Complaint in Intervention?

Useful Rulings on Complaint in Intervention

Recent Rulings on Complaint in Intervention

1501-1525 of 1550 results

ASSOCIATION OF IRRITATED RESIDENTS ET AL VS. CALIFORNIA AIR RESOURCES BOARD ET AL (CEQA CASE)

Ntc Of Mtn For Leave To File A Complaint In Intervention And Index Of Exhibits Set for hearing on Thursday, September 17, 2009, line 22, INTERVENOR ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND Motion For Leave To File a Complaint In Intervention and Index Of Exhibits. Continued to September 30, 2009, opposing party to provide courtesy copy with a cover letter reflecting the new hearing date. =(302/CWW)

  • Hearing

    Sep 17, 2009

CLAYTON BIAS.ET AL VS. MATTHEWS HOMES. ET AL

As insurer for cross-defendant Garnas & Rabe Construction, a suspended corporation without capacity to defend itself, FPIC has the right to file a complaint in intervention. FPIC shall file the complaint in intervention forthwith.

  • Hearing

    Sep 17, 2009

NICOLE ANDERSON VS. G & K SERVICES INC

Intervenor's complaint in intervention shall be filed upon presentment to the court and payment of the requisite filing fee. The court finds good cause for intervention given the absence of opposition and the fact that Raley's seeks to recoup funds it has paid to its injured employee under worker's compensation laws from the defendant herein.

  • Hearing

    Aug 28, 2009

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

PAUL O ANDREW VS. FOLSOM LAKE FORD

Intervener's complaint in intervention will be filed upon presentment to the clerk and payment of the requisite filing fee. The court finds good cause to intervene as Traveler's Insurance is plaintiff's employer's worker's compensation provider and is seeking to recoup payments it has made to plaintiff under that policy from the defendant herein.

  • Hearing

    Aug 17, 2009

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Auto

THEODORE RABAGO VS. AHMAD GITIFOROOZ

Upon proper proof of service of the motion, the Court's tentative is to GRANT the motion for leave to file a complaint in intervention by Broadspire Services, Inc., on behalf of Beaulieu of American, Inc. (C.C.P. § 387; Labor Code §§ 3852, 3853.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 06, 2009

ERIC ARNETT VS. LEWIS HOMES OF CALIFORNIA

Intervenor's complaint-in-intervention shall be filed upon presentment to the clerk and payment of the requisite filing fee. The Court finds good cause to intervene under Code of Civil Procedure §387(a) given the lack of opposition and the fact that intervenor is an insurer for cross-defendant Westco Electric, Inc., a suspended corporation.

  • Hearing

    Jul 31, 2009

RAFAEL GARCIA VS. CARL GOER

The plaintiff may be undergoing surgery to his leg but due to complications arising from the worker's compensation complaint in intervention may need to finance that surgery himself. 1. The trial is continued to / / . 2. The discovery, expert election, motion and other discovery cut-off dates will be based on the new trial date.

  • Hearing

    Jul 22, 2009

KENNETH THORNTON VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (BP) AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS ET AL

Defendants Unigard Insurance Company And Fireman'S Fund Insurance Company'S Motion For Leave Of Court To File Complaint In Intervention To Name Fireman'S Fund Insurance Company And Unigard Insurance Company As Intervenors Set for hearing on Thursday, July 16, 2009, line 1, Defendants Unigard Insurance Co. and Fireman's Fund Insur. Co. Motion for leave of Court to file complaint in intervention to name Fireman's Fund Insurance Co. and Unigard Insur. Co. as Intervenors.

  • Hearing

    Jul 16, 2009

KENNETH THORNTON VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (BP) AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS ET AL

Notice Of Motion And Motion For Leave Of Court To File Complaint In Intervention To Name Fireman?S Fund Insurance Company And Unigard Insurance Company As Intervenors Set for hearing on Monday, July 6, 2009, line 1, DEFENDANT UNIGARD INSURANCE COMPANY, FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY. Motion For Leave Of Court To File Complaint In Intervention To Name Fireman's Fund Insurance Company and Unigard Insurance Company as Intervenors. Off Calendar, entire action dismissed. =(302/HEK)

  • Hearing

    Jul 06, 2009

DRY CREEK JOINT UESD VS CC YOUNG CONSTRUCTION

Intervenor's complaint in intervention shall be filed upon presentment to the clerk and payment of the requisite filing fee. Intervenor's motion to stay any attempts to enter a default or default judgment against cross-defendant MCE Mechanical, Inc is DENIED. The court finds good cause to intervene given the absence of opposition and the fact that intervenor was the insurer for cross-defendant MCE Mechanical Inc. MCE is a suspended corporation. As such, it cannot defend itself in court.

  • Hearing

    May 21, 2009

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

F REGINALD TORAN JR VS BRIDGEPORT COVE PARTNERS. LTD ET AL

Ranger Insurance shall file its complaint in intervention forthwith.

  • Hearing

    Apr 22, 2009

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

JOEL MEDINA VS ALLAN L GOULDING CONSTRUCTION. INC. ET AL.

Also all remaining Cross-Complaints and Complaint in Intervention are dismissed. This dismissal is ordered pursuant to California Rule of Court 3.1385. Absent a request to appear and be heard for any matter on the Case Management Calendar, all tentative rulings shall become the final ruling of the court. The tentative ruling, or such other ruling as the court may render, will not become the final ruling of the court until the hearing.

  • Hearing

    Apr 14, 2009

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

PACIFIC SAND & GRAVEL, INC. VS. MITCHELL ENGINEERING ET AL

Ntc And Mtn To Strike The First Amended Complaint In Intervention Set for hearing on Wednesday, Arpil 8, 2009, line 4, DEFENDANT MITCHELL ENGINEERING/OBAYASHI CORPORATION, LUMBERMENS MUTUAL CASUALTY COMPANY, NATIONAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY OF HARTFORD, UNITED STATES FIDELITY AND GUARANTY COMPANY, ST.PAUL FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY, and, NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE OF PITTSBURG'S, Motion To Strike The First Amended Complaint In Intervention. Motion to strike is denied.

  • Hearing

    Apr 08, 2009

ROBERT TERESINSKI. ET AL VS. KRISTOPHER DEVINO. ET AL

Intervener's complaint in intervention shall be filed upon presenmtnet to the clerk and payment of the requisite filing fee. The court finds that intervener has a sufficient interest in the litigation to warrant intervenion under the permissive intervention provisions of CCP 387. Intervener is plaintiff's employer's worker's compensation carrier. As such intervener has paid sums to plaintiff to reimburse him for various procedures and expenses.

  • Hearing

    Mar 25, 2009

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Auto

MICHELLE D IGRA. JOEL C. TILLMAN VS. RODY D. MERLINO.ET AL

Plaintiffs seek a continuance on the following grounds: (1) defendants have not been cooperative with respect to discovery, additional time is required to complete discovery, and a motion to compel further information from defendants is calendared for March 26, (2) new counsel will be substituting into the case for plaintiffs, and (3) additional time is required to respond to a complaint in intervention which was recently filed. The court finds that plaintiffs have set forth good cause for a continuance.

  • Hearing

    Mar 13, 2009

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

STANFORD JONES VS. TAMARON RANCH APARTMENTS

Intervener's complaint in intervention shall be filed upon presentment to the clerk and payment of the requisite filing fee. The court finds good cause for intervention as intervener is plaintiff's employer's worker's compensation carrier. Intervener seeks to recoup the payments it made to plaintiff under the worker's compensation policy from defendant herein. The court finds that intervener's interest in the litigation is sufficient to warrant intervention under CCP 387.

  • Hearing

    Feb 26, 2009

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

PACIFIC SAND & GRAVEL, INC. VS. MITCHELL ENGINEERING ET AL

First Amended Complaint in Intervention filed on February 4, 2009. =(302/CWW)

  • Hearing

    Feb 19, 2009

THE DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING VS. SOUTHGATE GARDEN HOMES ASSOCIATION INC

Interveners' complaint in intervention shall be filed upon presentment to the clerk and payment of the requisite filing fee. The court finds good cause for intervention as interveners are the real parties in interest in a lawsuit filed on their behalf by the DFEH. Under the Fair Employment and Housing Act any person aggrieved with respect to the issues to be determined in a civil action under the act may intervene as matter of right in thatcivil action. ( Gov't Code 12927(g)).

  • Hearing

    Feb 06, 2009

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

STEPHEN ROBINSON VS. HERMAN MILLER CORPORATION

The complaint in intervention shall be filed upon presentment to the clerk and payment of the requisite filing fee. Intervener is plaintiff's employer's worker's compensation carrier. As such, intervener has made payments to plaintiff under the worker's compensation policy. Intervener seeks to recoup these sums from defendant herein. The court finds that intervener has a sufficient interest in this litigation to warrant intervention.

  • Hearing

    Jan 20, 2009

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

VANESSA BUSH VS. ADALBERTO LUGO

Good cause appearing, and no opposition having been filed, proposed intervener Center Unified School District's complaint in intervention is GRANTED. The complaint shall be filed upon presentment to the clerk and payment of the requisite filing fee. Intervener is plaintiff's employer and self-insured worker's compensation provider. Intervener has paid out sums to plaintiff under the worker's compensation law. Intervener seeks to recoup these sums from defendant herein.

  • Hearing

    Jan 16, 2009

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Auto

ROBERT WESCHE VS. HAROLD UTT

The complaint in intervention shall be filed upon presentment to the clerk and payment of the requisite filing fee. Intervener is plaintiff's employer's worker's compensation carrier. As such, intervener has made payments to plaintiff under the worker's compensation policy. Intervener seeks to recoup these sums from defendant herein. The court finds that intervener has a sufficient interest in this litigation to warrant intervention.

  • Hearing

    Jan 16, 2009

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Auto

JATINDER KULLAR VS. FOOT LOCKER, INC. ET AL

Notice Of Motion And Motion For Leave To File A Complaint In Intervention And Leave To Permit Class Members To Intervene Set for hearing on Thursday, December 18, 2008, line 5, INTERVENORS CRYSTAL ECHEVARRIA, NICHOLE PAYTON, AND JOHN KISSINGER'S Motion For Leave To File A Complaint In Intervention And Leave To Permit Class Members To Intervene IS OFF CALENDAR, MATTER TO BE HEARD BEFORE JUDGE KRAMER. =(302/PJM)

  • Hearing

    Dec 18, 2008

DEPARTMENT OF FAIR EMPLOYMENT AND HOUSING VS. 2626 MARIGOLD LLC

The complaint in intervention shall be filed upon presentment to the clerk and payment of the requisite filing fee. The court finds good cause to intervene as proposed interveners are real parties in interest in this action brought by the Department of Fair Employment and Housing. As such, interveners have a right to intervene in the action pursuant to Government Code 12989(d). Accordingly, interveners are entitled to intervention as a matter of right pursuant to CCP 387(b).

  • Hearing

    Dec 15, 2008

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

CHERYL LLOYD VS. GARY CURRY

Intervenor's complaint in intervention shall be filed upon presentment to the clerk and payment of the requisite filing fee. The court finds that intervenor is entitled to intervene under both the mandatory and permissive intervention provisions of CCP 387.

  • Hearing

    Nov 10, 2008

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

ALEXANDER CASTILLO ET AL VS. RYLAND HOMES OF CA. INC. ET AL

Complaint in Intervention is hereby dismissed. This dismissal is ordered pursuant to California Rule of Court 3.1385.

  • Hearing

    Sep 30, 2008

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

  « first    1 ... 56 57 58 59 60 61 62     last » 

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

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.