Preview
VIL ASE NFORMATION HEET
AUSE UMBER FOR CLERK USE ONLY OURT FOR CLERK USE ONLY
TYLED
€g., John Smith v. All American Insurance Co; In re Mary Ann Jones; In the Matterof the Estate of George Jackson)
A civil ca nformation sheet must be completed and submitted when an original petition or application is filed to initiate a new civil, family law, probate, or mental
health .¢ or when a post-judgment petition for modification or motion for enforcement is filed in a family law case. The information should be the best available at
the tin e of filing,
1. Contact information for person pleting case information sheet: Names of parties in case: Person or entity completing sheet is:
BlAttomney for Plaintiff/Petitioner
ame: I laintiff(s)/Petitioner(s): Pro Se Plaintiff/Petitioner
Diitle IV-D Agency
Dother:
Address: Telephone:
Additional Parties in Child Support Case:
Defendant(s)/Respondent(s): Custodial Parent
City/State/Zip: Fax:
Custodial Parent:
Signature: CPL State Bar No:
Presumed Father:
[Attach additional page as necessary to list all parties]
2, Indicate case type, or identify the most important issue in the case (select only 1)
Family Law
Post-judgment Actions
Contract Injury or Damage Real Property Marriage Relationship (non-Title
Debt/Contract DAAssault Battery TEminent Domain/ TAnnulment LJEnforcement
CConsumer/DTPA construction Condemnation (Declare Marriage Void (Modification ustody
(Debt/Contract (Defamation Partition ivorce (Modification ther
(Fraud/Misrepresentation Ipractice Quiet Title (With Children Title IV-D
Doother Debt/Contract: Daccounting LiTrespass to Try Title LINo Children (TJEnforcement/Modification
Legal Cotnher Property: Bpatermity
Foreclosure OMedical MiReciprocals (UIFSA)
(Home Equity xpedited uo er Professional Olsupport Order
Cother Foreclosure Liability
(Franchi: Related to Criminal
Dinsura ce [Motor Vehicle Accident Matters Other Family Law Parent-Child Relationship
DLandlord/Tenant DPremises CExpunction TEnforce Foreign DJAdoption/Adoption with
(Non-Competition duct Liability Cludgment Nisi Judgment ermination
partner Mp DAsbestos/Silica (Non-Disclosure (Habeas Corpus Cchitd Protection
(other Contr (other Product Liability Ceizure/Forfeiture (Name Change Cchitd support
ist Product: [Writ of Habeas Corpus (Protective Order Ccustody or Visitation
P -indictment DRemoval of Disabilities Ocestational Parenting
other Injury or Damage: Doother: of Minority (Grandparent Access
Cother: CParentage/Paternity
(Termination of Parental
Employment Other Civil Rights
BROther Parent-Child:
[Discrimination (Administrative Appeal CLawyer Discipline
(CiRetaliation (CAntitrust/Unfair perpetuate Testimony
DTermination Competition Disccurities/Stock
(Workers Compensation LCode Violations DTortious Interference
(other Employment: CiForeign Judgment Cother:
Citntellectual Property
Tax Probate & Mental Health
LiTax Appraisal Probate/Wills/Intestate Administration (Guardianship dult
(Tax Delinquency (Dependent Administration (Guardianship inor
Dother Tax [independent Administration (Mental Health
(other Estate Proceedings Clother:
3. Indicate procedure or remedy, if applicable _may select more than 1)
T1Appeal from Municipal or Justice Court (Declaratory Judgment LiPrejudgment Remedy
DArbitration-related (Garnishment (Protective Order
Attachment Oitnterpleader Deceiver
DaBill of Review BIicense sequestration
certiorari (Mandamus (Temporary Restraining Order/Injunction
Cclass Action CiPost-judgment Orurnover
4, Indicate damages sought ( 0 not select if it is a family law case)
CiLess than $100,000, including damages of any kind, penalties, costs pel pre-judgment interest, and attorney fees
CLess than $100,000 and non-monetary relief
(over $100, 000 but not more than $200,000
(over $200,000 but not more than $1,000,000
Dover $1,000,000,
Related Content
in Fort Bend County
Ruling
BRIMHALL VS BRIMHALL
Jul 23, 2024 |
FL-18-000951
FL-18-000951 – BRIMHALL VS BRIMHALL Petitioner’s Request for Order re Change Venue—DENIED, without prejudice.
There is no proof of service on file as required. (Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 5.94(b).)
This is a dissolution case in which a status-only judgment was filed on July 3, 2021, but no judgment on reserved issues has been entered, and Petitioner’s counsel recently withdrew. Accordingly, individual party service of Respondent is mandatory and jurisdictional. (Fam. Code, § 215(a).)
That said, the parties’ Stipulation and Order of January 8, 2021, resolved Petitioner’s move-away request and resulted in an agreed move of Petitioner and the minor child to the county of San Diego. Further, Petitioner alleges that Respondent no longer resides in this forum. If true, then the Court has authority to transfer the case as requested to San Diego County based on the convenience of the parties and the ends of justice. (Code Civ. Proc., § 397.5.)
The Court is inclined to grant the request based on this authority, but Respondent must either be properly served or else Respondent must personally appear and waive service. Petitioner may attempt to demonstrate good cause to continue the hearing to obtain service of Respondent; otherwise, the request will be denied without prejudice and Petitioner will need to file and serve a new order request.
Ruling
Metzger, Sr. vs. Metzger, Jr., et al.
Jul 25, 2024 |
22CV-0201077
METZGER, SR. VS. METZGER, JR., ET AL.
Case Number: 22CV-0201077
Tentative Ruling on Order to Show Cause Re Dismissal: An Order to Show Cause Re
Dismissal (“OSC”) issued on May 28, 2024 by Judge Boeckman, pursuant to Gov’t Code §
68608(b) to Plaintiff and Counsel for failure to cure the defects noted by the Court on February
20, 2024. Plaintiff has not filed a response to the OSC. However, proof of service has been filed
indicating that the Second Amended Complaint has been served on all parties. The OSC is
DISCHARGED. No appearance is necessary on the 8:30 a.m. calendar. The Court confirms
today’s 9:00 a.m. review hearing.
Ruling
Flores vs. Hudson
Jul 27, 2024 |
24CV-0204646
FLORES VS. HUDSON
Case Number: 24CV-0204646
Tentative Ruling on Order to Show Cause Re: Sanctions: An Order to Show Cause Re:
Sanctions issued on June 13, 2024, to Plaintiff Eladio Flores, in pro per, for failure to timely serve
pleadings on Defendant Katheryn Elizabeth Hudson (Katy Perry) pursuant to California Rules of
Court, Rule 3.110(b). “The complaint must be served on all named defendants and proofs of
service on those defendants must be filed with the court within 60 days after the filing of the
complaint.” CRC 3.110(b). The Complaint in this matter was filed on March 29, 2024, and no
proof of service has been filed. Plaintiff did not file a written response to the Order to Show Cause.
With no sufficient excuse for the delay, sanctions are imposed in the amount of $250.00 against
Plaintiff. The clerk is instructed to prepare a separate Order of Sanctions. The Court will issue an
Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal pursuant to Gov’t Code Section 68608(b) for Plaintiff’s failure
to timely serve the complaint. The hearing on the Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal is set for
Monday, September 9, 2024, at 8:30 a.m. in Department 64. The clerk is instructed to prepare
a separate Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal. This matter is also calendared on Monday,
September 9, 2024, at 9:00 a.m. in Department 64 for review regarding status of service.
Ruling
JACKSON VS JACKSON
Jul 22, 2024 |
FL-23-002067
FL-23-002067 – JACKSON VS JACKSON
Petitioner’s Request for Order re “Sell Family Residence,” etc.—HEARING REQUIRED.
This is a continued hearing. It appears that the request regarding the 1972 Chevrolet Pickup Truck has been resolved or is moot. Likewise, this appears to be the case with the request regarding the marital residence because Respondent is not opposed to sale provided that sufficient time before listing and sale is extended in order to conduct repairs necessary to obtain full value and as short a time on market as possible. (Respondent’s Supplemental Declaration.) The Court will reserve jurisdiction over the question of attorney’s fees and costs until disposition of the marital residence. Counsel are to meet and confer prior to the hearing as to a reasonable time for repairs to be completed and any other disputes that are within the scope of the pending order request. (Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 5.98.)
The following are the tentative ruling cases calendared before Judge J. Richard Distaso in Department #13:
THERE ARE NO TENTATIVES.
The following are the tentative ruling cases calendared before Judge Sweena Pannu in Department #14:
THERE ARE NO TENTATIVES.
The following are the tentative ruling cases calendared before Judge David I. Hood in Department #25:
Ruling
In Re: Tabag
Jul 25, 2024 |
24CV-0204603
IN RE: TABAG
Case Number: 24CV-0204603
Tentative Ruling on Petition for Change of Name: Petitioner Ramsey Anthony Viloria Tabag
also known as Ramsey C. Viloria seeks to change his name to Ramsey Viloria. All procedural
requirements of CCP §§ 1275 et. seq. have been satisfied. The Petition is GRANTED. All future
dates will be vacated, and the file closed upon the processing of the Decree Changing Name.
Ruling
Metzger, Sr. vs. Metzger, Jr., et al.
Jul 23, 2024 |
22CV-0201077
METZGER, SR. VS. METZGER, JR., ET AL.
Case Number: 22CV-0201077
Tentative Ruling on Order to Show Cause Re Dismissal: An Order to Show Cause Re
Dismissal (“OSC”) issued on May 28, 2024 by Judge Boeckman, pursuant to Gov’t Code §
68608(b) to Plaintiff and Counsel for failure to cure the defects noted by the Court on February
20, 2024. Plaintiff has not filed a response to the OSC. However, proof of service has been filed
indicating that the Second Amended Complaint has been served on all parties. The OSC is
DISCHARGED. No appearance is necessary on the 8:30 a.m. calendar. The Court confirms
today’s 9:00 a.m. review hearing.
Ruling
AGUAYO-MARTINEZ VS ZARAGOZA
Jul 24, 2024 |
FL-24-000399
FL-24-000399 – AGUAYO-MARTINEZ VS ZARAGOZA Respondent’s Request for Order re Discovery—HEARING REQUIRED.
After review of the papers and pleadings, the Court finds that a discovery dispute has arisen that appears amenable to resolution without a contested hearing. Accordingly, the Court is inclined to set an Informal Discovery Conference (IDC) under the auspices of a Family Centered Case Resolution Plan, and to stay determination of the present motion and any other pending discovery disputes until completion of the IDC. (Fam. Code, §§ 2450(a), 2451(a)(3); Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 5.83(c)(6)(D),(E).) The parties shall appear and may be heard on the IDC and, if ordered, to schedule the IDC at the earliest mutual availability of counsel and the IDC officer.
The following are the tentative ruling cases calendared before Judge J. Richard Distaso in Department #13:
THERE ARE NO TENTATIVES.
The following are the tentative ruling cases calendared before Judge Sweena Pannu in Department #14:
Ruling
AGUAYO-MARTINEZ VS ZARAGOZA
Jul 23, 2024 |
FL-24-000399
FL-24-000399 – AGUAYO-MARTINEZ VS ZARAGOZA Respondent’s Request for Order re Discovery—HEARING REQUIRED.
After review of the papers and pleadings, the Court finds that a discovery dispute has arisen that appears amenable to resolution without a contested hearing. Accordingly, the Court is inclined to set an Informal Discovery Conference (IDC) under the auspices of a Family Centered Case Resolution Plan, and to stay determination of the present motion and any other pending discovery disputes until completion of the IDC. (Fam. Code, §§ 2450(a), 2451(a)(3); Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 5.83(c)(6)(D),(E).) The parties shall appear and may be heard on the IDC and, if ordered, to schedule the IDC at the earliest mutual availability of counsel and the IDC officer.
The following are the tentative ruling cases calendared before Judge J. Richard Distaso in Department #13:
THERE ARE NO TENTATIVES.
The following are the tentative ruling cases calendared before Judge Sweena Pannu in Department #14:
Preview
VIL ASE NFORMATION HEET AUSE UMBER FOR CLERK USE ONLY OURT FOR CLERK USE ONLY TYLED €g., John Smith v. All American Insurance Co; In re Mary Ann Jones; In the Matterof the Estate of George Jackson) A civil ca nformation sheet must be completed and submitted when an original petition or application is filed to initiate a new civil, family law, probate, or mental health .¢ or when a post-judgment petition for modification or motion for enforcement is filed in a family law case. The information should be the best available at the tin e of filing, 1. Contact information for person pleting case information sheet: Names of parties in case: Person or entity completing sheet is: BlAttomney for Plaintiff/Petitioner ame: I laintiff(s)/Petitioner(s): Pro Se Plaintiff/Petitioner Diitle IV-D Agency Dother: Address: Telephone: Additional Parties in Child Support Case: Defendant(s)/Respondent(s): Custodial Parent City/State/Zip: Fax: Custodial Parent: Signature: CPL State Bar No: Presumed Father: [Attach additional page as necessary to list all parties] 2, Indicate case type, or identify the most important issue in the case (select only 1) Family Law Post-judgment Actions Contract Injury or Damage Real Property Marriage Relationship (non-Title Debt/Contract DAAssault Battery TEminent Domain/ TAnnulment LJEnforcement CConsumer/DTPA construction Condemnation (Declare Marriage Void (Modification ustody (Debt/Contract (Defamation Partition ivorce (Modification ther (Fraud/Misrepresentation Ipractice Quiet Title (With Children Title IV-D Doother Debt/Contract: Daccounting LiTrespass to Try Title LINo Children (TJEnforcement/Modification Legal Cotnher Property: Bpatermity Foreclosure OMedical MiReciprocals (UIFSA) (Home Equity xpedited uo er Professional Olsupport Order Cother Foreclosure Liability (Franchi: Related to Criminal Dinsura ce [Motor Vehicle Accident Matters Other Family Law Parent-Child Relationship DLandlord/Tenant DPremises CExpunction TEnforce Foreign DJAdoption/Adoption with (Non-Competition duct Liability Cludgment Nisi Judgment ermination partner Mp DAsbestos/Silica (Non-Disclosure (Habeas Corpus Cchitd Protection (other Contr (other Product Liability Ceizure/Forfeiture (Name Change Cchitd support ist Product: [Writ of Habeas Corpus (Protective Order Ccustody or Visitation P -indictment DRemoval of Disabilities Ocestational Parenting other Injury or Damage: Doother: of Minority (Grandparent Access Cother: CParentage/Paternity (Termination of Parental Employment Other Civil Rights BROther Parent-Child: [Discrimination (Administrative Appeal CLawyer Discipline (CiRetaliation (CAntitrust/Unfair perpetuate Testimony DTermination Competition Disccurities/Stock (Workers Compensation LCode Violations DTortious Interference (other Employment: CiForeign Judgment Cother: Citntellectual Property Tax Probate & Mental Health LiTax Appraisal Probate/Wills/Intestate Administration (Guardianship dult (Tax Delinquency (Dependent Administration (Guardianship inor Dother Tax [independent Administration (Mental Health (other Estate Proceedings Clother: 3. Indicate procedure or remedy, if applicable _may select more than 1) T1Appeal from Municipal or Justice Court (Declaratory Judgment LiPrejudgment Remedy DArbitration-related (Garnishment (Protective Order Attachment Oitnterpleader Deceiver DaBill of Review BIicense sequestration certiorari (Mandamus (Temporary Restraining Order/Injunction Cclass Action CiPost-judgment Orurnover 4, Indicate damages sought ( 0 not select if it is a family law case) CiLess than $100,000, including damages of any kind, penalties, costs pel pre-judgment interest, and attorney fees CLess than $100,000 and non-monetary relief (over $100, 000 but not more than $200,000 (over $200,000 but not more than $1,000,000 Dover $1,000,000,