Preview
Superior Court of California, County of Merced
MINUTE ORDERS
Apoyo Financiero Inc. 10:00 AM - 12:00 PM
vs Court Trial
Jose Reyes Hernandez
24CV-01909
Date of Hearing: 07/05/2024
Heard By: MacLaren, Peter Location: Courtroom 9
Courtroom Reporter: Courtroom Clerk: H. Zychowski
Court Interpreter: Albert J Valdez
Court Investigator:
Probate Examiner:
Parties Present: Future Hearings:
Apoyo Financiero Inc. Plaintiff December 05, 2025 10:00 AM Review
Reyes Hernandez, Jose Defendant Hearing Uncontested
Ramon Courtroom 9
TBA, Judge
The case is regularly called for hearing:
- Veronica Cisneros, representative for Apoyo Finaciero Inc. is present in court.
The Defendant is being assisted by the Spanish Language Interpreter.
The court has complied with the requirements under Government Code section 68561(g) and
procedures set forth by the Judicial Council.
All parties present are duly sworn.
The parties having met and conferred with the Small Claims Settlement Advisor, outside the presence of
the Court have agreed on the following stipulation, which is reduced to writing.
STIPULATION AS FOLLOWS:
Judgment is not entered at this time.
The Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff $200.00 a month starting on 8/25/2024, and on the 25th day of
each month thereafter until the entire amount of $13,987.00, with no interest accrued while payments
are being made and costs are waived.
The Defendants are granted a five-day grace period on all payments.
If a payment is missed, judgment may be entered by declaration of Plaintiff without further Court
process.
The matter is set for a review hearing for status of payments, as noted above.
- Interpreter Services Available; Spanish
- Stipulation; Agreement
Printed: 7/5/2024 07/05/2024 Court Trial - 24CV-01909 Page 1 of 1
Related Content
in Merced County
Ruling
Donald Baum vs Serratos Transportation Inc., et al.
Jul 26, 2024 |
23CV-03804
23CV-03804 Donald Baum v. Serratos Transportation, Inc., et al.
Order to Show Cause re: Sanctions
Appearance required. Parties who wish to appear remotely must contact the clerk of the
court at (209) 725-4111 to seek permission and arrange for a remote appearance. Appear
to address Plaintiff’s failure to appear at the June 10, 2024, Case Management
Conference and whether Plaintiff should be ordered to pay monetary sanctions of $100.
Appear to address the status of the case. There are no proofs of service on file showing
that any Defendant has been served.
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF MERCED
Ex Parte Matters
Hon. Brian L. McCabe
Courtroom 8
627 W. 21st Street, Merced
Friday, July 26, 2024
1:15 p.m.
The following tentative rulings shall become the ruling of the court unless a party gives
notice of intention to appear as follows:
1. You must call (209) 725-4111 to notify the court of your intent to appear.
2. You must give notice to all other parties before 4:00 p.m. of your intent to appear.
Per California Rules of Court, rule 3.1308(a)(1), failure to do both items 1 and 2 will
result in no oral argument. Note: Notifying Court Call (the court’s telephonic appearance
provider) of your intent to appear does not satisfy the requirement of notifying the court.
IMPORTANT: Court Reporters will NOT be provided; parties wanting a hearing
transcript must make their own arrangements.
Case No. Title / Description
There are no Ex Parte matters scheduled.
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF MERCED
Ex Parte Matters
Hon. Mason Brawley
Courtroom 9
627 W. 21st Street, Merced
Friday, July 26, 2024
1:15 p.m.
The following tentative rulings shall become the ruling of the court unless a party gives
notice of intention to appear as follows:
1. You must call (209) 725-4111 to notify the court of your intent to appear.
2. You must give notice to all other parties before 4:00 p.m. of your intent to appear.
Per California Rules of Court, rule 3.1308(a)(1), failure to do both items 1 and 2 will
result in no oral argument. Note: Notifying Court Call (the court’s telephonic appearance
provider) of your intent to appear does not satisfy the requirement of notifying the court.
IMPORTANT: Court Reporters will NOT be provided; parties wanting a hearing
transcript must make their own arrangements.
Case No. Title / Description
There are no Ex Parte matters scheduled.
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF MERCED
Ex Parte Matters
Hon. Jennifer O. Trimble
Courtroom 12
1159 G Street, Los Banos
Friday, July 26, 2024
1:15 p.m.
The following tentative rulings shall become the ruling of the court unless a party gives
notice of intention to appear as follows:
1. You must call (209) 725-4111 to notify the court of your intent to appear.
2. You must give notice to all other parties before 4:00 p.m. of your intent to appear.
Per California Rules of Court, rule 3.1308(a)(1), failure to do both items 1 and 2 will
result in no oral argument. Note: Notifying Court Call (the court’s telephonic appearance
provider) of your intent to appear does not satisfy the requirement of notifying the court.
IMPORTANT: Court Reporters will NOT be provided; parties wanting a hearing
transcript must make their own arrangements.
Case No. Title / Description
There are no Ex Parte matters scheduled.
____________________________________________________________________________
Ruling
Ryan Cardenas vs Warren Campbell, et al.
Jul 29, 2024 |
22CV-03955
22CV-03955 Ryan Cardenas v. Warren Campbell, et al.
Default Prove-Up
Appearance required on all matters. Remote appearances are permitted. Parties who
wish to appear remotely must contact the clerk of the court at (209) 725-4111 to arrange
for a remote appearance.
Ruling
Synchrony Bank vs Dianna Rodriguez
Jul 24, 2024 |
23CV-03604
23CV-03604 Synchrony Bank v. Dianna Rodriguez
Motion for Order that Requests for Admission be deemed admitted
Appearance required. Parties who wish to appear remotely must contact the clerk of the
court at (209) 725-4111 to seek permission and arrange for a remote appearance.
Ruling
Gary Kidgell vs County of Merced
Jul 24, 2024 |
23CV-04276
23CV-04276 Gary Kidgell v. County of Merced
Demurrer by Defendant County of Merced to first, third, fourth, fifth and sixth causes of action in
Second Amended complaint
The Demurrer to the Second Amended Complaint’s First Cause of Action for Cancellation
of a Written Instrument for failure to state a claim not barred by the statute of limitations
is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND to plead around the statute of limitations.
The Demurrer to the Second Amended Complaint’s Third cause of Action for failure to
allege a fiduciary duty that was breached by the County of Merced is SUSTAINED WITH
LEAVE TO AMEND to state facts establishing a fiduciary duty owed to Plaintiff by the
City of Merced.
The Demurrer to the Second Amended Complaint’s Fourth cause of Action for failure to
allege a statutory basis for liability against the County of Merced is SUSTAINED WITH
LEAVE TO AMEND to state a statutory basis for Plaintiff’s claim.
The Demurrer to the Second Amended Complaint’s Fifth cause of Action for failure
conduct a fraud investigation of recorded documents is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO
AMEND to state fact establishing a duty to conduct an investigation of recorded
documents.
The Demurrer to the Second Amended Complaint’s Sixth cause of Action for breach of
duty is SUSTAINED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND to state fact establishing a duty to breached
by the recording of the subject deed.
Motion to Strike Proofs of Service and Punitive Damages Claims in Second Amended
Complaint by Defendant City of Merced
The Motion to Strike Punitive Damages Claims is GRANTED WITH LEAVE TO AMEND to
state a cause of action and grounds for an award of punitive damages.
The Motion to Strike Proof of Service filed with the Court is DENIED AS MOOT given that
Defendant has made a general appearance in this action by filing a demurrer addressing
the merits of various causes of action therein. (See e.g. Fireman’s Fund Ins. Company v.
Sparks Construction, Inc. (2004) 114 Cal.App.4th 1135, 1145.)
Ruling
Salen's Landscaping, Inc. vs Smith Development and Construction Company, Inc,
Jul 29, 2024 |
23CV-01838
23CV-01838 Salen’s Landscaping, Inc. v. Smith Development and Construction
Company, Inc.
Default Prove-Up
Appearance required on all matters. Remote appearances are permitted. Parties who
wish to appear remotely must contact the clerk of the court at (209) 725-4111 to arrange
for a remote appearance.
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF MERCED
Limited Civil
Hon. Mason Brawley
Courtroom 9
627 W. 21st Street, Merced
Monday, July 29, 2024
1:30 p.m.
The following tentative rulings shall become the ruling of the court unless a party gives
notice of intention to appear as follows:
1. You must call (209) 725-4111 to notify the court of your intent to appear.
2. You must give notice to all other parties before 4:00 p.m. of your intent to appear.
Per California Rules of Court, rule 3.1308(a)(1), failure to do both items 1 and 2 will
result in no oral argument. Note: Notifying Court Call (the court’s telephonic appearance
provider) of your intent to appear does not satisfy the requirement of notifying the court.
IMPORTANT: Court Reporters will NOT be provided; parties wanting a hearing
transcript must make their own arrangements.
Case No. Title / Description
Ruling
John Poslof vs Brandon Soto et al.
Jul 29, 2024 |
19CV-01229
19CV-01229 John Poslof v. Brandon Soto, et al.
Order to Show Cause re: Dismissal-Notice of Settlement
Appearance required. Remote appearances are permitted. Parties who wish to appear
remotely must contact the clerk of the court at (209) 725-4111 to arrange for a remote
appearance. A Notice of Settlement of the Entire Case was filed 60 days ago on May 29,
2024. Appear to address the status of finalizing the settlement and filing a Dismissal of
the complaint and cross-complaint.
Ruling
Reyes Pineda De Leon vs Barbara Gillis Reid, et al.
Jul 25, 2024 |
23CV-01159
23CV-01159 Reyes Pineda De Leon v. Barbara Gillis Reid, et al.
Trial Setting Conference
Appearance required. Remote appearances are permitted. Parties who wish to appear
remotely must contact the clerk of the court at (209) 725-4111 to arrange for a remote
appearance. Appear to address the status of the case. While the clerk of this court
labeled the hearing as a trial setting conference the case only became at issue when an
Answer was filed on July 5, 2024.
Ruling
Rachel Perez, et al. vs Abdul Khattak, et al.
Jul 24, 2024 |
23CV-00483
23CV-00483 Rachael Perez, et al. v. Abdul Khattak, et al.
Case Management Conference
Appearance required. Remote appearances are permitted. Parties who wish to appear
remotely must contact the clerk of the court at (209) 725-4111 to arrange for a remote
appearance. Appear to address the status of mediation.