Complaint in Intervention?

Useful Rulings on Complaint in Intervention

Recent Rulings on Complaint in Intervention

101-125 of 1551 results

HOWARD SANGER, ET AL. VS CAMP ARIEL, INC, ET AL.

Its insurance company, Crum & Forster Insurance Group, seeks leave to file a complaint-in-intervention on its behalf. A liability insurer normally is not a party to a third party action against its insured, but may have the right to intervene in certain circumstances. Pursuant to Kaufman & Broad Communities, Inc. v.

  • Hearing

    Jan 07, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

SEAN GUARINO ET AL VS VISUAL GLASS CONCEPTS INC ET AL

Intervenor shall file its complaint in intervention within ten days. Intervenor is ordered to provide notice of this order and file proof of service of such. DATED: January 6, 2020 ___________________________ Stephen I. Goorvitch Judge of the Superior Court

  • Hearing

    Jan 06, 2020

ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY VS MAGIC WINDOWS BY A-1, INC., A CORPORATION, ET AL.

Hearing Date: January 3, 2020 Moving Parties: Proposed intervenor Admiral Insurance Company Responding Party: None Application for Leave of Court to File Complaint-In-Intervention The court considered the moving papers. RULING The motion is GRANTED. Admiral Insurance Company is ordered to file its complaint-in-intervention within five days.

  • Hearing

    Jan 03, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

ARMSTRONG V. AG PRODUCTION SERVICES

There the Court of Appeal in affirming a dismissal for delay of prosecution (Code Civ.Proc., § 583.410) of a complaint in intervention by a workers' compensation carrier, made clear that the running of the five years of the mandatory dismissal statute was to be calculated not from the filing of the complaint in intervention, but from the date the underlying complaint was filed.

  • Hearing

    Dec 20, 2019

MARIO TORRES VS CAVALRY HOME CONSTRUCTION ET AL

Complaint-In-Intervention to be filed within 10-days. Intervention is proper where the Intervenor shows an interest relating to the property or transaction which is the subject of the action and disposition of the action may as a practical matter impair or impede that person’s ability to protect the interest. Cal Code Civil Procedure § 387(b). Intervenor has an interest in this litigation in that it is the insurance carrier for Defendant, who cannot defend itself while it is suspended.

  • Hearing

    Dec 18, 2019

JOSE LUIS MELENDREZ VS SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON, A BUSINESS ENTITY FORM UNKNOWN, ET AL.

Intervening Party shall file its Complaint-in-Intervention within ten days and serve a copy of the order granting leave to intervene and the pleadings in intervention in compliance with California Code of Civil Procedure section 387, subdivision (e)(2). Intervening Party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

  • Hearing

    Dec 16, 2019

JESSE SNYDER VS. A TEICHERT & SONS INC

The StarStone National Insurance Company as subrogee of Power One LLC (Intervenor) is directed to serve the A Teichert & Son INC with the Complaint in Intervention.

  • Hearing

    Dec 16, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

MIGUEL RAMIREZ VS WILLIAMSON INDUSTRIES INC ET AL

The motion will therefore be granted, and Travelers is directed to separately file its complaint in intervention forthwith.

  • Hearing

    Dec 13, 2019

  • Judge Donna Geck
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

BERTHA ANN BERUMEN VS FTN TRANSPORT & LOGISTICS LLC ET AL

The petition shall include a copy of the proposed complaint in intervention or answer in intervention and set forth the grounds upon which intervention rests.” DISCUSSION Plaza seeks to intervene in the present action to protect its interests as the general liability insurer for Defendant FTN. (Pietrok Decl., ¶ 6-8.)

  • Hearing

    Dec 13, 2019

ANN MARIE DRAKE VS AIRSERV INC ET AL

BACKGROUND On September 15, 2017, Plaintiff Ann Drake and Plaintiffs-in-Intervention Steven Drake and Jon Vladimirtsev Drake filed the operative second amended complaint (“SAC”) and second amended complaint-in-intervention (“SACI”), respectively. The SAC has causes of action for: (1) wrongful death, (2) survival action – negligence, and (3) survival action – negligent hiring/training/retention.

  • Hearing

    Dec 12, 2019

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

PAMELA DIANNE SIMPSON VS JACOB LEMUS

On November 5, 2019, Plaintiff-in-Intervention Transdev Services, Inc. for Plaintiff filed a motion for leave to file a complaint-in-intervention pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 387. Trial is set for February 24, 2020. PARTY’S REQUEST Plaintiff-in-Intervention Transdev Services, Inc.

  • Hearing

    Dec 12, 2019

MICHAEL R. MONZON VS CITY OF LOS ANGELES, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

The petition shall include a copy of the proposed complaint in intervention or answer in intervention and set forth the grounds upon which intervention rests. (Code Civ. Proc., § 387, subd. (c).)

  • Hearing

    Dec 11, 2019

COOPER V. DIAZ-HUBBEN

For some, BMO included a terse, confusing one sentence explanation (“The ACCOUNT is not referenced in BMO’s COMPLAINT, and USRECH’s Complaint in intervention seeks an adjudication of the parties’ rights under the DACA as currently written”); and then for a few, a “notwithstanding see attached documents” type of response. No responses with objections clarified if the objections were asserted to the entire request, or just part of it.

  • Hearing

    Dec 10, 2019

DENIED.

DGI seeks leave to file a complaint in intervention and answer in intervention. A petition for leave to intervene may be made by noticed motion or ex parte application and must include a copy of the proposed complaint in intervention or answer in intervention and set forth the grounds upon which intervention action where “the person has an interest in the matter in litigation, or in the success of either of the parties, or an interest against both.”

  • Hearing

    Dec 09, 2019

DENIED.

DGI seeks leave to file a complaint in intervention and answer in intervention. A petition for leave to intervene may be made by noticed motion or ex parte application and must include a copy of the proposed complaint in intervention or answer in intervention and set forth the grounds upon which intervention action where “the person has an interest in the matter in litigation, or in the success of either of the parties, or an interest against both.”

  • Hearing

    Dec 09, 2019

ESTEBAN MONTENEGRO VS FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION

Plaintiff then brought a motion to set aside the dismissal of the Cross-Complaint in intervention, which was heard on April 12, 2019, and granted. The copy of the FACC attached to the motion to set aside set forth three causes of action, for Violation of California Civil Code § 2624.17, Wrongful Foreclosure, and Slander of Title. The FACC efiled with the court and served on the parties added a fourth cause of action for quiet title and fifth cause of action for declaratory relief.

  • Hearing

    Dec 06, 2019

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Foreclosure

CHRISALYN CAMPBELL VS TURO, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION, ET AL.

Liberty has filed a proposed complaint-in-intervention as well. Liberty’s unopposed motion for leave to intervene is GRANTED. Liberty is ordered to file its complaint-in-intervention within 10 days of the date of this order. Moving party to give notice. Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at [email protected] indicating intention to submit on the tentative.

  • Hearing

    Dec 06, 2019

TOMASKO V. SOUTH COAST FLOORING, INC.

Motion by County of Orange for Leave to Intervene: County of Orange’s motion for an order granting leave of court to file a Complaint-in Intervention is continued to December 19, 2019 at 1:30 PM. Code of Civil Procedure section 387(c) requires that a petition for leave to intervene “shall include a copy of the proposed complaint in intervention or answer in intervention and set forth the grounds upon which intervention rests.”

  • Hearing

    Dec 05, 2019

VICTOR PEREZ-BUENTROSTRO, ET AL. VS SWIFT TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, LLC, A CORPORATION, ET AL.

Intervenor’s proposed complaint in intervention is deemed filed as of this date. Intervenor is ordered to provide notice of this order and file proof of service of such. DATED: December 2, 2019 ___________________________ Stephen I. Goorvitch Judge of the Superior Court

  • Hearing

    Dec 02, 2019

LONNIE HOLMES VS STEVEN MEDFORD

Intervener is ordered to file a separate copy of the complaint-in-intervention within ten days. Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at [email protected] indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.

  • Hearing

    Dec 02, 2019

HUFF V. SIERRA MEADOWS SENIOR LIVING, LLC

The proposed complaint-in-intervention shall be filed with the Court within five (5) court days of this order. Moving party shall perfect service in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure.

  • Hearing

    Nov 26, 2019

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

E-COMMERCE LIGHTING VS E-COMMERCE TRADE RE: MOTION TO/FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER: MPAS / DECL OF THOMAS M OCONNELL BY E-COMMERCE LIGHTING INC, FRANK HALCOVICH, WENDY HERTZ

No Complaint in Intervention was filed with the court after the motion was granted. However, on 4/8/19, Bank filed a First Amended Complaint in Intervention against Defendants ECL, ECT, Frank Halcovich, Wendy Hertz and Brian Sawyer. The complaint alleges 6 causes of action (fraud, negligent misrepresentation, breach of subordination agreement, breach of contracts/loan documents, breach of guarantees and UCL violations).

  • Hearing

    Nov 26, 2019

CANNDESCENT JV LLC, ET AL. V. FIORE MANAGEMENT LLC, ET AL.

On February 6, HCB filed its complaint in intervention against McPherson, JV, MSLTD, Beary, and Canndescent for violation of the California Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (“UVTA”) and declaratory relief. On March 18, the court denied JV, MSLTD, McPherson, and Beary’s motion to reconsider the order granting HCB’s motion to intervene. On April 8, the court approved the confidential settlement and dismissed JV and MSLTD’s FAC and Canndescent’s cross-complaint.

  • Hearing

    Nov 25, 2019

MECHANICS BANK VS. ORION PACIFIC

Sunkist shall promptly file and serve the revised Complaint In Intervention submitted to the Court on November 15, 2019. The Court notes that Sunkist has withdrawn its request for permission to sue the receiver.

  • Hearing

    Nov 20, 2019

HLAVAJ VS. BOLTON

Sompo Japan Insurance Company of America’s unopposed Motion for Leave to File a Complaint in Intervention is granted. (Civ. Code, §387(a); Lab. Code, §3852, 3853.) Complaint in Intervention to be separately filed and served. MP to give notice.

  • Hearing

    Nov 20, 2019

  « first    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 63     last » 

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

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.