Dulap Vs Dunlap

Case Number: 24STCP01522 Hearing Date: July 15, 2024 Dept: 9 Petitioner must double check the spelling and legibility of the new name on the proposed decree. If Petitioner is satisfied with the spelling and legibility of the new name on the proposed decree, NO APPEARANCE IS NECESSARY. If the new name is not clearly written and correctly spelled on the proposed decree, Petitioner must appear at the hearing to submit a corrected proposed decree. The petition is granted. A copy of the signed decree will be available in Room 112 of the Clerk's Office seven days after the date of the hearing. Once the proposed decree is signed, it cannot be amended without a new petition to change name.

SIERRA PACIFIC WAGE AND HOUR CASES Case Number: 5235 Tentative Ruling on Case Management Conference: This coordinated proceeding is on calendar for a Case Management Conference. The Court has reviewed the Case Management Conference Statements filed by Plaintiff Smith and Defendant Sierra Pacific Industries. STAY. The McDonald matter remains stayed pending appeal. CLASS NOTICE. The Court appreciates the efforts made by SPI in identifying employees placed at SPI by staffing agencies and is in agreement with SPI’s suggestions regarding the employees at SPI placed by Sonora Employment Agency. The Court invites Plaintiff McDonald to discuss the proposals made by SPI. MOTIONS. There are currently no motions pending in the Smith matter. Pending in McDonald are SPI’s Motion for Extension of Time to Comply with Court Order Due to Impossibility that was filed on August 31, 2023 and SPI’s Motion for Protective Order Regarding Preservation and Production of Video Camera Footage that was filed on September 1, 2023. Both motions are stayed. TRIAL DATES. McDonald is not presently set for trial. The Court notes that Plaintiffs in Smith filed their Third Amended Complaint on February 28, 2024. SPI filed an Answer on April 2, 2024. As the matter is now at issue, the parties should be ready to discuss a timeline for a Motion for Class Certification. FURTHER CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE DATE. The Court intends to set a further Case Management Conference and will discuss available dates with counsel.

24CV01753 In re: Terian, Madylin Nayiri EVENT: Change of name (adult) There is no proof of publication on file. Upon the filing of the proof of publication, the Court will sign the decree provided.

FL-23-001672 – MEDINA-NARANJO VS SINGLETON Petitioner’s Request for Order re Change Venue—DENIED, without prejudice. There is no proof of service on file and an Affidavit of Non-Service was filed on July 11, 2024.  Moreover, the current custody order provides that neither party may change the minor child’s county of residence from this forum except upon forty-five (45) days prior written notice.  (FOAH Mediation, p. 4 of 5, No. 19.) The following are the tentative ruling cases calendared before Judge David I. Hood in Department #25: THERE ARE NO TENTATIVES.

FL-19-002701 – WHITTAKER VS GRAY Petitioner’s Request for Order re Enforce Judgment, etc.—HEARING REQUIRED. The Court finds that proof of service is on file and reflects valid and timely individual mail service of Respondent as required.  (Fam. Code, § 215(a).)  Respondent did not file a Responsive Declaration or written opposition.  Consequently, the Court is inclined to grant the requested relief.  However, a final judgment is already an “order” that the parties are bound to comply with and a further order to comply by the Court would be redundant.  That said, Petitioner’s claims all relate to that part of the judgment dealing with division of pension plans and this has not been accomplished due to Respondent’s non-cooperation.  Accordingly, the Court will not further delay proceedings by again ordering Respondent’s cooperation and, instead, finds good cause to appoint the clerk of the Court as elisor to sign the QDRO and other necessary papers on Respondent’s behalf.  But Petitioner must first submit a proposed order with the exact documents to be signed attached to it for review and approval by the Court.  (Local Rules, rule 7.08(A).)  Petitioner is free to use all the means to obtain information provided by the Civil Discovery Act if documents or other information has not been provided by Respondent.  (Fam. Code, § 218.)  And the Court will reserve jurisdiction over the issue of monetary sanctions against Respondent for the necessity of Petitioner having to file post-judgment motions to obtain Respondent’s compliance.

CITY OF ANDERSON VS. KRUMINS, ET AL. Case Number: 23CV-0203032 This matter is on calendar for review regarding status of the receivership and clean up of the property. On July 2, 2024, the Court granted the Receiver’s Ex Parte Application for Order to Respondents to Vacate the Receivership Property. The Ninth Report of the Receiver was filed on July 10, 2024. An appearance by all parties is necessary on today’s calendar to discuss the status of the receivership.

No appearances necessary. The petition for dissolution was filed on January 5, 2024 and a response was filed on June 12, 2024. After review of the CMC statements, the parties are ordered to serve their Preliminary Financial Disclosures (FL-140) and file a Declaration Regarding Service (FL-141) before the next court appearance. Further case management is scheduled for December 3, 2024 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 3. A Family Law CMC Statement must be filed and served at least 15 days prior to the CMC. (https://www.amadorcourt.org/localForms/familyLaw/FamilyLaw_CMC-STATEMENT.pdf)

CITY OF ANDERSON VS. KRUMINS, ET AL. Case Number: 23CV-0203032 This matter is on calendar for review regarding status of the receivership and clean up of the property. On July 2, 2024, the Court granted the Receiver’s Ex Parte Application for Order to Respondents to Vacate the Receivership Property. The Ninth Report of the Receiver was filed on July 10, 2024. An appearance by all parties is necessary on today’s calendar to discuss the status of the receivership.