We are checking for the latest updates in this case. We will email you when the process is complete.

Scardino V. Salvo

Case Last Refreshed: 3 years ago

Scardino , Gretchen N, filed a(n) Breach of Contract - Commercial case represented by Scardino Gretchen Neusel, against Salvo , Paul V, Salvo Enterprises, Pecky Cypress Depot Llc, in the jurisdiction of Travis County, TX, . Travis County, TX Superior Courts .

Case Details for Scardino , Gretchen N v. Salvo , Paul V , et al.

Filing Date

May 29, 2014

Category

Debt/Contract (Gen Lit )

Last Refreshed

February 20, 2021

Practice Area

Commercial

Filing Location

Travis County, TX

Matter Type

Breach of Contract

Parties for Scardino , Gretchen N v. Salvo , Paul V , et al.

Plaintiffs

Scardino , Gretchen N

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Scardino Gretchen Neusel

Defendants

Salvo , Paul V

Salvo Enterprises

Pecky Cypress Depot Llc

Case Documents for Scardino , Gretchen N v. Salvo , Paul V , et al.

RESPONSE SUMMARY JUDGMENT MTN

Date: September 28, 2015

MOTION TO RETAIN/REINSTATE

Date: March 24, 2016

MTN:OTHER MOTION

Date: June 07, 2016

ORD:JUDGMENT

Date: June 10, 2016

Case Events for Scardino , Gretchen N v. Salvo , Paul V , et al.

Type Description
Docket Event OTHER FILING
Docket Event NTC:OTHER NOTICE
Docket Event ORD:JUDGMENT
Docket Event MILITARY STATUS AFFIDAVIT
Docket Event MTN:OTHER MOTION
Docket Event CERT OF LAST KNOWN ADDRESS
Docket Event MOTION TO RETAIN/REINSTATE
Docket Event OTHER FILING
Docket Event RESPONSE SUMMARY JUDGMENT MTN
Docket Event EXECUTED SERVICE
See all events

Related Content in Travis County

Case

ALISON VERNHALEN, PLAINTIFF VS. QUALITY OPERATING COMPANY LLC D.B.A BOB'S CONTAINERS, DEFENDANT
Jul 17, 2024 | WONG, TODD | Contract Consumer/Commercial Debt | C-1-CV-24-003824

Case

PHILIP DOLLAR vs. SUMMIT SKY ADVISORY, LLC
Jul 15, 2024 | 98TH, DISTRICT COURT | Debt/Contract - Debt/Contract | D-1-GN-24-004336

Case

AMERICAN EXPRESS NATIONAL BANK, PLAINTIFF VS. CAROLYN RIOS AKA CAROLYN, DEFENDANT
Jul 15, 2024 | SHEPPERD, ERIC M | Contract Consumer/Commercial Debt | C-1-CV-24-003796

Case

THE STATE OF TEXAS, PLAINTIFF VS. COLLYN N GLASPIE, DEFENDANT
Jul 18, 2024 | WONG, TODD | Contract Consumer/Commercial Debt | C-1-CV-24-003839

Case

THE STATE OF TEXAS, PLAINTIFF VS. ROWENA S HARRELL, DEFENDANT
Jul 16, 2024 | WONG, TODD | Contract Consumer/Commercial Debt | C-1-CV-24-003804

Case

RPM LIVING, LLC vs. TIDES AT WHISPERING HILLS OWNER, LLC
Jul 18, 2024 | 345TH, DISTRICT COURT | Debt/Contract - Debt/Contract | D-1-GN-24-004416

Case

THE STATE OF TEXAS, PLAINTIFF VS. ROSALINA E HURT, DEFENDANT
Jul 16, 2024 | WONG, TODD | Contract Consumer/Commercial Debt | C-1-CV-24-003807

Ruling

CORONA COMMUNITY VILLAS INC vs CORONA POST ACUTE LLC
Jul 17, 2024 | CVRI2000489
CORONA COMMUNITY CVRI2000489 VILLAS INC vs CORONA Motion to be Relieved as Counsel POST ACUTE LLC Tentative Ruling: An in camera hearing is to held at 10:00 am.

Ruling

PURUSHOTTAM PATEL, ET AL. VS ADP PAYROLL SERVICES, INC., ET AL.
Jul 16, 2024 | 19STCV45113
Case Number: 19STCV45113 Hearing Date: July 16, 2024 Dept: 78 Superior Court of California ¿ County of Los Angeles ¿ Department 78 ¿ ¿ PURUSHOTTAM PATEL , Plaintiff (s) , vs. PAYROLL SERVICES, INC. , et al., Defendant ( s ) . Case No.:¿ 19STCV45113 Hearing Date:¿ July 1 6 , 2024 [TENTATIVE] ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION Plaintiff Purushottam Patel (Plaintiff) filed a Fifth Amended Complaint against defendants Travelers Property Casualty Company of America, Travelers Property Casualty Agency, Auto Data Processing, Inc., ADP Payroll Services, Inc., Automatic Data Processing Insurance Agency, Inc., Automatic Data Processing, Inc., ADP, Inc. and Does 1 to 1000 breach of contract arising from the cancellation from an insurance policy. On January 12, 2024, trial was continued to May 6, 2024, subject to the following : All discovery and motion cutoff dates remain based on the 3/18/2024 trial date except as follows the cutoff dates for which shall be based on the new trial date: (1) expert discovery; (2) motions regarding expert discovery; (3) fact discovery based upon information learned as a result of discovery obtained through timely filed motions to compel based on the 3/18/2024 trial date; (4) motions to compel discovery related to items covered by #3; and (5) motions in limine . (Min. Order, Jan. 12, 2024.) On March 26, 2024, Plaintiff filed a motion to compel the deposition of the Person Most Qualified (PMQ) of Automatic Data Processing Insurance Agency, Inc . and filed an application ex parte on April 2, 2024 to shorten time to advance the hearing date. On April 4, 2024, the Court denied Plaintiffs ex parte application , while also noting that Plaintiffs motions to compel filed on March 26, 2024 were not timely filed per the January 12, 2024 Order. (Min. Order, April 4, 2024.) Defendants ADP, Inc. f/k/a ADP, LLC and Automatic Data Processing Insurance Agency, Inc . s joint opposition provide that their counsel called Plaintiffs counsel requesting the motions be taken off-calendar, and that Plaintiffs counsel stated he would look into it . (Rojas Decl. ¶ 4.) Plaintiff has not taken the instant motion off-calendar. Based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs motion to compel deposition and production of documents is DENIED . The Court further notes that aside from the instant motion, there are two other motions to compel set for July 18, 2024 and July 22, 2024. Plaintiff is to review the Courts prior orders, and to promptly take these motions off-calendar , unless it falls within one of the specific exceptions outlined in the January 12, 2024 Order . Moving Party is ordered to give notice . DATED: July 1 5 , 2024 __________________________ Hon. Michelle C. Kim Judge of the Superior Court PLEASE TAKE NOTICE: " Parties are encouraged to meet and confer after reading this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreement. " If a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the court at SMCDEPT78@lacourt.org with the Subject line SUBMIT followed by the case number. The body of the email must include the hearing date and time, counsels contact information, and the identity of the party submitting . " Unless all parties submit by email to this tentative ruling, the parties should arrange to appear remotely (encouraged) or in person for oral argument. You should assume that others may appear at the hearing to argue. " If the parties neither submit nor appear at hearing, the Court may take the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court. After the Court has issued a tentative ruling, the Court may prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion without leave.

Ruling

Verdin vs. Nissan North America, Inc.
Jul 18, 2024 | 23CV-0202892
VERDIN VS. NISSAN NORTH AMERICA, INC. Case Number: 23CV-0202892 This matter is on calendar for review regarding status of mediation. No status report has been filed. An appearance is necessary on today’s calendar.

Ruling

China Tianjiu International Resources Group Limited vs Renee Kwan, et al
Jul 19, 2024 | 20CV01351
20CV01351 CHINA TIANJIU INT’L RESOURCES GRP LTD v. KWAN et al. (UNOPPOSED) PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO BE RELIEVED The unopposed motion to be relieved is granted. Plaintiff is ordered to immediately secure successor counsel, since a business entity party cannot proceed in pro per. Notice to prevailing parties: Local Rule 2.10.01 requires you to submit a proposed formal order incorporating, verbatim, the language of any tentative ruling – or attaching and incorporating the tentative by reference - or an order consistent with the announced ruling of the Court, in accordance with California Rule of Court 3.1312. Such proposed order is required even if the prevailing party submitted a proposed order prior to the hearing (unless the tentative is simply to “grant”). Failure to comply with Local Rule 2.10.01 may result in the imposition of sanctions following an order to show cause hearing, if a proposed order is not timely filed.

Ruling

OSCAR ANTONIO MENDEZ ESQUIVEL VS. AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO., INC., A CALIFORNIA ET AL
Jul 19, 2024 | CGC23608068
Matter on the Discovery Calendar for Friday, July 19, 2024, line 5, PLAINTIFF OSCAR ANTONIO MENDEZ ESQUIVEL , AN INDIVIDUAL NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, SET TWO (PART 4 OF 4) Request No. 20, is entitled to the same ruling as No. 15 above, GRANTING the motion to compel further response and production of documents. The motion to compel re Request No. 21 is GRANTED. If there are any such Field Review Comm. reports re the SD definition, they should be produced. If defendant cannot link any reports to the SD definition, it should so respond. The Court has no idea what "customer concerns" re SD means, in plaintiff's Request No. 26. For that reason, the motion is DENIED. Finally, reaching Request No. 31, the defendant's objections are a classic example of a blunderbuss reply. The motion to compel is GRANTED, but the defendant need only respond if a search for the emails is possible and then, if so, what results were obtained. The contested merits of plaintiff's motion to compel, and defendant's objections thereto are such that no sanctions either way are awardable. Any such requests are DENIED. Counsel for plaintiff shall prepare a form of proposed order consistent with the foregoing and, in compliance with Rule 3.1312 of the Rules of Court, submit the form order to defense counsel. Then the proposed order should be forwarded to psw@hassard.com for review and signature. For the 9:00 a.m. Discovery calendar, all attorneys and parties are required to appear remotely. Hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. To appear at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link (DISCOVERY, DEPARTMENT 302 DAILY AT 9:00 A.M.), or dial the corresponding number and use the meeting ID, and password for Discovery Department 302. Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to psw@hassard.com with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. If the tentative ruling is not contested, the parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Pro Tem hearing the motion and the Pro Tem will sign an order confirming the tentative ruling. The prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order repeating verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must e-mail it to the Judge Pro Tem. The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Discovery Department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript may be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: their name, CSR and telephone numbers, and their individual work email address. = (302/JPT) (End of tentative ruling part 4 of 4) = (302/JPT)

Ruling

LEAFY LLC, et al. vs TESLA, INC.
Jul 18, 2024 | Civil Unlimited (Breach of Rental/Lease Contra...) | 24CV067744
24CV067744: LEAFY LLC, et al. vs TESLA, INC. 07/18/2024 Hearing on Motion to Compel Arbitration in Department 518 Tentative Ruling - 07/16/2024 Victoria Kolakowski The Motion to Compel Arbitration filed by Tesla, Inc. on 04/16/2024 is Granted. I. Background Leafy LLC, Leafy Lifestyle Inc., Xi Wang, and Li Lok Chung sued Tesla Inc. for alleged violations of the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act. (Compl., Mar. 14, 2024.) Plaintiffs alleged they purchased a 2019 Tesla Model 3 from Tesla with “electrical defects, electronics defects, interior component defects, exterior and body component defects, suspension system defects and other serious nonconformities to warranty.” (Id. ¶¶ 10, 11.) Plaintiffs filed a complaint asserting causes of action for violations of the Song-Beverly Act. (Id. ¶¶ 16–56.) In response, Tesla moved to compel arbitration under the Motor Vehicle Order Agreement’s arbitration clause. (Mot., Apr. 16, 2024.) Tesla produced a copy of the arbitration agreement, which covered “any dispute between you and Tesla, Inc. and its affiliates” and “any dispute arising out of or rela0ng to any aspect of the relationship between you and Tesla.” (Kim Decl. Ex. 1, at 3, Apr. 16, 2024.) Plaintiffs did not oppose. (See Docket.) II. Orders The motion is GRANTED. The action is referred to arbitration pursuant to the terms of the arbitration agreement. The action is stayed pending conclusion of arbitration. The Court sets a status conference for Tuesday, November 19, 2024, at 2:30 p.m. to take status on the arbitration proceedings. The Court vacates the initial case management conference scheduled on July 29, 2024. PLEASE NOTE: Pursuant to California Rule of Court 3.1308, subdivision (a)(1), this tentative ruling will become the order of the Court unless it is contested before 4:00 PM on the court day preceding the noticed hearing. To contest a tentative ruling, a party should do the following: First, the party must notify Department 518, by email at Dept518@alameda.courts.ca.gov and SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ALAMEDA 24CV067744: LEAFY LLC, et al. vs TESLA, INC. 07/18/2024 Hearing on Motion to Compel Arbitration in Department 518 copy all counsel of record and self-represented parties. The contesting party must state in the subject line of the email the case name, case number and motion. Second, the party shall log into the eCourt Public Portal, search for this case (e.g., by case number), select the case name, select the "Tentative Rulings" tab, click the "Click to Contest this Ruling" button, enter the party's name and a brief statement of the party's reason for contesting the tentative, and click "Proceed." Parties may appear via videoconference, using the Zoom.com website or application. TO CONNECT TO ZOOM: Department 518 is inviting you to a scheduled ZoomGov meeting. Topic: Department 518's Personal Meeting Room Join ZoomGov Meeting https://alameda-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/16054307984 Meeting ID: 160 5430 7984 One tap mobile +16692545252,,16054307984# US (San Jose) +14154494000,,16054307984# US (US Spanish Line) --- Dial by your location • +1 669 254 5252 US (San Jose)

Ruling

LUZ RESTPERO VS. KIA AMERICA, INC., ET AL
Jul 16, 2024 | CGC23606743
Matter on calendar for Tuesday, July 16, 2024, Line 2, PLAINTIFF LUZ RESTPERO's Motion To Compel Further Responses To Plaintiff's Request For Production Of Documents, Set Two. The matter is continued to August 8, 2024, on the court's motion. =(302/JPT).

Ruling

SCHEINROCK vs AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO., INC.
Jul 16, 2024 | CVPS2203406
Motion to Compel: Attendance at SCHEINROCK vs AMERICAN CVPS2203406 Deposition by AMERICAN HONDA HONDA MOTOR CO., INC. MOTOR CO., INC. Tentative Ruling: Hearing continued to Wednesday July 17, 2024 8:30 a.m. Department PS2. No further briefing will be permitted.

Document

Dale & Klein, L.L.P., DALE & KLEIN, L.L.P. VS. Shahin Zaraienh
Feb 28, 2014 | Singleterry, Luis M. | Contract - Consumer/Commercial/Debt (OCA) | C-1384-14-A

Document

BENITO VASQUEZ VS. AMERICAN SECURITY INSURANCE COMPANY
Jul 16, 2024 | Contract - Consumer/Commercial/Debt (OCA) | CL-24-3012-B

Document

Dale & Klein, L.L.P., DALE & KLEIN, L.L.P. VS. Shahin Zaraienh
Feb 28, 2014 | Singleterry, Luis M. | Contract - Consumer/Commercial/Debt (OCA) | C-1384-14-A

Document

Dale & Klein, L.L.P., DALE & KLEIN, L.L.P. VS. Shahin Zaraienh
Feb 28, 2014 | Singleterry, Luis M. | Contract - Consumer/Commercial/Debt (OCA) | C-1384-14-A

Document

Dale & Klein, L.L.P., DALE & KLEIN, L.L.P. VS. Shahin Zaraienh
Feb 28, 2014 | Singleterry, Luis M. | Contract - Consumer/Commercial/Debt (OCA) | C-1384-14-A

Document

Portfolio Recovery Associates Llc VS. Larissa Estrada
Jul 16, 2024 | Contract - Other Contract (OCA) | CL-24-3033-H

Document

GUMARO DAVILA, JESSICA MARTINEZ VS. MARIO TREVINO CONSTRUCTION, LLC D/B/A TREVINO CONSTRUCTION
Apr 22, 2024 | Contract - Consumer/Commercial/Debt (OCA) | C-1875-24-G

Document

Dale & Klein, L.L.P., DALE & KLEIN, L.L.P. VS. Shahin Zaraienh
Feb 28, 2014 | Singleterry, Luis M. | Contract - Consumer/Commercial/Debt (OCA) | C-1384-14-A