Party Discovery: Credit Corp Solutions Inc -v- Lopez et al Print

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.

S-CV-0051944 JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A. vs. Tucker, Deram K ** NOTE: telephonic appearances are strongly encouraged Appearance required. Complaint is not at issue - Need responsive pleading, default or dismissal as to Defendant(s): Tucker, Deram K Additionally, no proof of service has been filed as to Defendant(s): Tucker, Deram K

Matter on the Law & Motion calendar for Tuesday, July 23, 2024, Line 1. PLAINTIFF PMIG FINANCIAL, LLC's HEARING ON CLAIM OF EXEMPTION. Continued to August 6, 2024 on the court's motion. =(302/CK)

DISCOVER BANK VS MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL CVCO2300997 CERVANTES FOR CAROLINA CERVANTES Tentative Ruling: No tentative ruling will be issued.

CV-23-006622 – DISCOVER BANK vs FERNANDEZ, MANUEL – Plaintiff Discover Bank’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings – GRANTED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND, and unopposed.   The Court GRANTS the request to take judicial notice of the answer and complaint filed in this case. The answer admits all allegations in the complaint as true and does not assert any affirmative defenses.   Based on the pleadings, the Court finds that the complaint states facts sufficient to constitute causes of action against the defendant, and the answer does not state facts sufficient to constitute a defense to the complaint. (Code Civ. Proc., § 438(c)(1)(A).) Defendant, who did not oppose this motion, has not given the Court any reason to grant leave to amend. (Cf. Today's IV, Inc. v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (2022) 83 Cal.App.5th 1137, 1176, reh'g denied (Oct. 25, 2022), review denied (Jan. 18, 2023).)   Consequently, the unopposed motion is GRANTED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND. The Court will sign the proposed order and the proposed judgment submitted by Plaintiff. Court trial date to be vacated.   Due to the interruption of telephone service as a result of an outage, any party requesting a hearing must make the request via email to the court clerk. If V-Court is not available and an in-person appearance is not possible, appearance must be via Zoom. Sign-up information for Zoom will be available on the court’s website.

CREDITORS ADJUSTMENT BUREAU, INC., VS. CASTRO Case Number: 23CVG-00362 Tentative Ruling on Motion for Terminating Sanctions: Plaintiff Creditors Adjustment Bureau, Inc. moves for terminating sanctions by striking Defendant Vincent Castro’s answer. Plaintiff also requests sanctions in the amount of $1,572.75 for each motion. Procedural Defect: As a procedural matter, this motion was served both via mail and email on May 9, 2024, and set for a hearing date of June 7, 2024. CCP § 1005(b) requires all moving papers be served 16 court days before the hearing. This notice period is extended by five calendar days if the motion is served by mail. Id. For service by email, the notice period is extended by two court days. CCP § 1010.6(a)(3). This timeframe is calculated by counting backwards from the hearing date but excluding the hearing date. CCP § 12c. Starting with the June 7, 2024, hearing date and counting backwards 16 court days (excluding the Court holiday of May 27, 2024) then five calendar days for out of state mailing this matter should have been served by mail no later than, May 4, 2024. For email the last day to serve the motion was April 24, 2024. The motion was served on May 7, 2024, and was untimely under either calculation. Based on insufficient statutory notice, the motion is denied. Merits of Motion: Even if the motion had been timely noticed, terminating sanctions are not warranted. Terminating sanctions are a “drastic penalty and should be used sparingly.” Lopez v. Watchtower Bible & Tract Society of New York, Inc. (2016) 246 Cal.App.4th 566, 604. A terminating sanction should not generally be imposed by the court until less severe sanctions have been attempted and were unsuccessful. Id. No justification has been provided as to why terminating sanctions are appropriate in this context instead of lesser evidentiary or issue sanctions. Without additional evidence, terminating sanctions would be premature. The motion is DENIED. A proposed order was lodged with the Court which will be modified to reflect the denial. Review Hearing: This matter is also on calendar for review regarding trial re-setting. The Court designates this matter as a Plan II case and intends on setting it for trial no later than October 15, 2024. An appearance is necessary on today’s calendar to discuss available trial dates.

ET AL. Case Number: 23CV-0201860 Tentative Ruling on Order to Show Cause Re Dismissal: An Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (“OSC”) issued on June 24, 2024, pursuant to Gov’t Code § 68608(b) to Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s Counsel for failure to appear at the June 17, 2024, hearing as ordered on February 20, 2024. No response to the OSC has been filed. The Court previously sanctioned Plaintiff and Counsel for failure to timely serve the parties. The parties have not been served. The sanctions have not been paid. It appears Plaintiff has abandoned this action and lesser sanctions would not be effective. The Court DISMISSES this action. The clerk is instructed to prepare a separate Order of Dismissal. No appearance is necessary on today’s calendar. ****************************************************************************** 9:00 a.m. Review Hearings ******************************************************************************

SIERRA CENTRAL CREDIT UNION VS. GOODWIN Case Number: 23CVG-00253 This matter is on calendar for review regarding status of bankruptcy. Plaintiff filed a Case Management Statement informing the Court that the stay is still in effect. The matter is continued to Tuesday, January 23, 2025 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 63 for status of bankruptcy. No appearance is necessary on today’s calendar.