What is a Motion for Sanctions?

Useful Rulings on Motion for Sanctions – General

Recent Rulings on Motion for Sanctions – General

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

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY VS. SANTA ANA RV STORAGE, L.P.

Given that CCP § 1263.510 mandates compensation for lost goodwill for the owner of a business conducted on the property taken, the Court will not preclude such recovery in the absence of express exclusionary language in the lease. That being said, it is not clear that SARVS necessarily will be eligible for such compensation.

  • Hearing

T-12 THREE, LLC VS. TURNER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

T-12 The motion is moot as to the Third Cause of Action by T-12 for indemnity.

  • Hearing

THE CITIES OF DUARTE VS STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD AND CITY OF GARDENA VS REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD

A peremptory writ of administrative mandamus shall issue under the seal of this Court, remanding the matter to Respondents and commanding Respondents to set aside the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System within the Coastal Watersheds of Los Angeles County, except for discharges originating from the City of Long Beach MS4, Order No. R4-2012-0175, NPDES No. CAS004001, as amended on June 16, 2015 by State Board Order WQ 2015-0075. 2.

  • Hearing

VELAZQUEZ VS KIA MOTORS AMERICA INC.

No appearance is required at the hearing set for 6/21/19.

  • Hearing

PERSOLVE LEGAL GROUP, LLP VS LETICIA HERNANDEZ

On June 5, 2020, Plaintiff filed a complaint, asserting causes of action against Hernandez and Does 1-100 for: Breach of Contract Money Lent Account Stated On November 3, 2020, Hernandez’s default was entered. An Order to Show Cause Re: Failure to Proceed with Default Judgment is set for February 1, 2020.

  • Hearing

MICHAEL PHAM, BY AND THROUGH HIS GUARDIAN AD LITEM, JOSEPH PHAM, ET AL. VS SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, ET AL.

The Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings will not be heard on this date in Department 28. No further hearings will be heard in Department 28, Spring Street Courthouse, as of 11/13/20.

  • Hearing

CEMEX USA, INC. VS ATILANO, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

On August 20, 2020, Plaintiff filed a complaint, asserting causes of action against Corporation, Atilano and Does 1-10 for: Breach of Contract Open Book Account Account Stated Reasonable Value Personal Guarantee On October 16, 2020, Corporation’s and Atilano’s defaults were entered. A Case Management Conference is set for January 22, 2021. Discussion Plaintiff’s Application for Default Judgment is DENIED without prejudice.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

717 NOGALES, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS NEW DIAMOND TRUCKING, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION AND, ET AL.

On January 30, 2020, Plaintiff filed a complaint, asserting a cause of action against New Diamond, Sweet & Cozy and Does 1-10 for: Unlawful Detainer On February 26, 2020, New Diamond’s default was entered. On June 22, 2020, Plaintiff dismissed Sweet & Cozy, without prejudice. An Order to Show Cause Re: Failure to Proceed with Default Judgment is set for January 15, 2021. Discussion Plaintiff’s Application for Default Judgment is DENIED without prejudice.

  • Hearing

MARK LIU VS XUEFAN LIU

Zhang”) and Does 1-10 for: Breach of Contract Fraud Conversion Common Counts (i.e., Money Had and Received) On November 9, 2019, X. Liu’s and S. Zhang’s defaults were entered. On July 23, 2020, Plaintiff dismissed L. Zhang, without prejudice. An Order to Show Cause Re: Failure to Proceed with Default Judgment is set for January 12, 2021. Discussion Plaintiff’s Application for Default Judgment is DENIED without prejudice. The following defects are noted: S. Zhang’s liability remains unclear.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

MICHAEL PHAM, BY AND THROUGH HIS GUARDIAN AD LITEM, JOSEPH PHAM, ET AL. VS SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, ET AL.

The Motion for Summary Judgment will not be heard on this date in Department 28. No further hearings will be heard in Department 28, Spring Street Courthouse, as of 11/13/20.

  • Hearing

PRIME STAFF INC VS PARTNERSHIP STAFFING SOLUTIONS LLC

The actual damage requested in the default judgment exceeds that amount for a total of $1,044,000.59 which includes $851,621.67 for workers' compensation insurance premiums paid to Cross-Defendant, IRS and EDD penalties and fees and costs for workers' compensation claims and $192,378.92 for "administrative fees."

  • Hearing

AVITUS INC. VS ANDIAMO MANAGEMENT COMPANY, A CORPORATION, ET AL.

Andiamo Management Company (19PSCV00240) _____________________________________________ Plaintiff Avitus, Inc.’s APPLICATION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT Tentative Ruling Plaintiff Avitus, Inc.’s Application for Default Judgment is DENIED without prejudice. Background Plaintiff Avitus, Inc.

  • Hearing

HASMIK KANATARYAN, ET AL. VS CHARLENE SARSTEDT, ET AL.

E of the Glendale Courthouse, for all purposes except trial. Department 1 hereby delegates to the Independent Calendar Court the authority to assign the case for trial to that Independent Calendar Court. Any pending motions or hearings, including trial and status conferences, will be reset, continued or vacated at the direction of the newly assigned Independent Calendar court. This minute order serves as the order of the Court.PLAINTIFF SHALL GIVE NOTICE TO ALL PARTIES OF RECORD.

  • Hearing

GRDSHP OF SCOTT

Proposed Order on Judicial Council Form GC-224 that contains specific, non- conclusory findings and the basis for each finding; factual basis must specifically state grounds of abuse, neglect and/or abandonment. Order must contain findings that (1) reunification with ward’s parents is not viable; and, (2) it is not in the ward’s best interest to return to his country of origin or last habitual residence and the reason for not returning.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

HAI YING RUAN, ET AL. VS CUONG THOAI DIEP, ET AL.

Motion to Strike Based upon the recommendation made on the demurrer, Defendants’ motion to strike portions of the complaint is MOOT.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

PETITION OF TRAVEON C GAINS

Per 12-10-19 minute order, court ordered a Petition for Final Distribution to be filed and calendared for 2-25-20.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

RE: PET’N TO COMPEL TIMOTHY MARTINI TO ACCT; RPT ACTS COMPEL

Note: Petition For Instructions to Sell Trust Real Property filed by petitioner is set for 2-28- 2021. KRIEGER FAMILY TRUST ESTABLISH STEVEN DURFLINGER, JR KONSTANTINE A DEMIRIS PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE -- See also Lines # 13 and 19 – Need appearances to report status Notes: 1. Per 8-15-19 minute order, several family members appeared in objection and court ordered written objections to be filed by 9-27-19. None has been filed. 2.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

RE: FIRST STATUS REPORT OF THE EXECUTOR'S ADMINISTRATION

Verified declaration by petitioner to include an itemized list of expenses for which he is seeking reimbursement FLORINDA CAMPOS GERMAN CAMPOS ANTHONY GUY ASHE PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need: 1. Verified declaration by petitioner to include Melvin Peterson, Michael Greene, Kenneth Schneider, Kathryn Sandberg and Susan Kirkpatrick Taylor as persons entitled to receive notice. 2.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

ESTATE OF ETHEL MAE HARTS

RE: PET’N FOR LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION FILED ON 08/19/20 BY DELPHIA LANCASTER PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need: Petition verified. Petition verification was not dated by petitioner. (CCP § 2015.5) DELPHIA LANCASTER JASON JM ROSS ETHEL MAE HARTS

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

RE: PET’N FOR CONSTRUCTION OF TRUST INSTRUMENT & CONFIRMATION

Verified declaration by petitioner to clarify whether you have attended the orientation class for unlicensed conservators pursuant to LR 7.4164. 3. Order Appointing Probate Conservator Form GC-340 (adopted 1-15-16) The Court is still waiting for: 1. Report of court-appointed counsel Carolyn D. Cain (limited) 2. Assessment from Regional Center. PrC § 1827.5; WIC § 4620.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

RE: PET’N FOR COMPENSATION

Citation filed 9-28-2020 states Citation was served 9-7-2020 for a hearing 8-26-2020. CHRISTY REYNA RAMIREZ SURIO RASILIO SURIO

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

PETITION OF CHE ANDREA TRAVERS

RE: OSC RE: NAME CHANGE FILED BY CHE' TRAVERS PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Che Travers still must do the following: File a Proof of Publication of Order to Show Cause For Change of Name CHE ANDREA TRAVERS PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Meiasha Davis, mother, still must do the following: Have a copy of the Order to Show Cause personally served on each father and file a Proof of Service with the court or file a verified declaration

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE

Proposed Order The Court is waiting for these items: 1. Report of Atty. Summer Selleck 2. Report of Atty. Robert O. Morris Need: 1. UCCJEA Form FL-105 verified. Verification is not dated. 2. Court Investigator’s Report Note: Form ICWA-030 was filed 11-18-2020. Need proof of mailing by clerk. CRC 5.481 FILED ON 06/11/20 BY SHEILA CRANDELL PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need appearances Note: Objection filed by Atty. Rex Crandell 10-5-2020.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

FALISHA PORTER VS PHARMAVITE, LLC

There is no information about when plaintiff worked for the City of Pasadena. For instance, was it 15 years ago or immediately before Pharmavite’s hire? Defendant does not claim that plaintiff was terminated for cause. Or that she was terminated at all. Also, it is unclear how employment with the City of Pasadena for some unspecified time prior to her employment with Pharmavite is relevant. It is defendant’s burden of establishing good cause for how these records relate to its specific defenses.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

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.