What is a Motion to Vacate Sister-State Judgment?

Useful Rulings on Motion to Vacate Sister-State Judgment

Recent Rulings on Motion to Vacate Sister-State Judgment

1-25 of 10000 results

PRICE VS THE CITY OF ANAHEIM

State Water Resources Control Bd. (1994) 23 Cal.App.4th 1459, 1471 [internal citations and footnote omitted].) “[A]n irreparable injury is one for which either (1) its pecuniary value is not susceptible to monetary valuation, or (2) the item is so unique its loss deprives the possessor of intrinsic values not replaceable by money or in kind.” (Jessen v. Keystone Savings & Loan Assn. (1983) 142 Cal.App.3d 454, 457.)

  • Hearing

T-12 THREE, LLC VS. TURNER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

s Motion for Summary Adjudication 4)Defendant/Cross-Defendant/Cross-Complainant Turner Construction Company's Motion for Summary Judgment or, in the Alternative, Summary Adjudication Against Plaintiffs 1. Motion by Saddleback Corp. dba Saddleback Waterproof for Summary Judgment or Adjudication as to Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint Defendant Saddleback’s motion for summary judgment and summary adjudication of Issues 5 and 6 (statute of limitations) is DENIED.

  • Hearing

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

Where the judgment commands that the order or decision be set aside, it may order the reconsideration of the case in light of the court’s opinion and judgment and may order respondent to take such further action as is specially enjoined upon it by law, but the judgment shall not limit or control in any way the discretion legally vested in the respondent. (Emphasis added.) Draft Proposed Judgment.

  • Hearing

VELAZQUEZ VS KIA MOTORS AMERICA INC.

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). The hearings on the applications are continued to 7/19/19 to allow the applicants to provide supplemental information regarding the foregoing factors. The supplemental information should be submitted by 7/12/19. No appearance is required at the hearing set for 6/21/19.

  • Hearing

PERSOLVE LEGAL GROUP, LLP VS LETICIA HERNANDEZ

with the date of the judgment and the title of the court and the case”).

  • 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.

Yes Dismissal of all parties against whom judgment is not sought or an application for separate judgment against specified parties under CCP 579, supported by a showing of grounds for each judgment. (CRC 3.1800(a)(7).) Yes Mandatory Judicial Council Form CIV-100. (CRC 3.1800(a).) Yes Relief sought is within amount of prayer of complaint or statement of damages. (Due Process; Greenup v. Rodman (1986) 42 Cal.3d 822, 824.) Yes Summary of the case. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(1).)

  • 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.

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

Yes Dismissal of all parties against whom judgment is not sought or an application for separate judgment against specified parties under CCP 579, supported by a showing of grounds for each judgment. (CRC 3.1800(a)(7).) Yes Mandatory Judicial Council Form CIV-100. (CRC 3.1800(a).) Yes Relief sought is within amount of prayer of complaint or statement of damages. (Due Process; Greenup v. Rodman (1986) 42 Cal.3d 822, 824.) Yes Summary of the case. (CRC 3.1800 (a)(1).)

  • 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

On the other hand, the FACC and the Cross-Complainant's additional declarations state that the request is based upon the terms of the parties' agreement that provides for recovery of reasonable attorney fees. In such case, the Local Rule 3.214(a) applies and the Court orders the Cross-Complainant to revise and reduce the amount in accordance with the rule and the new compensatory damage. Clerk to give notice _____________________________ Dennis J. Landin, Judge of the Superior Court

  • 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

GRDSHP OF SCOTT

Verified declaration by petitioner to specify any state laws upon which you base the grounds for your petition and allegations supporting your findings. 3. 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.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

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

On this basis, the Court agrees with Defendants’ assessment that the FAC needs to be amended to clearly state this a tort for aiding and abetting against the Moving Defendants.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

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

Verified declaration by petitioner to state names, current addresses and relationships of all persons entitled to receive notice. LR 7.112 3. Proof of service in the manner provided in CCP § 415.10 (30 days personal service) or CCP § 415.30 (30 days proof of mailing with Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt) on each person claiming an interest in, or having title to or possession of, the property. PrC § 851(a)(2) KRISTEN GATES CHARLES B WOOD KRISTEN GATES CHARLES B.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

RE: FIRST STATUS REPORT OF THE EXECUTOR'S ADMINISTRATION

Verified declaration by petitioner to state whether notice was given, or needed, to Dept. of Health Care Services as to predeceased spouse. PrC § 215, 9202(a); i.e., did predeceased spouse receive Medi-Cal benefits? 4. Compliance with CRC 7.250 regarding any acts taken under IAEA w/notice of proposed action. (Specifics needed including date was given and date action was taken) 5. Verified declaration by petitioner to include date of each receipt, and itemized expenses re: sale of real property.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

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

Submit Order Fixing Residence Outside the State of California Form GC-090 Note: Pursuant to court’s order dated 8/1/2018, Petitioners previously moved the ward to Nevada and were ordered to transfer the guardianship to Nevada within four months of the move. ARMANI JARED PICKARD SUMMER C SELLECK DIANA LYNN PICKARD MATTHEW ALLEN PICKARD Need appearances Need appearances

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

RE: PET’N FOR COMPENSATION

Verified declaration by petitioner to state names, current addresses and relationships of all persons entitled to receive notice so court can confirm mailing. LR 7.112 2. Proof of mailing to conservatee or waiver by counsel. PrC § 1460 3. Verified declaration by petitioner to clarify payments to AT&T. It appears amounts paid are excessive for periods in which conservatee lived in a care facility. 4. Original financial account statement(s) as required by PrC § 2620(c) (2), (3) 5.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

CHANGLIANG DAI VS THOMAS CHEN, ET AL.

The exhibits attached to “Plaintiff’s Case Summary in Suuport [sic] of Request for Default Judgment” have not been authenticated. ANALYSIS Yes (10/23/19; 9/1/20) Default Entered. (JC Form CIV-100.) Yes Dismissal of all parties against whom judgment is not sought or an application for separate judgment against specified parties under CCP 579, supported by a showing of grounds for each judgment. (CRC 3.1800(a)(7).) Yes Mandatory Judicial Council Form CIV-100. (CRC 3.1800(a).)

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

WESTERN WORLD INSURANCE COMPANY VS ASSOCIATED INDUSTRIES INSURANCE COMPANY INC ET AL

Nature of Proceedings: Motion for Summary Judgment Tentative not yet posted, please check again.

  • Hearing

  • Judge Donna Geck
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

NEWPORT CAPITAL RECOVERY GROUP II LLC VS SUSAN SCHWARTZ

Nature of Proceedings: Motion to Vacate Tentative not yet posted, please check again.

  • Hearing

  • Judge Donna Geck
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

MATTER OF THE YOUNG REVOCABLE TRUST

File a verified declaration to state names, current addresses and relationships of all persons entitled to receive notice. LR 7.112 3. Have a Judicial Council Form Notice of Hearing and copy of petition mailed to all persons entitled to receive notice and file a Proof of Service with court. 4. Submit a proposed Order Note: Letters of Temporary Guardianship issued to paternal aunt, Tanicia Currie, 8-5-19.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

RE: PET’N FOR APPT OF CONSERVATOR OF PERSON & ESTATE

File a declaration to state why termination of the guardianship is in the best interest of the minor 3. Proof of mailing petition and notice of hearing to all parties entitled to notice Note: Letters of guardianship issued to maternal grandmother Janelle Williams on 12/17/2018 JADE HORSLEY JANELLE WILLIAMS JODA HORSLEY PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Latisha Wilson, sister, still needs to do the following: 1. Appear at the hearing 2.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    Fenstermacher

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

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

Plaintiff alleges that on October 18, 2018, without authorization, Chen and Hung filed a new statement of information with the California Secretary of State, naming Hung a Director of Globalinks. Chen, in turn, seeks the involuntary dissolution of Globalinks and alleges that He has engaged in “brutal physical attacks” on Chen.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

RE: PET’N FOR LETTERS OF ADMINISTRATION, NO WILL, IAEA

Verified declaration by petitioner to state names, current addresses and relationships of all persons entitled to receive notice. LR 7.112 4. Proof of mailing Judicial Council Form Notice of Hearing to all persons entitled to receive notice 5.

  • Hearing

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

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.