Search anything: judges, parties, opposing counsel, motion types, legal issues

Sonoma County, California

County Name

Sonoma County

Population

494,336

Area (sq mi)

1,576

County Seat

Santa Rosa

Established Year

1850

Board of Supervisors

District 1 – Susan Gorin
District 2 – David Rabbitt
District 3 – Shirlee Zane
District 4 – James Gore
District 5 – Lynda Hopkins

Form of Government

General Law

Administration Address

575 Administration Drive Suite 104A Santa Rosa, CA 95403

Phone Number

(707) 565-2431

Meaning of Name

Exact etymology disputed; probably a Pomoterm meaning "valley of the moon," which references a native legend about spiritual activity in the area.

Rulings

1-100 of 1457 results

LOONEY V. PICK 6 TAHOE, LLC

This matter is on calendar for the motion of Plaintiff Gary E. Looney, dba Collectronics of California (“Plaintiff”) for an order appointing a receiver to carry out the enforcement of the judgment entered in this case against Pick 6 Tahoe, LLC, dba Pick 6 Sports Lounge; Harjot Singh Rai, individually; and, Matthew D. Delima, individually as Persona...

  • Hearing

    Feb 03, 2021

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

SCHOEPP V. VOLLERT

This matter is on calendar for the demurrers of Defendants Arthur L. Vollert and Diane R. Vollert (“Vollert Defendants”) pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) sections 430.10 (e) and 430.30(a) on the grounds that the first cause of action in Plaintiffs’ second amended complaint (“2AC”) fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a valid cau...

  • Hearing

    Feb 03, 2021

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

COUNTY OF SONOMA V. MAJOR

Presented to the Court is the Order to Show Cause Re: Confirmation of Appointment of Receiver; and for Issuance of a Permanent Injunction (“OSC”). On November 23, 2020, Plaintiff County of Sonoma (“County”) applied ex parte for the appointment of a receiver to manage and control the property located at 18550 Highway 116, Guerneville, CA. The County...

  • Hearing

    Dec 09, 2020

  • Judge

    Gary Nadler via Zoom

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

COUNTY OF SONOMA V. MAJOR

This matter is on calendar for the motion of plaintiff County of Sonoma (“County”) for entry of default judgment and permanent injunction against defendant Dave Major (“Defendant”). The County brings this motion to abate violations of the Administrative Abatement Decision and Order and Chapters 7 (Building), 11 (Grading), and 26 (Zoning) of the Son...

  • Hearing

    Dec 01, 2020

  • Judge

    Gary Nadler via Zoom

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

COUNTY OF SONOMA V. DALLEY FAMILY 1999 REVOCABLE TRUST

This matter is on calendar for the motion of plaintiff County of Sonoma (“County”) for an entry of default judgment and permanent injunction against defendants Frances Eve Dalley, Trustee of the Dalley Family 1999 Revocable Trust (“Dalley”) and The Dalley Family 1999 Revocable Trust (“Trust”). The hearing is CONTINUED to February 24, 2021, at 3:00 ...

  • Hearing

    Dec 01, 2020

  • Judge

    Gary Nadler via Zoom

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

DINAN V. BARELA

On November 25, 2002, Plaintiff Ronald Dinan dba Ronald Dinan & Associates obtained a judgment against defendant Eric Gabriel Barela (“Defendant”) in the amount of $6,665.17 (the “Judgment”). Plaintiff subsequently assigned the Judgment to Gary E. Looney dba Collectronics of California (“Judgment Creditor”). The judgment was renewed on August 24, 2...

  • Hearing

    Nov 25, 2020

  • Judge

    Elliot L

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

SMITH V. CHERRY CREEK TRUST

This matter is on calendar for the motion of plaintiff Preston Smith (“Plaintiff”) for an order enforcing the terms of the settlement agreement between the parties pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) section 664.6. Plaintiff seeks judgment against defendants Brian Rooney and Cherry Creek Trust in the principal amount of $10,000.00, plus an aw...

  • Hearing

    Nov 25, 2020

  • Judge

    Elliot L

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

ZAPELLI V. HAMMER

This matter is on calendar for the motion of plaintiff Lisa Zappelli (“Plaintiff”) for an order compelling defendants Michael J. Hammer, Sr. (“Hammer”); Western Construction Enterprises, Inc. (“Western”); and Michael J. Hammer, Sr., Trustee of the Michael J. Hammer, Sr. Revocable Trust u/t/d, dated February 14, 2018 (“Trust”)(together “Defendants”)...

  • Hearing

    Nov 25, 2020

  • Judge

    Elliot L

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

HOUSTON V. SUTTER WEST BAY HOSPITALS

This matter is on calendar for the demurrers of defendant Keystone America, Inc., dba Jones and Lewis Funeral Home (“Keystone”) and defendant Wanda Wilson (“Wilson”) to plaintiff Sara Houston’s (“Plaintiff’s”) Fourth Amended Complaint (“4AC”). Keystone and Wilson demur to the first cause of action for negligence/Civil Code of Procedure (CCP) sectio...

  • Hearing

    Nov 18, 2020

  • Judge

    Robert S

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

BATTIEST V. ALDERMAN

This matter is on calendar for the demurrer of defendant Rhonda Alderman (“Defendant”) to the cause of action labeled “Unrebutted affidavit in support of Notice of Injury/Affidavit Notice of Default” in plaintiff Demond Battiest’s (“Plaintiff’s”) personal injury complaint. The demurrer is brought on the grounds that the cause of action fails to sta...

  • Hearing

    Nov 18, 2020

  • Judge

    Robert S

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

SANTA ROSA ALL CITY GIRLS SOFTBALL LEAVE V. TRILLO

This matter is on calendar for the motion of plaintiff Santa Rosa All City Girls Softball League (“SRACGSL” or “Plaintiff”) pursuant to CCP sections 425.16(c)(1) and 128.5 for sanctions in the amount of $18,254.50 jointly and/or severally as against Defendant Michael Trillo, attorney Michael G. Miller, the law firm of Perry, Johnson, Anderson, Mill...

  • Hearing

    Nov 04, 2020

  • Judge

    Gary Nadler via Zoom

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

SCHMID V. TWO ROCK FIRE DEPT

Defendant County of Sonoma (“County” or “Defendant”) demurs pursuant to Civil Code of Procedure (“CCP”) section 430.10 to plaintiffs Frear Stephen Schmid’s and Astrid Schmid’s Verified Complaint for Writ of Mandate and Declaratory and Injunctive Relief for Enforcement of County Ordinances (“Schmid Complaint”). The County demurs to the Schmid Compla...

  • Hearing

    Nov 04, 2020

  • Judge

    Gary Nadler via Zoom

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

MORRIS V. CLINE CELLARS

Defendants Cline Cellars, Cline Cellars, Inc., and Cline Management (“Defendants”) move to compel this matter to arbitration and to stay litigation of the case pending the outcome of arbitration. Plaintiff’s request for judicial notice is granted. The motion is GRANTED. On or about September 24, 2017, plaintiff Morris reserved the Cline Villa for...

  • Hearing

    Nov 04, 2020

  • Judge

    Gary Nadler via Zoom

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

SILBERG V. WRIGHT

Plaintiff Michael Silberg moves for an order pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) section 437c granting Summary Adjudication on Defendant’s First, Second, Fifth, Seventh, and Eleventh Affirmative Defenses in favor of plaintiff and against defendant. The First affirmative defense asserts comparative negligence; the Second affirmative defens...

  • Hearing

    Nov 04, 2020

  • Judge

    Gary Nadler via Zoom

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

JOHN DOE 5 V. ROE 1

Plaintiffs John Doe 5 and John Doe 6 (“Plaintiffs”) seek leave to file a second amended complaint. This motion is made pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 340.1 on the grounds that good cause exists to allow Plaintiffs to file a Second Amended Complaint based upon the recent enactment of Assembly Bill 218 ("AB 218"), which amended Code of C...

  • Hearing

    Oct 30, 2020

  • Judge

    Gary Nadler via Zoom

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

PELAYO V. UTILITY PARTNERS OF AMERICA, LLC

Cross-defendant City of Santa Rosa (“City”) demurs to the causes of action in the cross-complaint of Utility Partners of America (“UPA”) for failure to state a cause of action and for uncertainty. The general and special demurrers are sustained with leave to amend. This action was filed on May 30, 2019, by individual plaintiffs against their empl...

  • Hearing

    Oct 30, 2020

  • Judge

    Gary Nadler via Zoom

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

WILD OAK HOMEOWNERS V. SIMONS

Plaintiff Wild Oak Homeowners Association (“Plaintiff”) seeks leave to file a first amended complaint, attached to the Miller declaration. The proposed amendments seek to add a cause of action for quiet title against Defendant Lawrence Simons (“Simons” or “Defendant”) and add information related to Defendant's placement of utility meters on Plainti...

  • Hearing

    Oct 30, 2020

  • Judge

    Gary Nadler via Zoom

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

REYNOSO V. DIAZ

TENTATIVE RULING: Plaintiff’s motion for an order deeming admitted all matters in Plaintiff’s Requests for Admissions, Set One, served to defendant Esteban Diaz on July 2, 2020 is GRANTED. (Code Civ. Proc. §2033.280(a)-(c).) Plaintiff’s request for monetary sanctions is GRANTED, in part. Defendant Diaz is ORDERED to pay Plaintiff a total of $1,158....

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

ABEL V. MCCUTCHAN, JR

TENTATIVE RULING: Plaintiff’s Request for Judicial Notice is GRANTED and his Motion for Leave to File a First Amended Complaint, consistent with Exhibit A to the Second Declaration of Richard Abel, filed October 21, 2020, is also GRANTED. However, the clerk cannot alter a filed document and the Court will not “deem filed” the proposed amended compl...

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

MCCLELLAND V. MCCLELLAND, ET AL.

TENTATIVE RULING: Defendants’ motion for a preliminary injunction is GRANTED on the condition that pending resolution of this matter, Plaintiff shall continue to be paid her customary pay and benefits. Plaintiff Jana McClelland (“Plaintiff”) shall not take any action on behalf of the McClelland Dairy and shall not enter the real properties that com...

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

ERICKSON V. WRIGHT

TENTATIVE RULING: Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File a First Amended Complaint to add a new plaintiff; new defendants; and new causes of action is GRANTED. Plaintiff has ten (10) days from service of the Court’s final ruling to file and serve the First Amended Complaint. Plaintiff’s counsel shall submit a written order to the Court that is cons...

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

FARROW COMMERCIAL, INC. V. KAZEMINI

Defendant Hassan Kazemini (“Kazemini”) demurs to the second cause of action in the complaint of plaintiff Farrow Commercial, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) and to the entirety of the allegations of the complaint and prayers for relief against Kazemini. The demurrer is brought pursuant to CCP section 430.10 and 430.30. For the reasons stated below, the general ...

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • Judge

    Gary Nadler via Zoom

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

MCALLISTER V. LA TORTILLA FACTORY

Plaintiffs Jonathan McAllister and Jose Adrian Perez, individually and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated, move for an order approving the Joint Stipulation of Class Action and PAGA Settlement (“the Settlement”) on the grounds that the Settlement is fair, adequate, and reasonable. At this stage, the court only nee...

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • Judge

    Gary Nadler via Zoom

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

FINLEY V. THE RENTAL PLACE LLC

This motion has been dropped pursuant to stipulation of the parties. The Court thanks the Discovery Facilitator, Scott Lewis, for resolving this matter....

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • Judge

    Gary Nadler via Zoom

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

TRIEBEL V. WHITESELL

TENTATIVE RULING: Appearances Required. The Court invites the parties to present oral argument with the following input from the Court. The Court finds that the arbitration clause in this case is “narrow” and that disputes arising out of the contract are subject to arbitration. While the complaint appears narrowly pleaded to avoid application of th...

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

DISCOVER BANK V. GOLDSBROUGH

TENTATIVE RULING: Attorney Shahane Harutyunyan’s unopposed motion to be relieved as counsel for defendant Erin S. Goldsbrough is GRANTED. Unless oral argument is requested, the Court will sign the proposed order lodged with the Court....

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

SMITH V. CHERRY CREEK TRUST

This matter is on calendar for the motion of plaintiff Preston Smith (“Plaintiff”) for an order enforcing the terms of the settlement agreement between the parties pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6. Plaintiff seeks Judgment against defendants Brian Rooney and Cherry Creek Trust in the principal amount of $10,000.00, plus an award of...

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • Judge

    Gary Nadler via Zoom

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

ST. MARTIN V. IDS PROPERTY CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY

DROPPED at request of moving party....

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

  • Judge

    Gary Nadler via Zoom

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

TURNER V. BIGGS

This matter is on calendar for the motion of plaintiff Traci Turner for an order requesting that the stay and judgment, if entered, be set aside pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) section 473(b) due to inadvertence, surprise, mistake, or excusable neglect and/or on the grounds that the judgment and/or default is void pursuant to CCP section ...

  • Hearing

    Oct 21, 2020

  • Judge

    Richard J

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

PAULSEN V. MIDPEN HOUSING CORPORATION

This matter is on calendar for the motion of defendant and cross-complainant Sonoma County Community Development Commission (“the Commission”) to compel plaintiffs John Paulsen, Paulsen Land Company, LLC, and Roseland Village to provide further responses to ­­­­­­­­­­the Commission’s Special Interrogatories, Set One, and for sanctions in the amount...

  • Hearing

    Oct 21, 2020

  • Judge

    Richard J

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

CAHCON-SALAZAR V. SIMON PROPERTY GROUP, INC.

The motion of counsel Ryan Dunn to withdraw as counsel for plaintiff is GRANTED....

  • Hearing

    Oct 21, 2020

  • Judge

    Richard J

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

MACEDO-ARCE V. PURE ANALYTICS

Dropped at request of moving counsel 10/20/20....

  • Hearing

    Oct 21, 2020

  • Judge

    Richard J

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

POCHARI V. BODEGA HARBOUR HOMEOWNERS

This matter is on calendar for the motion of defendants Bodega Harbour Homeowners Association and Kemper Sports (“Defendants”) pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) section 664.6 for an order entering judgment against plaintiffs/cross-defendants Thomas R. Pochari, Jr. and Catherine Pochari in accordance with the settlement reached between the p...

  • Hearing

    Oct 21, 2020

  • Judge

    Richard J

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

SMITH V. LOPEZ

APPEARANCS ARE REQUIRED BY ZOOM....

  • Hearing

    Oct 07, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

DOE V. SONOMA MISSION INN MANAGEMENT COMPANY LLC

APPEARANCS ARE REQUIRED BY ZOOM on the ex parte applications submitted September 30, 2020, during the emergency Court closure....

  • Hearing

    Oct 07, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

ATRIUM HOLDING COMPANY V. WESTPORT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Defendants Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company, Ironshore Indemnity Inc., Chubb Custom Insurance Company, The Princeton Excess and Surplus Lines Insurance Co., and Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London’s Motion for Summary Judgment DENIED as explained herein. The Lawsuit Alleging that they owned the Hilton Sonoma Wine Country Hotel (“the ...

  • Hearing

    Oct 07, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

JOHNSON V. LAWSON

Defendant’s Demurrer to Complaint OVERRULED as explained herein. Defendant is required to answer the complaint within 10 days of service of the notice of entry of this order. Defendant demurs to the complaint “on the grounds that the defendants have a lease on the property” and on the ground that the complaint is uncertain. A demurrer can only ...

  • Hearing

    Oct 07, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

C.F. V. MARTINEZ

Jerry D. Casheros’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel for Mark Martinez Continued to Wednesday, November 4, 2020, 3:00 p.m., Courtroom 16 in order to allow the attorney to explain why he has not simply filed a withdrawal by consent, as required in California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(c)....

  • Hearing

    Oct 07, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

KUBOSHIGE V. FCA US, LLC

Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Interrogatories; Request for Order Awarding Monetary Sanctions GRANTED in part, as explained herein. Sanctions of $760 awarded to Plaintiff. Plaintiff complains that she bought a 2015 Jeep Grand Cherokee Sport Utility Vehicle (“the Jeep”) from Defendant Lithia of Santa Rosa, Inc. (“Lithia”) and th...

  • Hearing

    Oct 07, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA V. THE TESTATE AND INTERSTATE SUCCESSORS OF DAVID L. MOSHER AND ROSEMARY MOSHER

APPEARANCES ARE REQUIRED BY ZOOM to clarify the case status, unless Plaintiffs drop the motion or otherwise inform the Court that it is moot or has been resolved....

  • Hearing

    Oct 07, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

MAASS CORPORATION V. SUNHILL ENTERPRISES, LP

APPEARANCES ARE REQUIRED BY ZOOM to address the apparent inconsistencies and unclear factual disputes regarding the Motion Pursuant to CCP § 664.6 for Entry of Final Judgment Enforcing Settlement Agreement. The Court notes the following issues for the parties to address: There is no dispute about the fact that this Court granted a motion to enfor...

  • Hearing

    Oct 07, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

SAMII V. CODDING ENTERPRISES

Non-Party tenant Jamie Rant’s motion for instructions or orders concerning the powers or duties of the receiver is DENIED, without prejudice to her right to refile the motion if and when a “dispute or controversy” arises. Indeed, as Ms. Rant’s reply aptly demonstrates, the issues in dispute, including the times and dates that the property can be sh...

  • Hearing

    Sep 23, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

VILLASENOR V. SOUCH

Plaintiff’s motion to compel defendant Souch to provide responses to requests for production of documents, set one, and pay monetary sanctions is GRANTED. Defendant Souch is ordered to provide complete and verified responses and pay $1,200.00 in sanctions ($300/hour x 4 hours) within twenty (20) days of service of the Court’s final ruling. The Co...

  • Hearing

    Sep 23, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

OKREPKIE V. NATIONWIDE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA

Defendant’s demurrer is SUSTAINED in its entirety and the motion to strike is MOOT. The Court notes Defendant’s meet and confer declaration filed September 18, 2020 wherein Defendant’s counsel represents that the parties have agreed that “the demurrer should be sustained, the motion to strike deemed moot, and that, as a result, the action should be...

  • Hearing

    Sep 23, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

TIB- THE INDEPENDENT BANKERSBANK V. REYNOLDS

Defendant’s motion to set aside the June 20, 2020 entry of default is DENIED, without prejudice. The Court refers Defendant to Code of Civil Procedure section 473(b) which states in part that a motion to set aside a default must “be accompanied by a copy of the answer or other pleading proposed to be filed therein, otherwise the application shall n...

  • Hearing

    Sep 23, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

NOLL V. SANTA ROSA CONVALESCENT HOSPITAL

This case is on calendar for Defendant’s motion to compel arbitration. The case arises from Norman Noll’s residency at Defendant’s skilled nursing facility from approximately June 2005 to the present. On September 18, 2019, Plaintiff filed the underlying complaint for negligence, elder abuse, and violation of Health and Safety Code section 1430. (I...

  • Hearing

    Sep 23, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. V. HOGAN

Plaintiff’s unopposed request for judicial notice of “all pleadings, declarations, motions, orders, proceedings, rulings and other court records on file in the within action, including Defendant's Answer to Complaint…” is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s unopposed motion for judgment on the pleadings is also GRANTED. As defendant has not opposed the motion and...

  • Hearing

    Sep 23, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

COUNTY OF SONOMA V. GOLDEN BRANCH TRUST

Mr. Alden’s motion to strike is DENIED. The Code provides that “[a]ny party, within the time allowed to respond to a pleading may serve and file a notice of motion to strike the whole or any part thereof…” (Code Civ. Proc. Code §435.) Additionally, the Court may strike any irrelevant, false, or improper matter inserted in any pleading and may strik...

  • Hearing

    Aug 26, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

FRANKLIN V. FORD MOTOR COMPANY

This lemon law action is on calendar for two motions. First, Ford Motor Company moves for summary adjudication of Plaintiff’s causes of action for negligent inducement; intentional inducement; and Plaintiff’s claim for punitive damages. As to that matter APPEARANCES ARE REQUIRED. Second, Ford moves to seal 15 documents attached to Plaintiff’s opp...

  • Hearing

    Aug 26, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

VILLA V. OCHOA

Defendant’s unopposed motion to strike Plaintiff’s claim for punitive damages is GRANTED. Specifically, the motion is granted as to Page 3, Paragraph 14(a)(2) (prayer for punitive damages) and the entirety of Page 5 (Exemplary Damages Attachment) of Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint. Defendant’s counsel shall submit a written order to the Court...

  • Hearing

    Aug 26, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

CASEY-NIELSEN V. CASEY

Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Deposition GRANTED, as explained below, with the following conditions: the deposition be conducted remotely via telephone or other remote technology as Defendant John Casey (“John”) chooses, John be allowed to be wherever he needs to be or wishes to be during the deposition, John be allowed to have not only his attorney...

  • Hearing

    Aug 05, 2020

  • Judge

    Ren

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

MCMORRIES V. DOE 1

Plaintiff’s Motion for an Order Allowing Plaintiff to File His Certificates of Merit Under Seal and for In Camera Review of Certificates of Merit and a Finding of Merit Under CCP §340.1(i) GRANTED in full. The Court grants the requests to file the documents under seal and to conduct in camera review. Based on the in camera review, the Court grants ...

  • Hearing

    Aug 05, 2020

  • Judge

    Ren

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

BELL MANOR, LP V. LOVATI

Defendant Aldo Joseph Lovati has filed a Motion to Quash Service of Summons and Complaint on the basis of Plaintiff Bell Manor, LP’s failure to give notice of its ex parte application for issuance of summons. Bell Manor, LP argues that no notice of the ex parte application was required. This argument is incorrect. Notice of the application is requi...

  • Hearing

    Aug 05, 2020

  • Judge

    Ren

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

LYNMAR WINERY, LLC V. WRIGHT CONTRACTING, INC.

DROPPED from calendar at the request of counsel for moving party....

  • Hearing

    Aug 05, 2020

  • Judge

    Ren

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

COUNTY OF SONOMA V. CARSON

APPEARANCES ARE REQUIRED BY ZOOM. Plaintiff filed this action to abate nuisances as well as violations of the zoning and building codes on Defendant’s real property at 88 Mizpah Street, Camp Meeker (“the Property”). The alleged nuisances included defective, unpermitted construction of buildings, wastewater disposal system, storage yard for inoper...

  • Hearing

    Aug 05, 2020

  • Judge

    Ren

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

ATRIUM HOLDING COMPANY V. WESTPORT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Plaintiffs’ Second Motion to Compel Discovery and Request for Sanctions GRANTED as explained below. Sanctions awarded to the moving party as explained below. Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel Depositions and Award Monetary Sanctions GRANTED in part, MOOT in part, as explained below. Sanctions awarded to the moving party as explained below. On August...

  • Hearing

    Aug 05, 2020

  • Judge

    Ren

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

LOONEY V. JRM ENTERPRISES, LLC

Plaintiff’s Motion for Appointment of a Receiver and to Appoint Michael Brewer as Receiver DENIED without prejudice. Plaintiff filed this action to collect on a debt of $1,505.40 which Defendants allegedly owe to Plaintiff’s predecessor in interest and assignor, Young’s Market Company (Young’s) for alcoholic beverages which Young’s allegedly sold...

  • Hearing

    Aug 05, 2020

  • Judge

    Ren

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

GILYANA V. WENGER

DROPPED from calendar at the request of counsel for moving party....

  • Hearing

    Jul 22, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

KNIGHT V. ROSANTA COMPANY

CONTINUED to Monday, July 27, 2020, 1:30 p.m. pursuant to order of July 16. Zoom information for that date and time will be provided to counsel in advance of July 27....

  • Hearing

    Jul 22, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

REYES V. MID-CENTURY INSURANCE COMPANY

Defendant James Donald Kinkela’s Motion to Continue Trial and Related Dates is MOOT. Kinkela filed the motion to continue trial from the then-set date of April 24, 2020, to August 24, 2020, or later. The Court has since continued the trial to October 30, 2020. Defendant Mid-Century Insurance Company’s Motion for Bifurcation of Trial of Issue of R...

  • Hearing

    Jul 15, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

GRIMAUDO V. DIRECT FLOW MEDICAL, INC.

Stipulated Joint Motion to Terminate Stay and Dismiss Class Action GRANTED. The parties refer to California Rules of Court, rule 3.525 but that covers responses in opposition to a petition for coordination of cases. It is inapplicable here and does not apply to stays as they contend. Instead, they appear to mean California Rules of Court, rule 3....

  • Hearing

    Jul 15, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

PARK V. LAW OFFICES OF TRACEY BUCK-WALSH

APPEARANCES ARE REQUIRED via Zoom on Plaintiff’s Motion to Continue Trial and Pretrial Deadlines....

  • Hearing

    Jul 15, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

DIETZE V. COUNTY OF SONOMA

Defendant County of Sonoma’s Motion to Compel Further Responses is now MOOT as to all items in dispute except for special interrogatory 11. With respect to special interrogatory 11, the motion is GRANTED in part, DENIED in part as set forth more fully below. No sanctions are awarded. When a propounding party is dissatisfied with responses to inte...

  • Hearing

    Jul 15, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

ATALLAH V. PATEL

Defendants’ Motion for Summary Adjudication DENIED. Any party may move for summary judgment or adjudication. Code of Civil Procedure section 437c(a), (f). For summary adjudication, each issue must entirely dispose of one or more 1) causes of action, 2) claims for punitive damages, 3) affirmative defenses, or 4) issues of duty. Code of Civil Proce...

  • Hearing

    Jun 10, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

SOCO INVESTMENTS, LLC V. PACIFIC CREST FENCE COMPANY

APPEARANCES RQUIRED BY ZOOM on Plaintiff’s Ex Parte Application for Issuance of Summons....

  • Hearing

    Jun 10, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

LYNMAR WINERY, LLC V. WRIGHT CONTRACTING, INC.

Defendants Gould Evans, Inc. and Douglas Thornley filed a Notice of Withdrawal of Motion to Quash Subpoena of J. Michael Higginbotham on June 3, 2020, and that motion has been DROPPED from calendar. Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint CONTINUED to Wednesday, August 5, 2020, 3:00 p.m., Courtroom 16, pursuant to stipulation...

  • Hearing

    Jun 10, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

E WEST CONSTRUCTION, INC. V. ECONOMICAL STEEL BUILDING TECHNOLOGIES, LLC

Defendants Economical Steel Building Technologies, LLC, Joseph R. Hudson, and Diana Hudson’s Motion to Quash Deposition Subpoena for Production of Business Records and Request for Protective Order DENIED in part, GRANTED in part. The motion is GRANTED solely as to the request for a protective order forbidding Plaintiff or its attorneys from communi...

  • Hearing

    Jun 10, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

FEDERATED MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY V. 101 MOTORS, LLC

Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend Complaint GRANTED. Plaintiff shall have five days from service of the Court’s final ruling to file a First Amended Complaint. Under Code of Civil Procedure section 473(a)(1), amendments are left to the sound discretion of the trial court. Judicial policy favors amendment to allow resolution of all potential claims and ...

  • Hearing

    Jun 10, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

MIDLAND FUNDING, LLC V. CARDIEL

Plaintiff’s Motion For The Order That Matters in Request for Admission of Truth of Facts Heard on May 30, 2019 Be Set Aside and For Order That Matters in Request for Admission of Truth of Facts Be Admitted GRANTED in full. For the reasons explained herein, the court GRANTS the request to set aside the prior order deeming the requests for admissio...

  • Hearing

    Jun 10, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

POST CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, L.P. V. FIRST REGIONAL BANK

APPEARANCES REQUIRED BY ZOOM unless the moving party informs the Court that the motion is moot. The opposition assertions indicate that the motion may be moot as to the substantive discovery issue, at least in part, but the situation is not clear. The Court finds that the motion appears to be moot as to verification but not as to other issues. The ...

  • Hearing

    Jun 10, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

CREDITORS ADJUSTMENT BUREAU, INC. V. IVERSON

APPEARANCES REQUIRED BY ZOOM on Defendant’s Claim of Exemption....

  • Hearing

    Jun 10, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

CARDENAS V. JOHNSON

Intervenor Cypress Insurance Company’s Motion for Leave of Court to Intervene is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s claim arises out of an injury sustained during his employment with the Intervenor. Plaintiff has received benefits for his injuries from Intervenor. The industrial injury was caused by Defendants’ breach of their duty of care owed to the Plaintif...

  • Hearing

    Jun 04, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOCIATES, LLC V. BLACKMAN

APPEARANCES ARE REQUIRED BY ZOOM on the Claim of Exemption....

  • Hearing

    Jun 04, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

HARDIN V. JOHNSTON

Defendant’s Demurrer to Amended Verified Complaint for Invasion of Privacy is SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY: Introduction This civil action follows the Family Law Case where Plaintiff disagreed with the result. Plaintiff alleges that this lawsuit for privacy is completely the product of his unsuccessful effort...

  • Hearing

    Jun 04, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

ASSET ACCEPTANCE V. ZARATE

Appearances Required...

  • Hearing

    May 28, 2020

GARCIA V. FORD MOTOR COMPANY

The COVID-19 pandemic intervened and shelter-in-place mandates were issued on March 16, precluding the PMQ deposition on March 18. Since the parties have agreed that Defendant will produce Ford’s PMK for deposition, the motion appears to be moot. Plaintiff’s motion is denied without prejudice and the parties are ordered to meet and confer about a...

  • Hearing

    May 28, 2020

GARCIA V. RACH

The motion for leave to file a cross complaint is granted. Prevailing counsel shall submit a written order to the court consistent with this tentative ruling and in compliance with California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1312....

  • Hearing

    May 28, 2020

STEELE V. NORTHERN CALIFORNIA MEDICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.

The demurrer to Plaintiff’s fourth cause of action for Breach of Fiduciary Duty and is overruled. The demurrer to the fifth cause of action for Interference with Prospective Economic Advantage is sustained with leave to amend. The demurrer to Plaintiff’s sixth cause of action for Accounting is overruled. Prevailing counsel shall submit a writ...

  • Hearing

    May 28, 2020

OSWALD V. LANDMARK BUILDERS, INC.

Plaintiff’s motion for Determination of Good Faith is GRANTED. Cross-Defendant’s counsel shall submit a written order to the court consistent with this tentative ruling and in compliance with California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1312....

  • Hearing

    May 21, 2020

  • Judge

    Robert S

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

BROOKE V. AURORA BEHAVIORAL HEALTHCARE-SANTA ROSA LLC

Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, defendants’ motion for protective order as to the deposition of Laura Sanders is continued by the court to July 1, 2020 in Department 18 at 3:00 p.m. The court will also be continuing defendants’ motion for protective order as to the deposition of Soon Kim frim June 17, 2020 to July 1, 2020 in Department 18 at ...

  • Hearing

    May 21, 2020

  • Judge

    Robert S

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

BARRAGAN V. SANTACRUZCAMARENA

Defendant’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Special Interrogatories is GRANTED as follows: Alison Rodriguez Request for Further Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One, numbers 4, 8, 16, 18, 19, 22, is granted. Request for Production (“RFP”), Set One, numbers 8 and 9 is granted on the condition that the requests seek medical recor...

  • Hearing

    May 21, 2020

  • Judge

    Robert S

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. V. POSTONOK

Plaintiff Bank of America, N.A.’s motion for order setting aside dismissal of the case pursuant to CCP §473 is DENIED. CCP §473 “includes a discretionary provision, which applies permissively, and a mandatory provision, which applies as of right.” (Minick v. City of Petaluma (2016) 3 Cal.App.5th 15, 25.) “The trial court is not required to consid...

  • Hearing

    Mar 04, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

TRIONE V. EQUESTRIAN FOOTINGS & SERVICES, INC.

Motion for Leave to File the First Amended Complaint GRANTED. Plaintiff shall submit a written order after hearing consistent with the court’s ruling....

  • Hearing

    Mar 04, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

CARR V. W REAL ESTATE

This case involves a dispute over the terms of an Independent Contractor Agreement and the attached Compensation Schedule. In this motion, Plaintiff moves to compel Defendant to produce documents responsive to Plaintiff’s request for production of documents. The motion revolves around a discovery agreement the parties reached in August 2019 whereby...

  • Hearing

    Mar 04, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

VILLASENOR V. SOUCH

Plaintiff’s motion to compel responses to form interrogatories from defendant Charlotte Souch is GRANTED. Souch shall pay plaintiff $1,800.00 in monetary sanctions within 30 days of this hearing. The court appreciates the time and effort expended by the discovery facilitator, Tad Shapiro, Esq. Plaintiff shall submit an order consistent with thi...

  • Hearing

    Mar 04, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

ESTES V. COUNTY OF SONOMA

Motion for Leave to File Amended Answer CONTINUED to Wednesday, April 22, 2020, at 3:00 p.m. in Courtroom 16. The moving parties fail to specify what changes are being made and where they are located. The moving papers refer only vaguely to two affirmative defenses and do not state what these are, where they are, or if they are the only changes. ...

  • Hearing

    Mar 04, 2020

  • Judge

    Robert S

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

DIAZ V. SUTTER BAY HOSPITALS

Motion to Compel (1) Plaintiff’s Deposition, (2) Plaintiff’s Verified Written Discovery Responses, (3) Completion of Medical Authorization Form and Request for Sanctions GRANTED IN PART, DENIED IN PART. The motion is granted with respect to compelling Plaintiff to respond to the form interrogatories and request for production and to attend deposi...

  • Hearing

    Mar 04, 2020

  • Judge

    Robert S

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

COLLECTRONICS, INC. V. SANCHEZ

Motion to (1) Approve Receiver’s Recommendation; (2) Approve Final Report and Accounting; (3) Discharge Receiver; and (4) Related Orders CONTINUED to Wednesday, April 22, 2020, at 3:00 p.m. in Courtroom 16. The Receiver must file a final report and accounting and must serve all those listed in the proof of service with notice of the new hearing dat...

  • Hearing

    Mar 04, 2020

  • Judge

    Robert S

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. V. MILLS

Motion to Amend Judgment GRANTED. The moving party is to prepare an order confirming with the order of the Court, submitting it to the opposing party for review five days prior to submitted it to the Court....

  • Hearing

    Mar 04, 2020

  • Judge

    Robert S

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

ATRIUM HOLDING COMPANY V. LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

Motion for Leave to File Verified First Supplemental Complaint GRANTED. The prevailing party is to prepare an order conforming with the order of the Court, submitting to the opposing party for review five days prior to submitting it to the Court....

  • Hearing

    Mar 04, 2020

  • Judge

    Robert S

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

MAASS CORPORATION V. SUNHILL ENTERPRISES, LP

Motion Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 473(d) to Correct Clerical Errors GRANTED. Plaintiff moves the Court to correct two alleged clerical errors in the order granting the motion to enforce settlement: (1) “The case is not dismissed as to the Faidi Living Trust”; and (2) “Maas Corporation is not in default under the lease for paying ...

  • Hearing

    Mar 04, 2020

  • Judge

    Robert S

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

AMERICAN EXPRESS NATIONAL BANK V. GREEN

Plaintiff’s unopposed motion for summary judgment is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s request for judicial notice of 15 USC Section 1666 and 12 CFR Section 202.12 is granted. This is a debt collection action for an unpaid credit card balance in the sum of $7,541.15. Plaintiff’s complaint alleges one cause of action for common counts based upon an open book a...

  • Hearing

    Feb 26, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

WROBEL V. SHACKELFORD

Plaintiff’s unopposed motion to strike defendant Shackelford’s answer and enter her default is GRANTED. Shackelford has failed to comply with this Court’s November 7, 2019 order compelling her to provide responses to form and special interrogatories and to pay $760.00 in monetary sanctions. Consequently, Plaintiff seeks terminating sanctions purs...

  • Hearing

    Feb 26, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

ANDERSEN V. O’HALLORAN

Plaintiff’s motion to enforce settlement is granted. Plaintiff shall submit separately a proposed order after hearing conforming to this ruling pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1312 and a proposed judgment for the amount of the settlement, less any payments received, plus any interest accrued, plus $4,500.00, as allowed in the stipulat...

  • Hearing

    Feb 26, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

MATTER OF DONNA I. RICHARDS TRUST

On the Court’s own motion, this matter is continued to March 18, 2020 at 3:00 p.m. in Department 19 to be heard by Judge Daum, who heard the underlying motion to enforce judgment....

  • Hearing

    Feb 26, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

ROWLEY V. SPORTS EQUITY PARTNERS, LLC

Respondents’ demurrer to the first amended petition for writ of mandate is sustained without leave to amend. Respondents’ unopposed request for judicial notice is granted. As argued by respondents, the first amended petition (FAP) “is substantively identical to the original writ, differing only in minor factual changes that add nothing to the leg...

  • Hearing

    Feb 26, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

CLAYBORN V. VERNON

The hearing on this matter is continued on the Court’s own motion for two purposes: 1) to allow time to conclude the deposition of Mr. McKusick (date to be determined according to defendants Vernon and Rea Status Update filed 2/13/20); and 2) to allow Mr. McKusick an opportunity to provide a statement from his doctor confirming their discussion on ...

  • Hearing

    Feb 26, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

ESTATE OF THERESA ANN NICHELINI

Respondent Nicole Nichelini’s unopposed motion to compel responses to special interrogatories and requests for production and sanctions in the amount of $2,500.00 is GRANTED. In light of the fact the only “responses” were made by a non-party who did not represent the petitioner, the Court treats the situation as one where no responses at all were m...

  • Hearing

    Feb 26, 2020

  • Judge

    Jennifer V

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

PERKINS V. SANTA ROSA MEMORIAL HOSPITAL

Demurrers to Plaintiffs’ Third Amended Complaint OVERRULED in part, SUSTAINED in part with leave to amend. The demurrer to the fourth cause of action, for battery, is sustained with leave to amend. The other demurrers are overruled. Motion to Strike Portions from Plaintiffs’ Third Amended Complaint GRANTED in part with leave to amend, DENIED in p...

  • Hearing

    Feb 26, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA V. TORANGO

Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Costs GRANTED in part. The motion is granted as to the attorney’s fees sought but not as to the hourly fees for the enforcement officer. Although Plaintiffs may be able to recover not only attorney’s fees but also costs, as explained below, it is not clear that the time which an enforcement officer spends working is r...

  • Hearing

    Feb 26, 2020

  • Judge

    Patrick M

  • County

    Sonoma County, CA

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 15     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we load this page.