Civil Bench Warrant - Failure to Comply

Useful Rulings on Civil Bench Warrant - Failure to Comply

Recent Rulings on Civil Bench Warrant - Failure to Comply

201-225 of 10000 results

IN RE THE ROCKETT LIVING TRUST DTD. JANUARY 25, 2017

A very limited number of people will be allowed in Department J6 at one time to comply with safety protocols. Face coverings (masks, etc.) are required at all times to enter the courthouse and Department J6, and appropriate social distancing in the courtroom and inside the courthouse shall be maintained at all times. You are encouraged to bring your own face covering to Court if you intend to appear in person.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

  • Type

    Probate

  • Sub Type

    Trust

IN RE SHEILA VOIGT 2019 TRUST, EST 01/06/2020

A very limited number of people will be allowed in Department J6 at one time to comply with safety protocols. Face coverings (masks, etc.) are required at all times to enter the courthouse and Department J6, and appropriate social distancing in the courtroom and inside the courthouse shall be maintained at all times. You are encouraged to bring your own face covering to Court if you intend to appear in person.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

  • Type

    Probate

  • Sub Type

    Trust

IN RE THE PATRICIA A CURLEY FAMILY TRUST

Proposed Order to be lodged prior to hearing per Local Rule 10.00.D.1. __________________ The court discourages in-person appearances in Department J6 during the COVID-19 pandemic period. Appearances in Department J6 should be made by CourtCall (audio or video) whenever possible. A very limited number of people will be allowed in Department J6 at one time to comply with safety protocols.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

  • Type

    Probate

  • Sub Type

    Trust

IN THE MATTER OF HOLLY BETH YORK

(Probate Code 6401) Proposed Order to be lodged prior to hearing per Local Rule 10.00.D.1. __________________ The court discourages in-person appearances in Department J6 during the COVID-19 pandemic period. Appearances in Department J6 should be made by CourtCall (audio or video) whenever possible. A very limited number of people will be allowed in Department J6 at one time to comply with safety protocols.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

IN THE MATTER OF BRIAN ROCHELEAU

Continue for the foregoing issues to be resolved. ______________ The court discourages in-person appearances in Department J6 during the COVID-19 pandemic period. Appearances in Department J6 should be made by CourtCall (audio or video) whenever possible. A very limited number of people will be allowed in Department J6 at one time to comply with safety protocols.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

  • Type

    Probate

  • Sub Type

    Trust

IN RE THE JOY RANDOLPH COLLOM REVOCABLE TRUST DTD. JULY 11, 1996

A very limited number of people will be allowed in Department J6 at one time to comply with safety protocols. Face coverings (masks, etc.) are required at all times to enter the courthouse and Department J6, and appropriate social distancing in the courtroom and inside the courthouse shall be maintained at all times. You are encouraged to bring your own face covering to Court if you intend to appear in person.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

  • Type

    Probate

  • Sub Type

    Trust

IN RE THE MARTHA S. WHITE SURVIVOR'S TRUST

Provide Trustee with Information and to Compel Charles White to Comply with Court Order ***************** Staker disclosure.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

  • Type

    Probate

  • Sub Type

    Trust

IN RE THE REVOCABLE INTER VIVOS TRUST OF JOHN D. ELVIDGE

A very limited number of people will be allowed in Department J6 at one time to comply with safety protocols. Face coverings (masks, etc.) are required at all times to enter the courthouse and Department J6, and appropriate social distancing in the courtroom and inside the courthouse shall be maintained at all times. You are encouraged to bring your own face covering to Court if you intend to appear in person.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

  • Type

    Probate

  • Sub Type

    Trust

NUTRIEN AG SOLUTIONS INC. V. VALLEY FARM SUPPLY INC.

The matter is therefore continued to September 9, 2020 at 8:30 a.m. The briefing schedule to be calculated by the original hearing date of August 12, 2020. The Case Management Conference set for August 11, 2020 is continued to September 9, 2020 to be heard concurrently with the Application for Writ of Attachment.]

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

PANIAGUA V. BRILLANT GENERAL MAINTENANCE INC.

Nature of Proceedings: Motion: Belaire-West Protective Order As of July 30, 2020, this court has yet to receive service of an order assigning a coordination motion judge. (CRC, rule 3.524 (a).) Consequently, it is not clear whether this action will be stayed pending determination whether coordination is appropriate. (Code Civ. Proc., § 404.5.) Due to these uncertainties, the court intends to continue this motion to September 3, 2020, at 8:30 a.m.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

NUTRIEN AG SOLUTIONS INC. V. VALLEY FARM SUPPLY INC.

The matter is therefore continued to September 9, 2020 at 8:30 a.m. The briefing schedule to be calculated by the original hearing date of August 12, 2020. The Case Management Conference set for August 11, 2020 is continued to September 9, 2020 to be heard concurrently with the Application for Writ of Attachment.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

JOHN S ARCHER VS. AARON LEMAR JOHNSON

If you wish to obtain a copy of any orders issued by the court at the hearing, please contact the Records Dept. one week after the hearing at: (805) 289-8668. Absent waiver of notice and in the event an order is not signed at the hearing, the prevailing party shall prepare a proposed order and comply with CRC 3.1312 subdivisions (a), (b), (d) and (e). The signed order shall be served on all parties and a proof of service filed with the court.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

KAREN GROGAN VS. VONS

Please review and comply with the Court's "EMERGENCY ORDERS, GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURES" prior to any hearing: http://www.ventura.courts.ca.gov/ If you wish to submit on the court's tentative decision, please send an email to the court at: [email protected] Absent waiver of notice and in the event an order is not signed at the hearing, the prevailing party shall prepare a proposed order and comply with CRC 3.1312 subdivisions (a), (b), (d) and (e).

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

HILDA GUTIERREZ MORENO VS. MARTIN VARGAS MARES

If you wish to obtain a copy of any orders issued by the court at the hearing, please contact the Records Dept. one week after the hearing at: (805) 289-8668. Absent waiver of notice and in the event an order is not signed at the hearing, the prevailing party shall prepare a proposed order and comply with CRC 3.1312 subdivisions (a), (b), (d) and (e). The signed order shall be served on all parties and a proof of service filed with the court.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

VOITA VS SUNCOAST PRODUCE INC.

s Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set Three Defendant Suncoast Produce, Inc.'s Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set Three, is GRANTED. CCP § 2031.300. In light of Plaintiff's counsel's position that he never received the discovery at issue, the Court finds that objections have not been waived. Further, no responses to this set of discovery have been served.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

  • Type

    Insurance

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

C SHAWN SKILLERN MD VS. LI SHENG KONG MD

If you wish to obtain a copy of any orders issued by the court at the hearing, please contact the Records Dept. one week after the hearing at: (805) 289-8668. Absent waiver of notice and in the event an order is not signed at the hearing, the prevailing party shall prepare a proposed order and comply with CRC 3.1312 subdivisions (a), (b), (d) and (e). The signed order shall be served on all parties and a proof of service filed with the court.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

CLAUDIA BROCK VS. COUNTY OF VENTURA

The court sustains Defendant's demurrer to both causes of action. The court will discuss with counsel whether leave to amend should be granted. Plaintiff's prelitigation claim failed to comply substantially with all of the statutory requirements of Government Code § 910. Therefore, her Complaint, in light of judicially noticeable records and facts, fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. (CCP § 430.10(e).) Both causes of action are also uncertain and insufficiently specific.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

ISAAC GARZA VS. NATHAN MELTON

Please review and comply with the Court's "EMERGENCY ORDERS, GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURES" prior to any hearing: http://www.ventura.courts.ca.gov/ If you wish to submit on the court's tentative decision, please send an email to the court at: [email protected] Absent waiver of notice and in the event an order is not signed at the hearing, the prevailing party shall prepare a proposed order and comply with CRC 3.1312 subdivisions (a), (b), (d) and (e).

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

GALAXY INTERNATIONAL PURCHASING LLC VS. SARA KESTEN

Please review and comply with the Court's "EMERGENCY ORDERS, GUIDELINES AND PROCEDURES" prior to any hearing: http://www.ventura.courts.ca.gov/ If you wish to submit on the court's tentative decision, please send an email to the court at: [email protected] Absent waiver of notice and in the event an order is not signed at the hearing, the prevailing party shall prepare a proposed order and comply with CRC 3.1312 subdivisions (a), (b), (d) and (e).

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

  • Type

    Collections

  • Sub Type

    Collections

LAURA MORRIS SMITH VS. WILLIAM L MORRIS

Tentative ruling for August 12, 2020 on Executor Lori Morris's Motion to Quash Deposition Subpoena Duces Tecum, and for Protective Order The court takes Executor Lori Morris's Motion to Quash Deposition Subpoena Duces Tecum, and for Protective Order off calendar as moot. The subject subpoena was withdrawn on May 13, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

  • Type

    Insurance

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

SPENCER VS ALCAZAR CUSTOM

Tentative ruling for August 12, 2020 on Plaintiff Lance Spencer's motion to compel answers, without objections, to: 1) form interrogatories, set one; 2) special interrogatories, set one, and 3) request for production of documents, set one. The court denies Plaintiff Lance Spencer's motion to compel answers, without objections, to: 1) form interrogatories, set one; 2) special interrogatories, set one, and 3) request for production of documents, set one.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

LAWRENCE WILLIAMS VS. MANOR CARE

HEARING ON MOTION TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF COMPLAINT FILED BY MANOR CARE OF WALNUT CREEK CA, LLC, et al. * TENTATIVE RULING: * Continued to October 7, 2020 at 9 am by moving party.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

CADLES OF WEST VA VS. ROUSSET

The Motion relates to Plaintiff’s Complaint for Breach of Contract. Defendant Christian J. Rousset (“Defendant” or “Rousset”) is in pro per. Defendant did not file an opposition although he did file an amended answer to the complaint on July 21, 2020. It is unclear whether Defendant intended this document to be responsive to the Motion. For the following reasons, the Motion is granted.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

CENTRAL COSTA BARNS VS. R.E. MILANO PLUMBING

HEARING ON MOTION TO STRIKE 1st Amended COMPLAINT FILED BY R.E. MILANO PLUMBING CORPORATION, et al. * TENTATIVE RULING: * Pursuant to CCP §§ 435 and 436, Defendants move to strike the following from Plaintiff’s Judicial Council Form Complaint: 1. From First C/A-- Request for attorneys’ fees (Section BC-5, at page 3) 2. From Second C/A—“attorneys’ fees and” (Section FR6, page 5) 3. From FAC: Request for attorney’s fees from section 10(c) at page 2.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

SKOUMBAS VS. KLAMMCZYNSKA

Finally, Plaintiff argues that leave to amend should be denied because the Oznowiczes’ claim is barred by the statute of limitations. The Oznowiczes counter that the statute of limitations has been tolled due to delayed discovery. The statute of limitations argument raises an interesting issue. For example, the Oznowiczes argue that they have a challenge based on the failure to give notice of the sale in 1978 or 1984. Yet it seems clear that the Oznowiczes were aware that the property was sold years ago.

  • Hearing

    Aug 12, 2020

  « 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.