The Honorable Randall S. Stamen

Riverside County Superior Court, Department 7

Thumbnail of judge report

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

Download Hon. Stamen Report

Biography

The Hon. Randall Stamen is a judge for the Riverside County Superior Court in California. He was appointed to the bench by former Governor Jerry Brown in 2017. He filled the vacancy created by the elevation of the Hon. Richard T. Fields to the Court of Appeal.

He is a registered Republican.

Judge Stamen received his B.A. from the University of California, Irvine. He went on to earn his J.D. from the University of San Diego School of Law.

Prior to his appointment to the Superior Court, Stamen spent his entire legal career in private practice. He began as an associate at Reid and Hellyer, where he practiced from 1992 to 1994. Stamen then joined the Law Offices of Thomas L. Miller, where he also worked briefly as an associate before entering into solo practice. During his time as a sole practitioner, Stamen specialized in the unique field of tree-related litigation, where he handled cases involving damage done by trees as well as tree encroachment. His experience in this field led him to write a book on the subject of California statutes concerning trees. He was practicing at his own firm at the time of his appointment to the Superior Court in 2017.

While on the bench, Judge Stamen has presided over a civil calendar and trials assignment at the Riverside Historic Courthouse.

Recent Rulings by Hon. Randall S. Stamen

  • SJO INVESTMENTS VS STEWART

    Sep 21, 2020 |  Riverside County

    There is no Tentative Ruling. Plaintiff, through counsel, is Ordered to appear via WebEx. The Court invites Defendants or their attorney to appear via WebEx.

    ...

  • CENTURY NATIONAL INSURANCE VS STATE OF CALIFORNIA

    Sep 17, 2020 |  Riverside County

    The motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Court is unable to properly analyze plaintiff Century National Insurance’s (“Plaintiff”) motion. Plaintiff has not complied with CRC Rule 3.1324, which provides that a motion for leave to amend must state what allegations are to be deleted or added by page, parag...

  • ZARATE VS HEACOCK BUSINESS CENTER LLC

    Sep 17, 2020 |  Riverside County

    There is no Tentative Ruling. All parties are Ordered to appear via WebEx through counsel.

    ...

  • NEESE VS MARINA LANDSCAPE INC

    Sep 16, 2020 |  Riverside County

    The hearing was continued to 8:30 am on October 6, 2020, pursuant to a stipulation and order thereon. Plaintiffs and Defendants are Ordered to further meet and confer by telephone regarding both discovery motions being heard on October 6, 2020. Judge Stamen will inquire, on the record and in detail, about ...

  • WELLS FARGO BANK VS. CALIFORNIA CUSTOM BOTTLES INC

    Sep 16, 2020 |  Riverside County

    The unopposed petition is GRANTED. The Court will file and image the proposed Order and the proposed Judgment. Prevailing party shall serve conformed copies thereof and file proof of service with the Court.

    ...

  • GAVOLA VS NOVORR

    Sep 16, 2020 |  Riverside County

    The hearing was continued to 8:30 am on November 19, 2020. In continuing the hearing of the motion, the Court grants the request for judicial notice. Moreover, the Court considered that under 11 USC § 548, a bankruptcy trustee has the power to avoid fraudulent transfers made on or within 2 years (or 10 yea...

  • RICO VS FCA US LLC

    Sep 15, 2020 |  Riverside County

    The Rico Plaintiffs’ motion for attorney’s fees and costs is GRANTED IN THE REDUCED AMOUNT OF $13,470.78 (attorney’s fees of $12,657.50 and costs of $813.28). Costs: Defendant FCA US LLC (“Defendant”) did not move to tax. Costs are awarded in the amount of $813.28. Evidentiary Objections: Plaintiffs make 7...

  • HALVORSON VS CORONA POST ACUTE LLC

    Sep 14, 2020 |  Riverside County

    The Motion to Strike the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) is granted, with 20 days leave to amend, as to paragraph 39 of the third cause of action and prayers for relief 3 and

    ...

  • HOLCOMB VS GREENWAY

    Sep 14, 2020 |  Riverside County

    There is no Tentative Ruling on the unopposed Motion for Summary Judgment. Moving party, defendant Dr. Sechrist, shall be prepared to address the electronic service of the Motion for Summary Judgment, including Temporary Emergency Rules Related to COVID-19 (see Appendix I of the California Rules of Court)....

  • HOLCOMB VS GREENWAY

    Sep 10, 2020 |  Riverside County

    There is no Tentative Ruling on the unopposed Motion for Summary Judgment. Moving party, defendant Dr. Greenway, shall be prepared to address the electronic service of the Motion for Summary Judgment, including Temporary Emergency Rules Related to COVID-19 (see Appendix I of the California Rules of Court)....

  • NAVARRO VS NAVARRO

    Sep 10, 2020 |  Riverside County

    There is no Tentative Ruling on the unopposed Demurrer. Moving parties, defendant Henry Francis Navarro, Jr., and Debbie Navarro, shall be prepared to address the electronic service of the Demurrer, including Temporary Emergency Rules Related to COVID-19 (see Appendix I of the California Rules of Court).

  • MORRIS VS MOORE

    Sep 09, 2020 |  Riverside County

    The unopposed motion is GRANTED. Defendant Moore is Ordered to: 1) serve verified responses to Form Interrogatories, Set Two, without objections, within 20 days; 2) serve verified responses to Special Interrogatories, Set Two, without objections, within 20 days; and, 3) serve verified responses and respons...

  • WESTERN PACIFIC HOUSING VS. CITY VENTURES HOME

    Sep 09, 2020 |  Riverside County

    The demurrer to the breach of contract cause of action is overruled. City Ventures has not shown that the Waiver and Release provisions in the Purchase Sale Agreement bar the claims made based upon the alleged breach of the indemnity provision in the later- executed Assignment of contracts.

    The dem...

  • HOLCOMB VS GREENWAY

    Sep 08, 2020 |  Riverside County

    There is no Tentative Ruling on the unopposed Motion for Summary Judgment. Moving party, defendant Dr. Gage, shall be prepared to address the electronic service of the Motion for Summary Judgment, including Temporary Emergency Rules Related to COVID-19 (see Appendix I of the California Rules of Court).

    ...

  • CAMP VS PLATINUM STORAGE GROUP

    Sep 04, 2020 |  Riverside County

    Defendant Yankee Mini Storage’s Motion to Strike the prayer for relief for punitive damages in the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) is GRANTED WITH 20 DAYS LEAVE TO AMEND. The FAC does not plead facts sufficient to support a claim for punitive damages against Defendant Yankee. The FAC alleges that Defendant...

  • FUENTES VS WINCO FOODS INC

    Sep 03, 2020 |  Riverside County

    The unopposed motion is GRANTED. Requests for Admission, Set One, are deemed admitted. Sanctions are imposed on plaintiff Fuentes in the reduced amount of $385.00. The sanctions shall be paid to defendant Winco Foods within 30 days.

    ...

  • QUINONEZ VS MADRIGAL

    Sep 03, 2020 |  Riverside County

    There is no Tentative Ruling. The Court strongly encourages the parties to further meet and confer in advance of the hearing. Additionally, the Court requests that the parties be prepared to discuss dates on which an Informal Discovery Conference will occur.

    ...

  • DIAZ VS CITYWIDE SELF STORAGE

    Aug 27, 2020 |  Riverside County

    The motion is GRANTED. The request for sanctions is denied. Neither Plaintiff nor Defendants tried to resolve this discovery dispute by properly meeting and conferring. Plaintiff and Defendants (through counsel) shall IMMEDIATELY meet and confer regarding the date, time, and location of employee Brown’s de...

  • RIZOR VS THE COMMISSION ON PROFESSIONAL COMPETENC

    Aug 27, 2020 |  Riverside County

    The petition for writ of administrative mandate is DENIED. The Court independently reviewed the evidence and analyzed the Morrison factors. There is a nexus between Petitioner’s conduct and his fitness to teach. The unfitness is “evident”. Petitioner’s behavior evidences either a defect in temperament or f...

  • OMEGA PAVING INC VS CARLISLE

    Aug 26, 2020 |  Riverside County

    The motion is GRANTED and defendants may file and serve their proposed Answer and proposed Cross-Complaint within 10 days. Defendant Carlisle indicates that there were over 40 emails between him and Plaintiff’s counsel between 12/20/19 and 1/15/20 and 1/31/20 and 4/2/20 and that in the emails, Plaintiff’s ...

  • HITOMI VS FORD MOTOR COMPANY

    Aug 26, 2020 |  Riverside County

    Defendants’ motion for sanctions is DENIED. Defendants request monetary sanctions be imposed on Plaintiffs (the Hitomis), as opposed to Plaintiffs’ counsel. The Court notes CCP §575.2(b).

    ...

  • DAVIS VS GENERAL MOTORS LLC

    Aug 26, 2020 |  Riverside County

    There is no Tentative Ruling.

    ...

  • HITOMI VS FORD MOTOR COMPANY

    Aug 25, 2020 |  Riverside County

    Defendants’ motion for sanctions is moot and will not be heard by the Court.

    ...

  • SMITH VS MASSEY

    Aug 25, 2020 |  Riverside County

    Plaintiffs’ counsel filed a Declaration on August 10, 2020. Based upon defendant Massey’s moving papers and the Declaration, the Court rules as set forth below. Plaintiff Smith is Ordered to serve verified responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One, without objections, within 20 days. Sanctions in the r...

  • See More Results

Recent Rulings by Hon. Randall S. Stamen

  • SJO INVESTMENTS VS STEWART

    Sep 21, 2020 |  Riverside County

    There is no Tentative Ruling. Plaintiff, through counsel, is Ordered to appear via WebEx. The Court invites Defendants or their attorney to appear via WebEx.

    ...

  • CENTURY NATIONAL INSURANCE VS STATE OF CALIFORNIA

    Sep 17, 2020 |  Riverside County

    The motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The Court is unable to properly analyze plaintiff Century National Insurance’s (“Plaintiff”) motion. Plaintiff has not complied with CRC Rule 3.1324, which provides that a motion for leave to amend must state what allegations are to be deleted or added by page, parag...

  • ZARATE VS HEACOCK BUSINESS CENTER LLC

    Sep 17, 2020 |  Riverside County

    There is no Tentative Ruling. All parties are Ordered to appear via WebEx through counsel.

    ...

  • NEESE VS MARINA LANDSCAPE INC

    Sep 16, 2020 |  Riverside County

    The hearing was continued to 8:30 am on October 6, 2020, pursuant to a stipulation and order thereon. Plaintiffs and Defendants are Ordered to further meet and confer by telephone regarding both discovery motions being heard on October 6, 2020. Judge Stamen will inquire, on the record and in detail, about ...

  • WELLS FARGO BANK VS. CALIFORNIA CUSTOM BOTTLES INC

    Sep 16, 2020 |  Riverside County

    The unopposed petition is GRANTED. The Court will file and image the proposed Order and the proposed Judgment. Prevailing party shall serve conformed copies thereof and file proof of service with the Court.

    ...

  • GAVOLA VS NOVORR

    Sep 16, 2020 |  Riverside County

    The hearing was continued to 8:30 am on November 19, 2020. In continuing the hearing of the motion, the Court grants the request for judicial notice. Moreover, the Court considered that under 11 USC § 548, a bankruptcy trustee has the power to avoid fraudulent transfers made on or within 2 years (or 10 yea...

  • RICO VS FCA US LLC

    Sep 15, 2020 |  Riverside County

    The Rico Plaintiffs’ motion for attorney’s fees and costs is GRANTED IN THE REDUCED AMOUNT OF $13,470.78 (attorney’s fees of $12,657.50 and costs of $813.28). Costs: Defendant FCA US LLC (“Defendant”) did not move to tax. Costs are awarded in the amount of $813.28. Evidentiary Objections: Plaintiffs make 7...

  • HALVORSON VS CORONA POST ACUTE LLC

    Sep 14, 2020 |  Riverside County

    The Motion to Strike the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) is granted, with 20 days leave to amend, as to paragraph 39 of the third cause of action and prayers for relief 3 and

    ...

  • HOLCOMB VS GREENWAY

    Sep 14, 2020 |  Riverside County

    There is no Tentative Ruling on the unopposed Motion for Summary Judgment. Moving party, defendant Dr. Sechrist, shall be prepared to address the electronic service of the Motion for Summary Judgment, including Temporary Emergency Rules Related to COVID-19 (see Appendix I of the California Rules of Court)....

  • HOLCOMB VS GREENWAY

    Sep 10, 2020 |  Riverside County

    There is no Tentative Ruling on the unopposed Motion for Summary Judgment. Moving party, defendant Dr. Greenway, shall be prepared to address the electronic service of the Motion for Summary Judgment, including Temporary Emergency Rules Related to COVID-19 (see Appendix I of the California Rules of Court)....

  • NAVARRO VS NAVARRO

    Sep 10, 2020 |  Riverside County

    There is no Tentative Ruling on the unopposed Demurrer. Moving parties, defendant Henry Francis Navarro, Jr., and Debbie Navarro, shall be prepared to address the electronic service of the Demurrer, including Temporary Emergency Rules Related to COVID-19 (see Appendix I of the California Rules of Court).

  • MORRIS VS MOORE

    Sep 09, 2020 |  Riverside County

    The unopposed motion is GRANTED. Defendant Moore is Ordered to: 1) serve verified responses to Form Interrogatories, Set Two, without objections, within 20 days; 2) serve verified responses to Special Interrogatories, Set Two, without objections, within 20 days; and, 3) serve verified responses and respons...

  • WESTERN PACIFIC HOUSING VS. CITY VENTURES HOME

    Sep 09, 2020 |  Riverside County

    The demurrer to the breach of contract cause of action is overruled. City Ventures has not shown that the Waiver and Release provisions in the Purchase Sale Agreement bar the claims made based upon the alleged breach of the indemnity provision in the later- executed Assignment of contracts.

    The dem...

  • HOLCOMB VS GREENWAY

    Sep 08, 2020 |  Riverside County

    There is no Tentative Ruling on the unopposed Motion for Summary Judgment. Moving party, defendant Dr. Gage, shall be prepared to address the electronic service of the Motion for Summary Judgment, including Temporary Emergency Rules Related to COVID-19 (see Appendix I of the California Rules of Court).

    ...

  • CAMP VS PLATINUM STORAGE GROUP

    Sep 04, 2020 |  Riverside County

    Defendant Yankee Mini Storage’s Motion to Strike the prayer for relief for punitive damages in the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) is GRANTED WITH 20 DAYS LEAVE TO AMEND. The FAC does not plead facts sufficient to support a claim for punitive damages against Defendant Yankee. The FAC alleges that Defendant...

  • FUENTES VS WINCO FOODS INC

    Sep 03, 2020 |  Riverside County

    The unopposed motion is GRANTED. Requests for Admission, Set One, are deemed admitted. Sanctions are imposed on plaintiff Fuentes in the reduced amount of $385.00. The sanctions shall be paid to defendant Winco Foods within 30 days.

    ...

  • QUINONEZ VS MADRIGAL

    Sep 03, 2020 |  Riverside County

    There is no Tentative Ruling. The Court strongly encourages the parties to further meet and confer in advance of the hearing. Additionally, the Court requests that the parties be prepared to discuss dates on which an Informal Discovery Conference will occur.

    ...

  • DIAZ VS CITYWIDE SELF STORAGE

    Aug 27, 2020 |  Riverside County

    The motion is GRANTED. The request for sanctions is denied. Neither Plaintiff nor Defendants tried to resolve this discovery dispute by properly meeting and conferring. Plaintiff and Defendants (through counsel) shall IMMEDIATELY meet and confer regarding the date, time, and location of employee Brown’s de...

  • RIZOR VS THE COMMISSION ON PROFESSIONAL COMPETENC

    Aug 27, 2020 |  Riverside County

    The petition for writ of administrative mandate is DENIED. The Court independently reviewed the evidence and analyzed the Morrison factors. There is a nexus between Petitioner’s conduct and his fitness to teach. The unfitness is “evident”. Petitioner’s behavior evidences either a defect in temperament or f...

  • OMEGA PAVING INC VS CARLISLE

    Aug 26, 2020 |  Riverside County

    The motion is GRANTED and defendants may file and serve their proposed Answer and proposed Cross-Complaint within 10 days. Defendant Carlisle indicates that there were over 40 emails between him and Plaintiff’s counsel between 12/20/19 and 1/15/20 and 1/31/20 and 4/2/20 and that in the emails, Plaintiff’s ...

  • HITOMI VS FORD MOTOR COMPANY

    Aug 26, 2020 |  Riverside County

    Defendants’ motion for sanctions is DENIED. Defendants request monetary sanctions be imposed on Plaintiffs (the Hitomis), as opposed to Plaintiffs’ counsel. The Court notes CCP §575.2(b).

    ...

  • DAVIS VS GENERAL MOTORS LLC

    Aug 26, 2020 |  Riverside County

    There is no Tentative Ruling.

    ...

  • HITOMI VS FORD MOTOR COMPANY

    Aug 25, 2020 |  Riverside County

    Defendants’ motion for sanctions is moot and will not be heard by the Court.

    ...

  • SMITH VS MASSEY

    Aug 25, 2020 |  Riverside County

    Plaintiffs’ counsel filed a Declaration on August 10, 2020. Based upon defendant Massey’s moving papers and the Declaration, the Court rules as set forth below. Plaintiff Smith is Ordered to serve verified responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One, without objections, within 20 days. Sanctions in the r...

  • 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.