assign the case for trial to that Independent Calendar Court.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

TAULER SMITH LLP VS JOSEPH VALERIO, ET AL.

On August 31, 2020, the Court denied the Motion to Reclassify. Defendants filed an opposition to the Motion to Compel Further on September 8, 2020. Discussion Notice of the motion to compel further must be given “within 45 days of service of the verified response, or any supplemental verified response, or any specific later date to which the requesting party and the responding party have agreed in writing,” otherwise, the propounding party waives any right to compel a further response. (Code Civ.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

AMERICAN CONTRACTORS INDEMNITY COMPANY, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION VS MICHAEL JAMES PORTEOUS

AT LEAST 16 COURT DAYS PRIOR TO THE NEW HEARING DATE DEFENDANT IS TO FILE AND SERVE A SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION ATTACHING A COPY OF THE PROPOSED RESPONSE TO THE COMPLAINT. FAILURE TO DO SO MAY RESULT IN THE MOTION TO VACATE BEING DENIED OR PLACED OFF CALENDAR. Motion to Quash Service of the Summons and Complaint When a motion to quash is brought concurrently with a motion to vacate default, the court must rule on the motion to vacate first. (Steven M.

  • Hearing

    Sep 22, 2020

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

  « first    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 gather your results.