On April 29, 2019 a
Request,Application
was filed
involving a dispute between
Vij, Rakesh,
and
Abraham, Sellam,
Constantine, Casey,
Constantine, Donovan,
Louise, David,
Mehl, Gavin,
Mehl, John Glen,
for 32: Limited Residential Unlawful Detainer - under 10,000
in the District Court of Yolo County.
Preview
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF YOLO
CIVIL LAW AND MOTION MINUTE ORDER
HON: DANIEL M WOLK
CASE NO: CV-2019-879
TITLE: ViJ VS MEHL
DATE: 12/15/2020
TIME: 9:00 AM
PROCEEDINGS: *REQUEST TO CORRECT OR VACATE JUDGMENT
CLERK: Piper Noto
APPEARANCES
1OPlaintiff Present
Os/t
2AwiBy Attys: Ca oy Gveisen
ayADetendant Present Ur |
Osit
4 OWBy Attys:
REPORTER: S. Qranvw
19 Tentative ruling adopted; see attached
WARRANT ORDERS
1 O Debtor failed to appear; Warrant of Body
Attachment ordered; Bail set $.
2 0 Stay issuance of warrant until next hearing,
creditor to send warning letter to debtor
3 O Warrant of body attachment recalled
NEXT SCHEDULED APPEARANCE DISMISSALS
1 ODate. Time. 1 O Case ordered dismissed
For. Dept Owith Owithout prejudice
2 ODate: Time. 2 O Case ordered dismissed for lack of
For. Dept prosecution (DLP)
3 QJury OCourt Trial OTime Est. 3 O Party dismissed (PDS)
Date. Time Dept
4 OSettlement Conference
Date. Time. Dept. RULINGS
5 DOTrial Readiness Conference 1 O Court ordered temporary orders remain in
Date Time. Dept. effect pending further hearing
40 Continued by Court's Motion (CTC)
5 O Continuance requested by party(s) (CPM)
By:
2 O Court granted restraining order effective
until . Defendant ordered to stay
yards away from plaintiff.
60 Notice waived
MOTION/ORDERS
1 O Cause ordered off calendar
Orequest of Ono pis filed
3 O Default ordered
4 0 Proceed by offer of proof
5 O Stipulation reached
6 O Submitted on the pleadings
Owith argument Owithout argument
7 O Taken under submission (USD)
8 O Motion/Petn/App
granted (MOTG) Cidenied (MOTD)
100 Claim of exempt DENIED, $$ released to
creditor
110 Claim of exempt GRANTED, $$ released to
debtor
120 Debtor sworn and released
160 Settlement conference held; case settled
(SCL)
170 Trial confirmed; no settlement reached
150 Tentative ruling posted (TD)
OthTENTATIVE RULING
Case: Vij v. Mehl
Case No. CV-2019-879
Hearing Date: December 15, 2020 Department Nine 9:00 a.m.
Defendant Gavin Mehl’s request for judicial notice is DENIED. (Evid. Code, §§ 452, 453.) The
proffered documents are irrelevant to the Court’s determination of the instant motion. (People v.
Rowland (1992) 4 Cal.4th 238, 268 fn. 6 [*Rowland”].)
Defendant’s second request for judicial notice is GRANTED IN PART. (Evid. Code, §§ 452,
453.) The Court takes judicial notice of Exhibit B. However, the Court does not take judicial
notice of Exhibit A because this document is irrelevant to the Court’s determination of the
instant motion. (Rowland, supra, 4 Cal.4th at p. 268 fh. 6.)
Plaintiff Rakesh Vij’s objection to Mehl’s exchange of witness information is SUSTAINED.
(Code Civ. Proc., § 2034.260.) ,
Defendant Gavin Mehl’s motion to vacate judgment is DENIED. Defendant.does not provide an
adequate legal basis for the sought relief. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 187; Kulchar v. Kulchar
(1969) 1 Cal.3d 467, 471.)
Ifno hearing is requested, this tentative ruling is effective immediately. No formal order
pursuant to California Rule of Court 3.1312, or further notice is required.
Document Filed Date
December 15, 2020
Case Filing Date
April 29, 2019
Category
32: Limited Residential Unlawful Detainer - under 10,000
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF YOLO CIVIL LAW AND MOTION MINUTE ORDER HON: DANIEL M WOLK CASE NO: CV-2019-879 TITLE: ViJ VS MEHL DATE: 12/15/2020 TIME: 9:00 AM PROCEEDINGS: *REQUEST TO CORRECT OR VACATE JUDGMENT CLERK: Piper Noto APPEARANCES 1OPlaintiff Present Os/t 2AwiBy Attys: Ca oy Gveisen ayADetendant Present Ur | Osit 4 OWBy Attys: REPORTER: S. Qranvw 19 Tentative ruling adopted; see attached WARRANT ORDERS 1 O Debtor failed to appear; Warrant of Body Attachment ordered; Bail set $. 2 0 Stay issuance of warrant until next hearing, creditor to send warning letter to debtor 3 O Warrant of body attachment recalled NEXT SCHEDULED APPEARANCE DISMISSALS 1 ODate. Time. 1 O Case ordered dismissed For. Dept Owith Owithout prejudice 2 ODate: Time. 2 O Case ordered dismissed for lack of For. Dept prosecution (DLP) 3 QJury OCourt Trial OTime Est. 3 O Party dismissed (PDS) Date. Time Dept 4 OSettlement Conference Date. Time. Dept. RULINGS 5 DOTrial Readiness Conference 1 O Court ordered temporary orders remain in Date Time. Dept. effect pending further hearing 40 Continued by Court's Motion (CTC) 5 O Continuance requested by party(s) (CPM) By: 2 O Court granted restraining order effective until . Defendant ordered to stay yards away from plaintiff. 60 Notice waived MOTION/ORDERS 1 O Cause ordered off calendar Orequest of Ono pis filed 3 O Default ordered 4 0 Proceed by offer of proof 5 O Stipulation reached 6 O Submitted on the pleadings Owith argument Owithout argument 7 O Taken under submission (USD) 8 O Motion/Petn/App granted (MOTG) Cidenied (MOTD) 100 Claim of exempt DENIED, $$ released to creditor 110 Claim of exempt GRANTED, $$ released to debtor 120 Debtor sworn and released 160 Settlement conference held; case settled (SCL) 170 Trial confirmed; no settlement reached 150 Tentative ruling posted (TD) OthTENTATIVE RULING Case: Vij v. Mehl Case No. CV-2019-879 Hearing Date: December 15, 2020 Department Nine 9:00 a.m. Defendant Gavin Mehl’s request for judicial notice is DENIED. (Evid. Code, §§ 452, 453.) The proffered documents are irrelevant to the Court’s determination of the instant motion. (People v. Rowland (1992) 4 Cal.4th 238, 268 fn. 6 [*Rowland”].) Defendant’s second request for judicial notice is GRANTED IN PART. (Evid. Code, §§ 452, 453.) The Court takes judicial notice of Exhibit B. However, the Court does not take judicial notice of Exhibit A because this document is irrelevant to the Court’s determination of the instant motion. (Rowland, supra, 4 Cal.4th at p. 268 fh. 6.) Plaintiff Rakesh Vij’s objection to Mehl’s exchange of witness information is SUSTAINED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2034.260.) , Defendant Gavin Mehl’s motion to vacate judgment is DENIED. Defendant.does not provide an adequate legal basis for the sought relief. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 187; Kulchar v. Kulchar (1969) 1 Cal.3d 467, 471.) Ifno hearing is requested, this tentative ruling is effective immediately. No formal order pursuant to California Rule of Court 3.1312, or further notice is required.