What is a Motion for New Trial?

Useful Rulings on Motion for New Trial

Recent Rulings on Motion for New Trial

76-100 of 10000 results

COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA V. AMERICAN SURETY CO.

The motion for summary judgment on the bond was not entered until August 24, 2020, which is more than 90 days after March 11, 2020. It appears the bond must accordingly be vacated and bail exonerated. The court will set a schedule for briefing from County Counsel on this issue at the hearing. (See Monarch Healthcare v. Superior Court (2000) 78 Cal.App.4th 1282, 1286.)]

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

MATTER OF ALBERT AND PATRICIA BUSSE TRUST

When a decedent’s spouse predeceased the decedent less than 15 years (for real property) before decedent’s death, and decedent did not leave issue or remarry a new spouse (which is the case here), Probate Code section 6402.5 requires the Court to distribute real property owned by decedent to the predeceased spouse’s issue in equal degree, or per section 240 if unequal degree.

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

EST. OF GAONA V. SALINAS

As of October 20, 2020, the motion for an order authorizing depositions was not opposed. The motion for an order authorizing depositions is unopposed and is granted. Plaintiffs have demonstrated good cause by identifying what information they may gain from a second deposition session that it did not seek in the first deposition session. The deposition must be narrowly focused and exclude factual issues on which these individuals have already testified.

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

CONS. OF KENNETH WARDELL BLACKWELL SR.

Petition for Approval of Accounts of Trustee is set for 1-26-2021. 4. Amended Opposition filed by Kelly Schwerin 10-14-2020. 5. Status Report filed by Kelly Schwerin 10-15-2020. 6. Memorandum Regarding Accounting Issues filed by Kyle Schwerin 10-15-2020. KELLY SCHWERIN CHARLES A. TRIAY KYLE SCHWERIN NATHAN D. PASTOR THE SUSAN K.

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

PETITION OF CHE ANDREA TRAVERS

Proposed Order The Court is waiting for these items: Court Investigator’s Report C.C. COUNTY HEALTH SERVICES DEPT STEVEN P RETTIG JAMIE DULIK RONALD K. MULLIN

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

CONS OF JAMIE DULIK

Proposed Order The Court is waiting for these items: Court Investigator’s Report C.C. COUNTY HEALTH SERVICES DEPT COUNTY COUNSEL JOHN DOUGLAS TRACY S REGLI PAUL DAVID GREGORY SEAN P CULLIGAN

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

CONS. OF MARY JANE LOPEZ

Verified declaration by petitioner to clarify whether you have attended the orientation class for unlicensed conservators pursuant to LR 7.416 The Court is still waiting for: A. Court Investigator’s Report B. Appointment of counsel for proposed conservatee C. Report of court-appointed counsel D.

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • Judge

    Fenstermacher

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

MANUEL ALEJANDRE VS CAL-VILLA ESTATES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION

(Rule 3.1312) The case management conference scheduled for September 25, 2020 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 11B will remain. Ross 9/18/2020 ……………… Directions for Contesting or Arguing the Tentative Ruling: Tentative rulings for Law and Motion will be posted electronically by 1:30 p.m. the day before the hearing.

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

JOSEPH SAIDIAN, ET AL. VS IRA JAY BOREN, ET AL.

Legal Standard on Motion to Strike Any party, within the time allowed to respond to a pleading may serve and file a notice of motion to strike the whole or any part thereof. (Code of Civ. Proc., § 435, subd. (b)(1); Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1322(b).)

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

Torres, et al MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL (CCP § 284(2); CRC Rule 3.1362) TENTATIVE RULING Motion of Attorney Anthony Willoughby, Esq. of Willoughby & Associates to Withdraw as Counsel for Plaintiff Martin Hernandez is DENIED. THE MOTION IS DEFECTIVE IN NUMEROUS RESPECTS, AS FOLLOWS. THE MOTION IS NOT SUPPORTED BY A DECLARATION ON JUDICIAL COUNCIL FORM MC-052 AS REQUIRED BY CAL. RULES OF COURT RULE 3.1362, SUBDIVISION (C).

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

MARTIN HERNANDEZ VS JAIME TORRES

MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS (CCP § 2023.010) TENTATIVE RULING: Defendant Jamie Torres’ Motion for Terminating, Evidentiary, Issue Preclusion and Monetary Sanctions is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. THE COURT HEREBY DISMISSES PLAINTIFF MARTIN HERNANDEZ’S COMPLAINT WITH PREJUDICE. THE REQUEST FOR EVIDENTIARY, ISSUE PRECLUSION AND MONETARY SANCTIONS IS DENIED.

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

VAROUJAN KURKEYERIAN V. ERIK BENHAM, ET AL.

Benham and Bening now bring a motion for summary judgment, or in the alternative summary adjudication, of the FAC against Kurkeyerian and SCI. Chavez filed a joinder in the motion. However, a party may not join another party’s motion for summary judgment and adopt the other party’s separate statement. (Frazee v. Seely (2002) 95 Cal.App.4th 627, 636; see also Weil & Brown, Cal. Practice Guide: Civil Procedure Before Trial (The Rutter Group 2020) ¶ 10:95.3.) Therefore, the Court denies Chavez’s joinder.

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

NICHOLAS BUTTA VS BILLIE LEE SGROI-PROFFITT

If such a showing of prejudice were sufficient to warrant a denial of a motion for leave to amend, no motion for leave to amend would be granted. Trial in this matter is set for September 27, 2021, a little less than a year away, giving the parties ample time to conduct the necessary discovery in this case. The Court further finds that Plaintiff’s motion substantially complies with the requirements of California Rules of Court Rule 3.1324 and there exists good cause for allowing the amendment.

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

TERRY HERRERA, ET AL. VS FULL CIRCLE REAL ESTATE SOLUTIONS INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

Defendant thereafter agrees to withdraw its Motion for Undertaking within seven days of receiving notice of the withdrawal of the Lis Pendens. 3. Plaintiffs further agree they will not re-file, re-instate, or file a new Lis Pendens in the present or in any future action involving the Property. (Motion, Exh. B.)

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

ROBERT GARBER VS COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, ET AL.

The Court denied the demurrer on the grounds for misjoinder due to the lack of legal authority submitted in the demurrer. Because the issue was raised previously and overruled, the Court considers the instant motion as a motion for reconsideration under CCP §1008. County has now provided the legal authority to show that it has been incorrectly identified as a respondent in this action.

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY VS ANDREY HARPER, ET AL.

QUASH SERVICE (CCP § 418.10) TENTATIVE RULING: Defendant Andrey Harper’s Motion to Quash Service of Summons and Complaint is PLACED OFF CALENDAR. ANALYSIS: On February 6, 2018, Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (“Plaintiff”) filed the instant action for automobile subrogation against Defendants Andrey Harper (“Defendant”) and Duanea Delgadillo. Plaintiff dismissed Delgadillo from the action a month later.

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

THE ESTATE OF TEJ PAL SINGH, BY AND THROUGH THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE, VS BALBIR SINGH, M.D.

Sanctions pursuant to CCP section 2023.020(b) in the sum of $1,410.00 ($225 x 5 hours to prep motion, 1 hour for appearance plus $60 filing fee) is awarded in favor of defendant against plaintiff and his counsel of record, Dordulian Law Group, payable to client trust account of defense counsel within 30 days.

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

ROBERT MAKUTA, ET AL. VS PRISTINE WINDOWS, INC., ET AL.

If all parties to a motion submit, the court will adopt this tentative as the final order. If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar. Due to Covid-19, the court is strongly discouraging in-person appearances.

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

PHILIP ENTERTAINMENT PRODUCTION INC. VS BE HOME US CORPORATION

The Contract also included a written Scope of Work at the same date, an addendum on March 14, 2019 (“Addendum”), a change order on April 18, 2019 (“Change Order”), a new arrangement for payment on October 4, 2019, and a written novation on November 5, 2019 (“Novation”) substituting Defendant TNL Renovation Inc. (“TNL Renovation”) for TNL. (Compl. ¶¶ 18.)

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

IN THE MATTER OF: HELEN E. ANDREOLI, ET AL.

“Neither the trial court, nor the appellate court, may ‘review the merits of the dispute, the sufficiency of the evidence, or the arbitrator's reasoning, nor may we correct or review an award because of an arbitrator's legal or factual error, even if it appears on the award's face. Instead, we restrict our review to whether the award should be vacated under the grounds listed in section 1286.2. [Citations.]’” (Id.) Discussion A.

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

MARO BURUNSUZYAN VS DIMITRI ROGER

The Court finds that Judgment Creditor has failed to provide sufficient evidence in support of her motion for assignment order or her motion for order restraining Judgment Debtor. While Judgment Creditor attests to the fact that she has performed an internet and public information investigation and that Judgment Debtor has a current or past business relationship with the Obligors, Judgment Creditor has failed to provide evidence of same aside from her conclusory declaration.

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

IN THE MATTER OF JOHN ANTHONY KOZUB

In order to expand access to justice and still maintain social distancing protocols in Department J6 and the courthouse, the Court has set up a new, free Public Access number for Department J6 through CourtCall, effective June 15, 2020 for all hearings in Department J6. Any interested person or member of the public can dial in and observe the court (audio only) using the phone number below. They will not be able to speak or participate on this free public line.

  • Hearing

    Oct 27, 2020

  • Type

    Family Law

  • Sub Type

    Conservatorship

IN THE MATTER OF JOHN ANTHONY KOZUB

In order to expand access to justice and still maintain social distancing protocols in Department J6 and the courthouse, the Court has set up a new, free Public Access number for Department J6 through CourtCall, effective June 15, 2020 for all hearings in Department J6. Any interested person or member of the public can dial in and observe the court (audio only) using the phone number below. They will not be able to speak or participate on this free public line.

  • Hearing

    Oct 27, 2020

  • Type

    Family Law

  • Sub Type

    Conservatorship

IN THE MATTER OF ALEJANDRA DUARTE

In order to expand access to justice and still maintain social distancing protocols in Department J6 and the courthouse, the Court has set up a new, free Public Access number for Department J6 through CourtCall, effective June 15, 2020 for all hearings in Department J6. Any interested person or member of the public can dial in and observe the court (audio only) using the phone number below. They will not be able to speak or participate on this free public line.

  • Hearing

    Oct 27, 2020

  • Type

    Family Law

  • Sub Type

    Conservatorship

IN THE MATTER OF JOSEPHINA VARGAS

In order to expand access to justice and still maintain social distancing protocols in Department J6 and the courthouse, the Court has set up a new, free Public Access number for Department J6 through CourtCall, effective June 15, 2020 for all hearings in Department J6. Any interested person or member of the public can dial in and observe the court (audio only) using the phone number below. They will not be able to speak or participate on this free public line.

  • Hearing

    Oct 27, 2020

  • Type

    Family Law

  • Sub Type

    Conservatorship

  « 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 load this page.