The Honorable Arthur A. Wick

Sonoma County Superior Court, Department Courtroom 17

Discover if Hon. Wick is the right judge for your case based on their ruling history. Stop making 170.6 decisions blindly. See a report sample

Download Hon. Wick Report

Biography

The Hon. Arthur A. Wick is a judge for the Superior Court of Sonoma County in California. He was appointed to the bench by former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2006, filling a vacancy created by the retirement of the Hon. Robert Dale.

Wick earned a B.S. from California State University, Long Beach in 1976. He then completed a J.D. from Northrop University School of Law in 1980.

Prior to his appointment to the bench, Wick served as a senior associate and general counsel with School and College Legal Services, an organization dedicated to providing legal services to various school districts in Sonoma County and throughout the State of California. Before that, he worked as a partner and an associate in two private sector law firms.

Wick successfully spearheaded the campaign to incorporate Windsor, California in 1992. He was also instrumental in the campaigns to institutionalize the Windsor Unified School District and to pass the nearly $30 million bond for the construction of Windsor High School.

Recent Rulings by Hon. Arthur A. Wick

  • ALVES V. ZURA

    Apr 24, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    The unopposed motion by Plaintiffs Jose Alves and Lina Alves for leave to file the [Proposed] First Amended Complaint, and the joinders by defendants/cross-complainants Judie Zura and the City of Petaluma, are GRANTED. Plaintiffs shall file the First Amended Complaint, Exhibit 2 to the Declaration of Willi...

  • THE NATIONAL GRANGE OF THE ORDER OF PATRONS OF HUSBANDRY V. BENNETT VALLEY GUILD

    Apr 24, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    The Motion for Writ of Possession, previously continued to May 8, 2019, has been dropped at the request of moving party.

    ...

  • VICTOR V. SONNTAG

    Apr 24, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    The currently operative second amended complaint filed by Plaintiff Joseph Victor (through his guardian ad litem Kimberly Scranton) (“Plaintiff”) arises out of an incident on November 28, 2016 whereby defendant Sadie Sonntag (“Sonntag”) allegedly struck Plaintiff in a crosswalk owned and maintained by the ...

  • LARKFIELD V. LUCAS

    Apr 17, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    Plaintiff Larkfield Office Park Owners Association, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) brought this construction defect case against Lucas Construction fdba Lucas & Lucas General Contractors and others, including John Carlisle Construction, Inc., for breach of contract, negligence, and breach of warranty. Lucas Constructi...

  • THE NATIONAL GRANGE OF THE ORDER OF PATRONS OF HUSBANDRY V. BENNETT VALLEY GUILD

    Apr 17, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    This motion by plaintiff The National Grange of the Order of Patrons of Husbandry for summary judgment or, in the alternative, summary adjudication, is CONTINUED to May 8, 2019 at 3:00pm in Department 17 so as to be heard along with Plaintiffs’ application for writ of possession. The writ of possession sch...

  • OURA V. CASA DEL SOL TOWNHOMES OWNERS' ASSOCIATION

    Apr 17, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    This matter is on calendar for the motion by cross-defendant Creative Services Inc. (“CSI”) to compel responses by plaintiffs Michelle Oura and Stephen Oura (together “Plaintiffs”) to its first set of special interrogatories, form interrogatories, and requests for production, without objections, and for mo...

  • LARKFIELD V. LUCAS

    Apr 10, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    This matter is on calendar for a hearing on Defendant/Cross-Defendant/Cross-Complainant John Carlisle Construction, Inc.’s joinder (the “Joinder Motion”) to the motion filed by Cross-Defendant/Cross-Complainant RE West Builders, Inc. for leave to file an amendment to its cross-complaint (the “RE West Motio...

  • CITY OF NOVATO V. RIVERA

    Apr 10, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    Plaintiff City of Novato (“Plaintiff”) filed the complaint in this action for negligence and negligence per se against defendant Jose Lopez Rivera (“Defendant”) arising out of a motor vehicle accident during which Defendant’s vehicle struck a motorcycle owned by Plaintiff for use by its police force. This ...

  • SYNCHRONY BANK V. SMITH

    Apr 10, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    This matter is on calendar for plaintiff Synchrony Bank’s (“Plaintiff’s”) motion to set aside and vacate the default it caused to be entered against defendant Michelle Smith aka Michelle A. Smith (“Defendant”) pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) section 473. According to the supporting declaration ...

  • DOE V. THORPE

    Apr 05, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    Defendant Roman Catholic Bishop of Santa Rosa’s (“RCBSR”) Motion to Bifurcate “the issue of whether or not [RCBSR] is the alter ego/agent of defendant [HBC] as alleged by plaintiff,” and that it be tried first is DENIED. RCBSR has not demonstrated that under Code of Civil Procedure section 598 that bifurca...

  • MARTINEZ V. JANESCO ENTERPRISES, INC.

    Apr 05, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    Plaintiff filed a request for dismissal with prejudice of the entire action and the dismissal was entered on March 11, 2019. As a result, this matter is DROPPED.

    ...

  • GUEN V. PEREIRA

    Apr 05, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    Defendant’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees is GRANTED in the reduced amount of $39,187.50 and $2,498.85 in costs, for a total of $41,686.35. Under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16(c) the prevailing party is entitled to fees, but the amount awarded is within the Court’s discretion. Attorney Greene’s rate ...

  • RINTEELA V. CAPPA

    Mar 27, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    Defendant’s motion to strike the claim for punitive damages is DENIED. The Complaint alleges facts supporting a causal relationship between the alleged intoxication and Plaintiffs’ injuries. (See Peterson v. Superior Court (1984) 31 Cal.3d 147; Dawes v. Superior Court (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 82; Taylor v. Su...

  • DOE V. MARTINEZ

    Mar 27, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    Dropped by request of moving party.

    ...

  • SANDERS V. FCA US LLC

    Mar 27, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    Plaintiff’s motion to compel responses GRANTED, in part, and DENIED, in part. Defendant’s separate statement states supplemental responses were made to responses 18-21, 23-25, 28-32, 54, and 57. This motion does not cover the supplemental responses, leaving 26, 27, 36-39, 41, 52, 60, 72, 73, and 86-89 resp...

  • LARAMORE V. LARAMORE

    Mar 20, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    This matter is on calendar for the motion by Defendant Nina D. Laramore to compel plaintiff Megan D. Laramore to provide verified responses to her demand for inspection and copying of tangible things, set two, and supplemental demand for inspection and copying of tangible things pursuant to Code of Civil P...

  • NEW-OLD WAYS WHOLISTICALLY EMERGING V. SONOMA, COUNTY OF, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

    Mar 20, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    Motion of Stephen Volker to Withdraw as Attorney is GRANTED. Motion of Law Offices of Stephan C. Volker to Intervene is GRANTED. Absent a contrary agreement, attorney’s fees under CCP section 1021.5, applicable in this action, belong to the attorney instead of the client and accordingly if the client in so...

  • MARIN ADVOCATES FOR CHILDREN, A CALIFORNIA NON-PROFIT CORPORATION V. MCQUAID

    Mar 20, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    Plaintiffs Marin Advocates for Children (“MAC”) and Kerline Astere (“Astere,” together with MAC “Plaintiffs”) filed a complaint against defendants Susan McQuaid and James Findlay (“Defendants”). Defendants filed a motion to strike under the anti-SLAPP statute, Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) section 425.16...

  • COLLECTRONICS, INC V. EST, 1833, LLC

    Mar 06, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    This matter is on calendar for the motion by Plaintiff Collectronics, Inc., assignee of Young’s Market Company, (“Plaintiff”) pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) section 473(b) to vacate the court-ordered dismissal entered on October 4, 2018. The Motion is GRANTED. The Complaint was filed on April ...

  • ONEMAIN FINANCIAL GROUP, LLC V. INOCENTES

    Mar 06, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    Appearance of defendant is required.

    ...

  • LOWER AUSTIN-KIDD CREEK CONSERVANCY V. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTECTION

    Mar 06, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    Motion to Compel Responses to Plaintiff’s Requests for Production, Set 1 from Lytton Rancheria GRANTED. Motion to Compel Responses to Plaintiff’s Requests for Production, Set 1 from James Beyers GRANTED. The discovery requests at issue are largely identical in both motions and they request the same types o...

  • FUITEN V. MR. BAR-B-Q

    Feb 27, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    This matter is on calendar for attorney Rafferty E. Taylor’s application to be admitted pro hac vice as counsel for defendants/cross-defendants Mr. Bar-B-Q, Blue Rhino Global Sourcing, Inc. and Ferrellgas, L.P. The application is DENIED, without prejudice, based on the failure to comply with California Rul...

  • PENNACCHIO V. MEDRANO

    Feb 27, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    On August 14, 2017, Plaintiffs Mark Pennacchio and Sheri Pennacchio (“Plaintiffs”) filed the complaint in this action against defendants Ken Medrano, individually and dba Kendell Brook Builders, Jack Shapiro, Shapiro Plastering, Inc. and various sureties (altogether “Defendants”) for construction defects a...

  • CLARK V. STATE OF CALIFORNIA

    Feb 27, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    This case is on calendar for Plaintiffs’/Judgment Debtors’ (“Plaintiffs”) motion to vacate Defendant’s/Judgment Creditor’s (“Defendant”) application to renew the judgment, which was filed and entered on November 29, 2018. First, Plaintiffs contend that the application should be vacated because it was not f...

  • See More Results

Recent Rulings by Hon. Arthur A. Wick

  • ALVES V. ZURA

    Apr 24, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    The unopposed motion by Plaintiffs Jose Alves and Lina Alves for leave to file the [Proposed] First Amended Complaint, and the joinders by defendants/cross-complainants Judie Zura and the City of Petaluma, are GRANTED. Plaintiffs shall file the First Amended Complaint, Exhibit 2 to the Declaration of Willi...

  • THE NATIONAL GRANGE OF THE ORDER OF PATRONS OF HUSBANDRY V. BENNETT VALLEY GUILD

    Apr 24, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    The Motion for Writ of Possession, previously continued to May 8, 2019, has been dropped at the request of moving party.

    ...

  • VICTOR V. SONNTAG

    Apr 24, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    The currently operative second amended complaint filed by Plaintiff Joseph Victor (through his guardian ad litem Kimberly Scranton) (“Plaintiff”) arises out of an incident on November 28, 2016 whereby defendant Sadie Sonntag (“Sonntag”) allegedly struck Plaintiff in a crosswalk owned and maintained by the ...

  • LARKFIELD V. LUCAS

    Apr 17, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    Plaintiff Larkfield Office Park Owners Association, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) brought this construction defect case against Lucas Construction fdba Lucas & Lucas General Contractors and others, including John Carlisle Construction, Inc., for breach of contract, negligence, and breach of warranty. Lucas Constructi...

  • THE NATIONAL GRANGE OF THE ORDER OF PATRONS OF HUSBANDRY V. BENNETT VALLEY GUILD

    Apr 17, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    This motion by plaintiff The National Grange of the Order of Patrons of Husbandry for summary judgment or, in the alternative, summary adjudication, is CONTINUED to May 8, 2019 at 3:00pm in Department 17 so as to be heard along with Plaintiffs’ application for writ of possession. The writ of possession sch...

  • OURA V. CASA DEL SOL TOWNHOMES OWNERS' ASSOCIATION

    Apr 17, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    This matter is on calendar for the motion by cross-defendant Creative Services Inc. (“CSI”) to compel responses by plaintiffs Michelle Oura and Stephen Oura (together “Plaintiffs”) to its first set of special interrogatories, form interrogatories, and requests for production, without objections, and for mo...

  • LARKFIELD V. LUCAS

    Apr 10, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    This matter is on calendar for a hearing on Defendant/Cross-Defendant/Cross-Complainant John Carlisle Construction, Inc.’s joinder (the “Joinder Motion”) to the motion filed by Cross-Defendant/Cross-Complainant RE West Builders, Inc. for leave to file an amendment to its cross-complaint (the “RE West Motio...

  • CITY OF NOVATO V. RIVERA

    Apr 10, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    Plaintiff City of Novato (“Plaintiff”) filed the complaint in this action for negligence and negligence per se against defendant Jose Lopez Rivera (“Defendant”) arising out of a motor vehicle accident during which Defendant’s vehicle struck a motorcycle owned by Plaintiff for use by its police force. This ...

  • SYNCHRONY BANK V. SMITH

    Apr 10, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    This matter is on calendar for plaintiff Synchrony Bank’s (“Plaintiff’s”) motion to set aside and vacate the default it caused to be entered against defendant Michelle Smith aka Michelle A. Smith (“Defendant”) pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) section 473. According to the supporting declaration ...

  • DOE V. THORPE

    Apr 05, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    Defendant Roman Catholic Bishop of Santa Rosa’s (“RCBSR”) Motion to Bifurcate “the issue of whether or not [RCBSR] is the alter ego/agent of defendant [HBC] as alleged by plaintiff,” and that it be tried first is DENIED. RCBSR has not demonstrated that under Code of Civil Procedure section 598 that bifurca...

  • MARTINEZ V. JANESCO ENTERPRISES, INC.

    Apr 05, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    Plaintiff filed a request for dismissal with prejudice of the entire action and the dismissal was entered on March 11, 2019. As a result, this matter is DROPPED.

    ...

  • GUEN V. PEREIRA

    Apr 05, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    Defendant’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees is GRANTED in the reduced amount of $39,187.50 and $2,498.85 in costs, for a total of $41,686.35. Under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.16(c) the prevailing party is entitled to fees, but the amount awarded is within the Court’s discretion. Attorney Greene’s rate ...

  • RINTEELA V. CAPPA

    Mar 27, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    Defendant’s motion to strike the claim for punitive damages is DENIED. The Complaint alleges facts supporting a causal relationship between the alleged intoxication and Plaintiffs’ injuries. (See Peterson v. Superior Court (1984) 31 Cal.3d 147; Dawes v. Superior Court (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 82; Taylor v. Su...

  • DOE V. MARTINEZ

    Mar 27, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    Dropped by request of moving party.

    ...

  • SANDERS V. FCA US LLC

    Mar 27, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    Plaintiff’s motion to compel responses GRANTED, in part, and DENIED, in part. Defendant’s separate statement states supplemental responses were made to responses 18-21, 23-25, 28-32, 54, and 57. This motion does not cover the supplemental responses, leaving 26, 27, 36-39, 41, 52, 60, 72, 73, and 86-89 resp...

  • LARAMORE V. LARAMORE

    Mar 20, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    This matter is on calendar for the motion by Defendant Nina D. Laramore to compel plaintiff Megan D. Laramore to provide verified responses to her demand for inspection and copying of tangible things, set two, and supplemental demand for inspection and copying of tangible things pursuant to Code of Civil P...

  • NEW-OLD WAYS WHOLISTICALLY EMERGING V. SONOMA, COUNTY OF, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

    Mar 20, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    Motion of Stephen Volker to Withdraw as Attorney is GRANTED. Motion of Law Offices of Stephan C. Volker to Intervene is GRANTED. Absent a contrary agreement, attorney’s fees under CCP section 1021.5, applicable in this action, belong to the attorney instead of the client and accordingly if the client in so...

  • MARIN ADVOCATES FOR CHILDREN, A CALIFORNIA NON-PROFIT CORPORATION V. MCQUAID

    Mar 20, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    Plaintiffs Marin Advocates for Children (“MAC”) and Kerline Astere (“Astere,” together with MAC “Plaintiffs”) filed a complaint against defendants Susan McQuaid and James Findlay (“Defendants”). Defendants filed a motion to strike under the anti-SLAPP statute, Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) section 425.16...

  • COLLECTRONICS, INC V. EST, 1833, LLC

    Mar 06, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    This matter is on calendar for the motion by Plaintiff Collectronics, Inc., assignee of Young’s Market Company, (“Plaintiff”) pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) section 473(b) to vacate the court-ordered dismissal entered on October 4, 2018. The Motion is GRANTED. The Complaint was filed on April ...

  • ONEMAIN FINANCIAL GROUP, LLC V. INOCENTES

    Mar 06, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    Appearance of defendant is required.

    ...

  • LOWER AUSTIN-KIDD CREEK CONSERVANCY V. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTECTION

    Mar 06, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    Motion to Compel Responses to Plaintiff’s Requests for Production, Set 1 from Lytton Rancheria GRANTED. Motion to Compel Responses to Plaintiff’s Requests for Production, Set 1 from James Beyers GRANTED. The discovery requests at issue are largely identical in both motions and they request the same types o...

  • FUITEN V. MR. BAR-B-Q

    Feb 27, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    This matter is on calendar for attorney Rafferty E. Taylor’s application to be admitted pro hac vice as counsel for defendants/cross-defendants Mr. Bar-B-Q, Blue Rhino Global Sourcing, Inc. and Ferrellgas, L.P. The application is DENIED, without prejudice, based on the failure to comply with California Rul...

  • PENNACCHIO V. MEDRANO

    Feb 27, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    On August 14, 2017, Plaintiffs Mark Pennacchio and Sheri Pennacchio (“Plaintiffs”) filed the complaint in this action against defendants Ken Medrano, individually and dba Kendell Brook Builders, Jack Shapiro, Shapiro Plastering, Inc. and various sureties (altogether “Defendants”) for construction defects a...

  • CLARK V. STATE OF CALIFORNIA

    Feb 27, 2019 |  Sonoma County

    This case is on calendar for Plaintiffs’/Judgment Debtors’ (“Plaintiffs”) motion to vacate Defendant’s/Judgment Creditor’s (“Defendant”) application to renew the judgment, which was filed and entered on November 29, 2018. First, Plaintiffs contend that the application should be vacated because it was not f...

  • See More Results

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

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.