What is a Motion to Extend the Time Within Which an Action Must Be Brought to Trial?

Useful Rulings on Motion to Extend the Time Within Which an Action Must Be Brought to Trial

Recent Rulings on Motion to Extend the Time Within Which an Action Must Be Brought to Trial

1-25 of 10000 results

T-12 THREE, LLC VS. TURNER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

And, even if it were added to the pleading, it would fail as a matter of law for the reasons explained above. The cases relied upon by Plaintiffs, including Marina Tenants Association v. Deauville Marina Dev. Co. (1986) 181 Cal.App.3d 122, Gilbert Fin. Corp. v. Steelform Contracting Co. (1978) 82 Cal.App.3d 65, and Shell v. Schmidt (1954) 126 Cal.App.2d 279, do not support Plaintiffs’ third-party beneficiary theory. These cases confirm that incidental beneficiaries are not entitled to sue under a contract.

  • Hearing

    Apr 25, 2026

KAREN KHOSTEGHYAN VS CITY OF LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND POWER, A PUBLIC UTILITY, ET AL.

(c) Form of amendment The court may deem a motion to file an amendment to a pleading to be a motion to file an amended pleading and require the filing of the entire previous pleading with the approved amendments incorporated into it. (Subd (c) adopted effective January 1, 2002.) (d) Requirements for amendment to a pleading An amendment to a pleading must not be made by alterations on the face of a pleading except by permission of the court. All alterations must be initialed by the court or the clerk.

  • Hearing

    Aug 03, 2020

ANTHONY SAM VS RENEE KWAN ET AL

Under California Rules of Court, rule 3.1324, a motion to amend a pleading before trial must (1) include a copy of the proposed amendment or amended pleading, which must be serially numbered to differentiate it from previous pleadings or amendments; (2) state what allegations in the previous pleading are proposed to be deleted, if any, and where, by page, paragraph and line number, the deleted allegations are located; and (3) state what allegations are proposed to be added to the previous pleading, if any, and

  • Hearing

    Jul 29, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

MARSHA A. JOHNSON VS BOARD OF REGISTERED NURSES

A demurrer can be used only to challenge defects that appear on the face of the pleading under attack or from matters outside the pleading that are judicially noticeable. (See Donabedian v. Mercury Ins. Co. (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 968, 994 [in ruling on a demurrer, a court may not consider declarations, matters not subject to judicial notice, or documents not accepted for the truth of their contents].)

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

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

A demurrer can be used only to challenge defects that appear on the face of the pleading under attack or from matters outside the pleading that are judicially noticeable. (See Donabedian v. Mercury Ins. Co. (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 968, 994 [in ruling on a demurrer, a court may not consider declarations, matters not subject to judicial notice, or documents not accepted for the truth of their contents].)

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

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

A demurrer can be used only to challenge defects that appear on the face of the pleading under attack or from matters outside the pleading that are judicially noticeable. (See Donabedian v. Mercury Ins. Co. (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 968, 994 [in ruling on a demurrer, a court may not consider declarations, matters not subject to judicial notice, or documents not accepted for the truth of their contents].)

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

HAGOP TCHAKERIAN VS CITY OF LOS ANGELES

The burden is on the complainant to show the Court that a pleading can be amended successfully. (Blank v. Kirwan (1985) 39 Cal.3d 311, 318.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

HOMAYOUN LARIAN VS EDWARD CZUKER, ET AL.

A demurrer can be used only to challenge defects that appear on the face of the pleading under attack or from matters outside the pleading that are judicially noticeable. (See Donabedian v. Mercury Ins. Co. (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 968, 994 [in ruling on a demurrer, a court may not consider declarations, matters not subject to judicial notice, or documents not accepted for the truth of their contents].)

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

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

A demurrer can be used only to challenge defects that appear on the face of the pleading under attack or from matters outside the pleading that are judicially noticeable. (See Donabedian v. Mercury Ins. Co. (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 968, 994 [in ruling on a demurrer, a court may not consider declarations, matters not subject to judicial notice, or documents not accepted for the truth of their contents].)

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA VS CHARLES PETERS

Again, “the grounds for the motion must appear on the face of the challenged pleading or from any matter of which the court is required to take judicial notice.” (Civic Partners Stockton, LLC v. Youssefi, supra, 218 Cal.App.4th at p. 1013.) Rather, Defendant’s arguments relate to Plaintiffs’ ability to prove the violations of the BHMC, not whether the violations have been sufficiently stated on the face of the complaint.

  • Hearing

    Jul 26, 2020

NINA MARIE JOHNSON VS IAN PATTON, ET AL.

A demurrer can be used only to challenge defects that appear on the face of the pleading under attack or from matters outside the pleading that are judicially noticeable. (See Donabedian v. Mercury Ins. Co. (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 968, 994 [in ruling on a demurrer, a court may not consider declarations, matters not subject to judicial notice, or documents not accepted for the truth of their contents].)

  • Hearing

    Jul 24, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

MATTER OF: ALEIZA ROGERS

Petitioner is directed to submit a supplement to the court identifying by page, paragraph, and line number (where applicable) all additions to and deletions from the prior pleading. Appearances required. How to Appear The court is currently conducting hearings via CourtCall or Zoom videoconference. Please see https://www.sbcourts.org/gi/COVID19_orders_policies.shtm for information on how to access those platforms. Note for Zoom appearance: Each department has a unique Zoom Meeting ID number.

  • Hearing

    Jul 21, 2020

MATTER OF LEONARD A AND MAVI GONZALES TRUST

According to the Minute Order of March 2, 2020, a responsive pleading to the Second Amended Petition (filed Dec. 17, 2019) should have been filed by April 27, 2020. Since that deadline, there have been two status reports filed with the Court. The first status report, filed May 18, 2020, by Petitioners, shows an agreement has been reached by all beneficiaries and global settlement of the case should be forthcoming. The second status report, filed more recently by Ms. Brockway and Ms.

  • Hearing

    Jul 20, 2020

  • Judge Jed Beebe
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

KIM LEVINE ET AL VS JANET BERSCHNEIDER ET AL

And, where a party's right to attorneys’ fees rests on section 1717, the fact that the entire contract was before the court in the original action is a sufficient ‘pleading’ to authorize an attorneys' fees award.” Ganey v. Doran, 191 Cal.App.3d 901, 911 (1987) [internal quotations and citation omitted]. In the motion, Berg says the contract provides for attorney fees. Berg does not provide a copy of the lease agreement.

  • Hearing

    Jul 17, 2020

  • Judge Donna Geck
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

ROGER PERRY VS SCOTT WILLIAM POWERS ET AL

(1) Code of Civil Procedure Section 474 “When the plaintiff is ignorant of the name of a defendant, he must state that fact in the complaint, or the affidavit if the action is commenced by affidavit, and such defendant may be designated in any pleading or proceeding by any name, and when his true name is discovered, the pleading or proceeding must be amended accordingly ….” (Code Civ. Proc., § 474.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 17, 2020

  • Judge Donna Geck
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

STEPHEN LASHBROOK VS CITY OF LOS ANGELES ET AL

If contested, declarations by the nonsettlor should be filed which in many cases could require the moving party to file responsive counterdeclarations to negate the lack of good faith asserted by the nonsettling contesting party. (192 Cal.App.3d 1251, 1260-1261 [citation omitted].) In Tech-Bilt, Inc. v.

  • Hearing

    Jul 17, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

AMERICAN RECOVERY SERVICE INCORPORATED, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION AS ASSIGNEE OF STATE COMPENSATION INSURANCE FUND, A PUBLIC E VS QUINTANA CONSTRUCTION, INC.

.)¿ In a demurrer proceeding, the defects must be apparent on the face of the pleading or via proper judicial notice.¿ (Donabedian v. Mercury Ins. Co. (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 968, 994.)¿ “A demurrer tests the pleadings alone and not the evidence or other extrinsic matters.¿ Therefore, it lies only where the defects appear on the face of the pleading or are judicially noticed.”¿ (SKF Farms v.

  • Hearing

    Jul 17, 2020

CYNTHIA MARIA RIBAS VS BEAU MONDE ASSOCIATION, ET AL.

.)¿ In a demurrer proceeding, the defects must be apparent on the face of the pleading or via proper judicial notice.¿ (Donabedian v. Mercury Ins. Co. (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 968, 994.)¿ “A demurrer tests the pleadings alone and not the evidence or other extrinsic matters.¿ Therefore, it lies only where the defects appear on the face of the pleading or are judicially noticed.”¿ (SKF Farms v.

  • Hearing

    Jul 17, 2020

PAOLO REGINALDO VS EDWARD JOHN ANTHONY DERANEY, ET AL.

California Code of Civil Procedure section 435.5 requires that, before filing a motion to strike, the moving party shall meet and confer¿in person or by telephone¿with the party who filed the pleading that is subject of the motion for the purpose of determining whether an agreement can be reached that would resolve the objections to be raised in the demurrer. The parties are to meet and confer at least five days before the date the responsive pleading is due. (Code Civ. Proc., § 435.5, subd. (a)(2).)

  • Hearing

    Jul 17, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

CARRIEN QIAN HE, AN INDIVIDUAL VS JAY MIN CHEN, AN INDIVIDUAL, ET AL.

Also, “[a] motion to amend a pleading before trial must: (1) Include a copy of the proposed amendment or amended pleading, which must be serially numbered to differentiate it from previous pleadings or amendments; (2) State what allegations in the previous pleading are proposed to be deleted, if any, and where, by page, paragraph and line number, the deleted allegations are located; and (3) State what allegations are proposed to be added to the previous pleading, if any, and where, by page, paragraph, and line

  • Hearing

    Jul 17, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

SPERLING LAC-VV LLC, VS RAYMOND T. CERULLI INDIVIDUALLY, ET AL.

In addition, Plaintiff has the burden of showing the manner in which it can amend the pleadings to correct this defect and how that amendment will change the legal effect of the pleading. (Goodman v. Kennedy (1976) 18 Cal.3d 335, 349.) However, the demurrer is unopposed such that Plaintiff has not provided any additional facts or proposed amendments to the pleading. Based upon the above ruling, the Status Conference set on 7/27/2020, is advanced to this date and vacated. This case is dismissed.

  • Hearing

    Jul 17, 2020

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

SHON HOLDERBAUM VS ELIZABETH MATTHEWS, ET AL.

Rather, the burden is on the plaintiff to show in what manner he or she can amend the complaint, and how that amendment will change the legal effect of the pleading. Goodman v. Kennedy (1976) 18 Cal.3d 335, 349; Hendy v. Losse (1991) 54 Cal.3d 723, 742. Plaintiff does not allege any facts to support his request to amend his complaint. Accordingly, leave to amend is denied. Defendants’ motion to strike punitive damages is GRANTED without leave to amend. Defendants are ordered to give notice.

  • Hearing

    Jul 17, 2020

CYNTHIA MARIA RIBAS VS BEAU MONDE ASSOCIATION, ET AL.

.)¿ In a demurrer proceeding, the defects must be apparent on the face of the pleading or via proper judicial notice.¿ (Donabedian v. Mercury Ins. Co. (2004) 116 Cal.App.4th 968, 994.)¿ “A demurrer tests the pleadings alone and not the evidence or other extrinsic matters.¿ Therefore, it lies only where the defects appear on the face of the pleading or are judicially noticed.”¿ (SKF Farms v.

  • Hearing

    Jul 17, 2020

FRANK MCHUGH VS ADAM GREENFIELD, ET AL.

If Plaintiff feels sanctions remain warranted, he may serve and file a subsequent motion for sanctions, which addresses the operative pleading.

  • Hearing

    Jul 16, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

888 TOWER, LP, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP VS SMITH PATTEN, A BUSINESS ENTITY, FORM UNKNOWN

Application for this relief shall be accompanied by a copy of the answer or other pleading proposed to be filed therein, otherwise the application shall not be granted, and shall be made within a reasonable time, in no case exceeding six months, after the judgment, dismissal, order, or proceeding was taken . . . .

  • Hearing

    Jul 16, 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.