Complaint in Intervention?

Useful Rulings on Complaint in Intervention

Recent Rulings on Complaint in Intervention

126-150 of 1550 results

COX VS SPRADLING

The Complaint-in-Intervention is deemed filed and served on all parties to this action.

  • Hearing

    Nov 18, 2019

SALVADOR DELGADILLO VS RUSH TRUCK, ET AL.

Interventor shall file its complaint-in-intervention within ten (10) days. Intervenor shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court. DATED: November 18, 2019 ___________________________ Stephen I. Goorvitch Judge of the Superior Court

  • Hearing

    Nov 18, 2019

ANDREWS V. HESS

The Court finds Intervenor’s motion is timely, sets forth the grounds for intervention, and includes a copy of her proposed cross-complaint in intervention. (Code Civ. Proc., § 387, subd. (b)(3).) Intervenor is ordered to electronically file and her Cross-Complaint in Intervention within 15 days. Intervenor shall serve her Cross-Complaint in Intervention pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure. Intervenor shall give notice of the ruling.

  • Hearing

    Nov 15, 2019

PAUL VALDEZ VS KPRS CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, INC., A BUSINESS ENTITY FORM UNKNOWN

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

    Nov 14, 2019

DURAN VS. OBESITY RESEARCH INSTITUTE LLC

THEREFORE, the motion for leave to file a complaint in intervention is DENIED.

  • Hearing

    Nov 14, 2019

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

DEDICATO TREATMENT CENTER, INC. VS MICHAEL D. ANDERSON

On July 1, 2019, Linda Pawlik filed a Cross-Complaint-in-Intervention, and then on September 17, 2019, filed a First Amended Cross-Complaint against Cross-Defendant alleging the following causes of action: negligence; intentional infliction of emotional distress; dependent adult abuse and neglect; breach of fiduciary duty; rescission of void contract; unjust enrichment. II. Demurrer A. Legal Standard A demurrer is a pleading used to test the legal sufficiency of other pleadings.

  • Hearing

    Nov 13, 2019

  • Judge

    James E. Blancarte or Serena R. Murillo

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

JOHN SOSEBEE VS BRANDON HILL

On October 11, 2019, Plaintiff-in-Intervention Tristar Risk Management for Nova Casualty Company filed a motion for leave to file a complaint-in-intervention pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 387. Trial is set for March 11, 2021.

  • Hearing

    Nov 12, 2019

KESLINKE VS. STROUD

Schmier shall file his complaint in intervention by November 15, 2019.

  • Hearing

    Nov 08, 2019

KESLINKE VS. STROUD

* TENTATIVE RULING: * Intervenor Kenneth Schmier’s motion to expunge the lis pendens recorded on 728 Laurel Drive and 3269 Judith Lane is granted, conditioned on the filing of the complaint in intervention (see Line 11). As an initial matter, both sides failed to tab any of their exhibits or attachments to the complaint, FAC or complaint in intervention. Tabs are required per CRC 3.1110(f) and Local Rule 3.42. In the future, all filings must be properly tabbed.

  • Hearing

    Nov 08, 2019

EDGAR L RODRIGUEZ-BARON ET AL VS NEW LINE ELECTRIC ET AL

RELIEF REQUESTED: Plaintiff-In-Intervention Applied Risk Services, Inc. moves for leave to file a Complaint-In-Intervention.

  • Hearing

    Nov 08, 2019

GLENN DEATON VS WILSON'S METAL EXCHANGE, INC, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

ICW has an interest in the matter in the litigation, and submits a proposed Complaint in Intervention for reimbursement of workers’ compensation benefits. The Court GRANTS ICW’s unopposed Motion for Leave to Intervene. ICW to file the proposed Complaint in Intervention within 10 days of the date of this Order. Moving party to give notice.

  • Hearing

    Nov 07, 2019

NORTH COAST RIVERS ALLIANCE VS. DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES

NDWA’s Petition and Complaint in Intervention shall be filed forthwith. If this tentative ruling becomes the final ruling of the Court, counsel for Respondent shall prepare a formal order; submit it to counsel for the parties for approval as to form; and thereafter submit it to the Court for signature and entry of judgment in accordance with California Rules of Court, rule 3.1312.

  • Hearing

    Nov 01, 2019

XERA HEALTH LLC VS SCHEELE

The complaint in intervention was thereafter filed. ROA 178. Scheele and Nova-Life filed a general denial as well as a cross-complaint in intervention against CSVBA and George McGregor. ROA 198, 199. Xera Health filed an answer as well as a cross-complaint in intervention against Scheele and Nova-Life. ROA 205, 206. The court was required to vacate the trial date due to the parties' inability to prepare for trial. ROA 187.

  • Hearing

    Oct 31, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

ANDREA Y OBREON PULIDO ET AL VS MICHAEL JOSEPH BONGIORNO

Thus, American’s motion for leave to intervene pursuant to a cross-complaint in intervention is DENIED.

  • Hearing

    Oct 31, 2019

KELLY ROA VS ABM INDUSTRIES GROUPS, LLC; A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, ET AL.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER Intervenor’s motion for leave to file a complaint in intervention is granted. Intervenor shall file its complaint in intervention within ten (10) days. Intervenor shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court. DATED: October 30, 2019 ___________________________ Stephen I. Goorvitch Judge of the Superior Court

  • Hearing

    Oct 30, 2019

MARIANA NOEMI GARCIA VS. JOSE ANTONIO PORTILLO

The complaint in intervention was filed by the insurer under CCP 387. Further, the OSC for sanctions/dismissal for failure to file default judgment, set on 1/7/20, is vacated. The prior default entered against defendant Jennifer Neal LLC was vacated on 7/17/19. Notice to be provided by Government Employees Insurance Company.

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2019

  • Judge

    Genalin Riley

  • County

    Ventura County, CA

SARA DIEGO FRANCISCO VS DONALD BROOKS JR 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. (Code Civ. Proc., § 387, subd. (c).)

  • Hearing

    Oct 25, 2019

EMMANUEL B. DAVID VS. MARLENE Z. ROBERTSON

However, as used in section 1032, a “defendant” includes “a cross-defendant, a person against whom a complaint is filed, or a party who files an answer in intervention” and a “plaintiff” includes “cross-complainant or a party who files a complaint in intervention.” (CCP §1032(a)(2)-(3).) Mount does not fit within the definition of a “defendant” for the purposes of section 1032 because the procedural posture of this case shows that Mount was not a defendant against whom a complaint was filed.

  • Hearing

    Oct 25, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

DARRIN CHAVEZ VS PEDRO GONZALEZ

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

    Oct 25, 2019

MICHAEL RESENDEZ ET AL VS THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR CORPORATION

On May 22, 2017, Plaintiff-in-Intervention County of Los Angeles filed a complaint-in-intervention against Defendant/Cross-complainant/Defendant-in-Intervention ThyssenKrupp Elevator Corporation asserting claims of subrogation under Labor Code section 3852. In March 2018, Plaintiff substituted Defendant ABM, Mitsubishi Elevators and Escalators, and Mitsubishi Electric US, Inc. as Does 1-3, respectively.

  • Hearing

    Oct 25, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

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

    Oct 25, 2019

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Foreclosure

COLOMBARI VS URRUTIA

Pepper Inc. and National Union Fire Insurance Co. for leave to file complaint-in-intervention is granted. CCP § 387(a). Intervenors shall file and serve their complaint-in-intervention by 11/4/19.

  • Hearing

    Oct 24, 2019

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Auto

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

    Oct 23, 2019

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

YAN LI VS APRIL LI

Co. filed its complaint in intervention. On February 25, 2019, Plaintiffs dismissed Cheng, without prejudice. On May 23, 2019, Plaintiffs filed an Amendment to Complaint, wherein Zhigang Yang (“Yang”) was substituted in lieu of Doe 1. A non-jury trial is set for April 13, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Oct 21, 2019

LOUIS ROBERT SALINAS VS ANTHONY DAVID FINO

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

  • Hearing

    Oct 15, 2019

  « first    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 62     last » 

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

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.