What is a Motion for Preliminary Approval Class Settlement?

Useful Rulings on Motion for Preliminary Approval Class Settlement

Recent Rulings on Motion for Preliminary Approval Class Settlement

1-25 of 10000 results

PRICE VS THE CITY OF ANAHEIM

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction Provided that the City will stipulate to a preliminary injunction with respect to the provisions of Ordinance No. 6374 relating to immediate warrantless access to the short-term rental (STR) units, the Court DENIES the application for a preliminary injunction in all other respects, WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

  • Hearing

    Sep 29, 2030

T-12 THREE, LLC VS. TURNER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

The motion is MOOT as to Issue 2, which seeks adjudication of the Third Cause of Action, which Plaintiffs dismissed as to Count 1, under the General Contract. [ROA 2604.] The Court’s analysis with respect to Saddleback’s motion directed to the contract claims applies equally to this motion. 3.

  • Hearing

    Apr 25, 2026

VELAZQUEZ VS KIA MOTORS AMERICA INC.

Plaintiff Francisco Velazquez’s Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice as to Kim D. Stephens, Gregory F. Coleman, Paul C. Peel, Jason T. Dennett and Adam A. Edwards The pro hac vice applications of Adam A. Edwards, Gregory Coleman, Jason T. Dennett, Kim D. Stephens, and Paul C. Peel do not address whether the applicants are: (1) regularly employed in the State of California or (2) regularly engaged in substantial business, professional, or other activities in the State of California. CRC, Rule 9.40(a)(2) and (3).

  • Hearing

    Jun 20, 2021

BELINDA AGUILAR, ET AL. VS TG PROPERTIES LLC

Hearing on the above motion and any pending motions or hearings, including trial or status conferences, will be reset, continued or vacated at the direction of the newly assigned Independent Calendar Court. (NOTE: All hearings currently set in Department 29 of the Spring Street Courthouse are taken off calendar subject to being reset and notified by the receiving court Re: New hearing dates.)

  • Hearing

    Oct 13, 2020

VAGAN AZARYAN VS EXXON MOBILE

Hearing on the above motion and any pending motions or hearings, including trial or status conferences, will be reset, continued or vacated at the direction of the newly assigned Independent Calendar Court. (NOTE: All hearings currently set in Department 29 of the Spring Street Courthouse are taken off calendar subject to being reset and notified by the receiving court Re: New hearing dates.)

  • Hearing

    Sep 18, 2020

DANIEL GINZBURG, ET AL. VS 15025 SATICOY STREET, INC., ET AL.

Hearing on the above motion and any pending motions or hearings, including trial or status conferences, will be reset, continued or vacated at the direction of the newly assigned Independent Calendar Court. (NOTE: All hearings currently set in Department 29 of the Spring Street Courthouse are taken off calendar subject to being reset and notified by the receiving court Re: New hearing dates.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 31, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

RICHARD MACIAS VS CITY OF LOS ANGELES, ET AL.

Hearing on the above motion and any pending motions or hearings, including trial or status conferences, will be reset, continued or vacated at the direction of the newly assigned Independent Calendar Court. (NOTE: All hearings currently set in Department 29 of the Spring Street Courthouse are taken off calendar subject to being reset and notified by the receiving court Re: New hearing dates.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 27, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

CITRUS OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLGY VS CITRUS VALLEY HEALTH

(Motion 7:21-26.)

  • Hearing

    Aug 06, 2020

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

REBEKAH CEHAJIC VS Z&A ASSOCIATES, INC., ET AL.

Hearing on the above motion and any pending motions or hearings, including trial or status conferences, will be reset, continued or vacated at the direction of the newly assigned Independent Calendar Court. (NOTE: All hearings currently set in Department 29 of the Spring Street Courthouse are taken off calendar subject to being reset and notified by the receiving court Re: New hearing dates.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 30, 2020

ESTATE OF JOSEPHINE FRANCES CARLENTINE

Petition is recommended for approval.

  • Hearing

    Jul 29, 2020

  • Judge Jed Beebe
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

ANTHONY SAM VS RENEE KWAN ET AL

The motion is unopposed. The Court GRANTS Board of Fire and Police Pension Commissioners’ motion for leave to file a FACC.

  • Hearing

    Jul 29, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

JOHN PHAM VS HYUNDAI MOTOR COMPANY, A BUSINESS ENTITY OF UNKNOWN FORM, ET AL.

Hearing on the above motion and any pending motions or hearings, including trial or status conferences, will be reset, continued or vacated at the direction of the newly assigned Independent Calendar Court. (NOTE: All hearings currently set in Department 29 of the Spring Street Courthouse are taken off calendar subject to being reset and notified by the receiving court Re: New hearing dates.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 27, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Products Liability

SHARON HUDSON VS RIVIERA PLACE,LLC

Hearing on the above motion and any pending motions or hearings, including trial or status conferences, will be reset, continued or vacated at the direction of the newly assigned Independent Calendar Court. (NOTE: All hearings currently set in Department 29 of the Spring Street Courthouse are taken off calendar subject to being reset and notified by the receiving court Re: New hearing dates.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 27, 2020

HOMAYOUN LARIAN VS EDWARD CZUKER, ET AL.

In that the Court has SUSTAINED the demurrer to the fourth cause of action, without leave to amend, the Court GRANTS Defendants’ motion to strike attorney’s fees. Finally, Plaintiff seeks statutory damages in connection with his sixth cause of action. The Court, though, has SUSTAINED the demurrer to the sixth cause of action, with leave to amend, such that Defendants’ motion to strike the request for statutory damages is DENIED, as MOOT.

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

HAGOP TCHAKERIAN VS CITY OF LOS ANGELES

The communication on December 26, 2017, stating Plaintiff could not obtain a different job, and approval of the retirement on March 1, 2018, was not continuing conduct because Plaintiff had left his job after applying for disability retirement. (See Morgan, supra, 88 Cal.App.4th at pp. 66-67 [isolated employment decisions made by different decision makers after a degree of permanence did not constitute continuing conduct].)

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

MED CAFE CORP, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION VS MOSTAFA KARIMBEIK, ET AL.

Motion to Strike Given the Court’s ruling on demurrer, Defendants’ motion to strike is DENIED, as MOOT.

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

ANNE SHOYKHET, ET AL. VS NATHALIE DUBOIS, ET AL.

These unlawful methods include “[r]epresenting that goods or services have sponsorship, approval, characteristics, ingredients, uses, benefits, or quantities that they do not have or that a person has a sponsorship, approval, status, affiliation, or connection that he or she does not have” and “[r]epresenting that goods or services are of a particular standard, quality, or grade, or that goods are of a particular style or model, if they are of another.” (Civ. Code, § 1770, subds. (a)(5), (a)(7).)

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

MARSHA A. JOHNSON VS BOARD OF REGISTERED NURSES

Motion to Reclassify Defendant moves to reclassify this matter from limited to unlimited jurisdiction based on the requested relief. Despite Plaintiff’s identification of this action as a limited civil action, the action is currently classified as an unlimited civil action based on the relief sought. Therefore, Defendant Board of Registered Nursing’s Motion to Reclassify Matter from Limited to Unlimited Jurisdiction is DENIED, as MOOT.

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

KOUROSH IZADPANAHI VS MARIA ALMA YOLANDA IBARRA DABDOUB, ET AL.

Motion to Strike Based on the Court’s ruling on demurrer, Defendant’s motion to strike is DENIED, as MOOT.

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA VS CHARLES PETERS

Request for Judicial Notice Plaintiffs request judicial notice of the Court’s Tentative Ruling on the Application for a Preliminary Injunction and three provisions of the Beverly Hills Municipal Code. Plaintiffs’ request is GRANTED, pursuant to Evidence Code section 452, subdivisions (b) and (d). Analysis A motion for judgment on the pleadings has the same function as a general demurrer but is made after the time for demurrer has expired. (Code Civ. Proc., § 438, subd. (f).)

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

NINA MARIE JOHNSON VS IAN PATTON, ET AL.

As such, Defendants’ motion to strike is GRANTED, with twenty (20) days leave to amend, as to her request for attorney’s fees. Upon amending the complaint, Plaintiff shall provide the contractual basis for such a claim.

  • Hearing

    Jul 24, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

EDUARD GASPARYAN VS. DANIEL GREEN ET. AL.

It is clear that the motion to compel the deposition (by ex parte application) was necessary for the deposition to take place. Accordingly, sanctions are warranted. The amount of sanctions requested is considered unreasonably high for the amount of work which this motion should have taken.

  • Hearing

    Jul 24, 2020

LA LIVE PROPERTIES, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS KA WAIKWAN, AN INDIVIDUAL, ET AL.

The Court DENIES Plaintiff’s motion for bifurcation.

  • Hearing

    Jul 23, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

LOREN NAUTA V. SUSAN MURPHY

In the interim, Nauta filed a “Supplemental Opposition to Motion for a Change of Venue and Notice of a Stay,” on December 23, 2019, and again on December 30, 2019. The supplemental opposition states the conservatee, Loren Nauta, has instituted bankruptcy proceedings requiring a stay of this action. The second Supplemental Opposition included a “Notice of Bankruptcy Case Filing.” Currently before the Court is Murphy’s Motion to Dismiss, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 399(a).

  • Hearing

    Jul 22, 2020

(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)

Accordingly, the motion is GRANTED.

  • Hearing

    Jul 20, 2020

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.