Search anything: judges, parties, opposing counsel, motion types, legal issues

IN THE MATTER OF XAVIER RYAN LOPEZ

Gomez is refusing to transfer the court-ordered assets; and that the conservatory is unable to thereby meet the temporary conservatee's needs. There is an existing order of this court which is very specific to Ms. Gomez. The remedy for failure to comply with an express order of the court is an order to show cause re contempt. Set order to show cause re contempt and order Rosa Gomez to appear. gmr

  • Hearing

    Dec 31, 2015

  • Type

    Family Law

  • Sub Type

    Conservatorship

  • County

    Ventura County, CA

IN THE MATTER OF XAVIER RYAN LOPEZ

Gomez is refusing to transfer the court-ordered assets; and that the conservatory is unable to thereby meet the temporary conservatee's needs. There is an existing order of this court which is very specific to Ms. Gomez. The remedy for failure to comply with an express order of the court is an order to show cause re contempt. Set order to show cause re contempt and order Rosa Gomez to appear. gmr

  • Hearing

    Dec 31, 2015

  • Type

    Family Law

  • Sub Type

    Conservatorship

  • County

    Ventura County, CA

GOMEZ VS. SIVERLAKE

., et al.’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint in Gomez, et al. v. Scepter Holdings, Inc., et al., Case No. 3:17-cv-00042-CDL (M.D. Ga.), Exhibit 10, Defendant Moore Company’s Brief in Support of The Moore Company’s Second Motion to Dismiss in Gomez, et al. v. Scepter Holdings, Inc., et al., Case No. 3:17-cv-00042-CDL (M.D. Ga.), and Exhibit 11, Complaint for Damages by plaintiffs Robert Gomez, et al. filed March 6, 2017 in Gomez, et al. v.

  • Hearing

    Nov 16, 2017

GUADALUPE HERNANDEZ GOMEZ VS. ANDRIGHETTO PRODUCE INC. A CALIFORNIA PRODUCE ET AL

Gomez was qualified to do her job and her employment was terminated because of her pregnancy, pregnancy-related disability and gender. The fifth cause of action adequately alleges that Ms. Gomez was qualified to do her job and she requested reasonable accommodations which were ignored or denied. The eighth cause of action adequately alleges that Ms. Gomez was qualified to do her job and that her employment was terminated because she requested pregnancy-related medical leave.

  • Hearing

    Aug 16, 2018

LOUIS LOZANO, ET AL. VS CITY OF LOS ANGELES, A MUNICPAL CORPORATION AND CHARTER CITY WITHIN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ET AL.

Gomez counselled them for not listening to the radio. (AR 104, 659-660.) The following day, Gomez decided to review Petitioners' digital in-car video system (DICVS). Gomez learned that Petitioners were aware of the radio call and that the Division was extremely busy that day. He learned that Petitioners discussed their current location and drove away from the mall. Gomez believed that Petitioners broadcasted they were in the Crenshaw Corridor to appear to be involved in other police business.

  • Hearing

    Jul 14, 2020

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

GOMEZ V PLA-ART INTERNATIONAL INC

Gomez does not offer evidence to rebut these assertions. The length of employment and asserted grounds for termination do not indicate there was a plan in place to "get rid" of Mr. Gomez. The evidence weighs in favor of denying the motion. The Court notes that Chavez filed objections to a declaration of Mr. Gomez. The referenced declaration of Mr. Gomez was not filed with the Court. The Court could not consider the referenced declaration and it cannot rule on the objections.

  • Hearing

    Oct 18, 2018

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

EEL HOLDINGS LLC VS. MOISES GOMEZ, ET AL.

Defendant’s relevant evidence Defendant presents evidence that: · Gomez believed the $108,000 was in exchange for not selling or leasing the property to third-parties. (Defendant’s Undisputed Material Fact 1.) · Gomez believed the $108,000 was paid as a down-payment, and not for three months’ advance rent and a security deposit. (Ibid.) · Gomez understood the documents he signed to be more than a lease. He understood the documents as a series of contracts. (DUMF 3.

  • Hearing

    Aug 02, 2018

  • Judge

    Maurice A. Leiter or Salvatore Sirna

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

RE: PET’N FOR APPT OF GUARDIAN OF PERSON

Proposed order CARMEN ELISA MEJIA GOMEZ MATTHEW WEISNER PAULINA GOMEZ JOCHOLA

  • Hearing

    Nov 22, 2019

GOMEZ V PLA-ART INTERNATIONAL INC

Gomez does not offer evidence to rebut these assertions. The length of employment and asserted grounds for termination do not indicate there was a plan in place to "get rid" of Mr. Gomez. The evidence weighs in favor of denying the motion. The Court notes that Chavez filed objections to a declaration of Mr. Gomez. The referenced declaration of Mr. Gomez was not filed with the Court. The Court could not consider the referenced declaration and it cannot rule on the objections.

  • Hearing

    Oct 18, 2018

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

BONFILIO GOMEZ VS ANGELICA MORALES ET AL

Gomez denies the existence of this agreement. (Alexander Decl. ¿ 9.) Morales argues that Gomez failed to meet and confer before bringing this motion to compel deposition (Opposition at p. 5), that the discovery cutoff has run and that the motion is untimely, (Opposition at pp. 5–6), and that there is no pending demand for inspection to justify granting a motion to compel. (Opposition at pp. 6–7.)

  • Hearing

    Oct 07, 2019

LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY VS ARREOLA, MARIA

Background Plaintiff Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (“Plaintiff”) filed the instant subrogation action against Defendants Maria Arreola, Juan Carlos Gomez and Eduardo Gomez Velasquez on May 19, 2015. Default was entered as to all three Defendants on July 27, 2015. On October 25, 2016, Plaintiff dismissed Defendant Velasquez from the action. Default judgment was entered against moving Defendants Maria Arreola and Juan Carlos Gomez on November 9, 2016.

  • Hearing

    May 25, 2017

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Auto

  • Judge

    Elaine Lu or Yolanda Orozco

  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

CHRISTOPHER TAYLOR VS CENTURY 21 REAL ESTATE LLC ET AL

Ruling The circumstances above combine to demonstrate a delay in prosecution of the case against Gomez and Gamboa that warrants dismissal.

  • Hearing

    Oct 06, 2016

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

CHRISTOPHER TAYLOR VS CENTURY 21 REAL ESTATE LLC ET AL

Background The original complaint was filed on June 5, 2011, and it does not appear that plaintiff ever obtained entry of default against either Gomez or Gamboa on it. On June 30, 2015, plaintiff filed the SAC, yet he did not name either Gomez or Gamboa as defendants in the caption.

  • Hearing

    Oct 06, 2016

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

MARY GOMEZ VS FCA US LLC ET AL

MARY GOMEZ; Plaintiff, vs. FCA US LLC, et al.; Defendants. Case No.: BC 697897 Hearing Date: October 4, 2019 [TENTATIVE] RULING RE: Plaintiff MARY GOMEZ’ Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs. Gomez’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs is GRANTED in the amount of $32,360.05. FACTUAL BACKGROUND This is a Lemon Law action. The Complaint alleges as follows. Plaintiff Mary Gomez (“Gomez”) purchased a new 2015 Jeep Renegade on February 29, 2016, with a warranty from Defendant FCA US LLC (“FCA”).

  • Hearing

    Oct 04, 2019

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

MARIA GOMEZ ET AL VS 99 CENTS ONLY STORES LLC

MARIA GOMEZ, ET AL., Plaintiff(s), vs. 99 CENTS ONLY STORES, LLC, ET AL., Defendant(s). CASE NO: BC609294 [TENTATIVE] ORDER DENYING MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL Dept. 92 1:30 p.m. January 3, 2018 Plaintiffs, Maria Gomez and Pascual Eduardo Gomez originally filed this action on 2/04/16 through attorney Octavio Lopez. On 4/27/16, Maria Gomez substituted the Century Park Law Group as her attorney of record.

  • Hearing

    Jan 03, 2018

STEWART VS. GOMEZ

DTAA did not pay Gomez to work at the Farmer’s Market nor did it pay his weekly salary. Gomez was on GOTM’s payroll and GOTM issued him a W-2 for 2015 and paid his social security taxes. (DTAA, SS 12.) GOTM determined where Gomez worked during the week, and when and how much he was paid for work performed for GOTM. (DTAA, SS 12.) Gomez was supervised by GOTM’s Operations Manager, who gave him instructions and oversaw his work at least once every week. (DTAA, SS 15.)

  • Hearing

    Nov 15, 2018

CORY GREENBERG VS. GUADALUPE GOMEZ

Tentative ruling for February 28, 2019 The court grants Alfonso Gomez, Guadalupe Gomez, and the Alfonso and Guadalupe Gomez a995 Trust's unopposed motions for leave to file amended verified answer and cross-complaint, which shall be filed forthwith.

  • Hearing

    Feb 28, 2019

JORGE URBINA VS VORTEX MAINTENANCE INC

This ruling is without prejudice to Plaintiff's ability to re-file this motion should the motion for summary judgment in Gomez be denied.

  • Hearing

    Aug 20, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

BONFILIO GOMEZ VS ANGELICA MORALES ET AL

Gomez finally moves to compel further responses to Request No. 26, which asks for documents related to Morales’s bank records in a certain account. Morales responds that Gomez has already issued a subpoena to the bank, and thus likely has these documents in its possession. (Opposition at p. 6.)

  • Hearing

    Jul 12, 2018

PNC EQUIPMENT FINANCE, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS GOMEZ LANDSCAPE & TREE SERVICE, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

(Gomez Landscape), Gilbert Gomez, aka Gilberto Gomez (Gomez) (collectively, Defendants), and Does 1 through 30, alleging claims for (1) conversion and (2) claim and delivery. On September 14, 2020, Plaintiff submitted two ex parte applications for two writs of possession, one as to each Defendant.

  • Hearing

    Sep 30, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    other

JORGE URBINA VS VORTEX MAINTENANCE INC

This ruling is without prejudice to Plaintiff's ability to re-file this motion should the motion for summary judgment in Gomez be denied.

  • Hearing

    Aug 20, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

GINA GOMEZ VS PATRICK A. POOLER

Re: Gina Gomez, et al. v. Patrick A. Pooler (BC596555) DEMURRER TO FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT Moving Party: Defendant Patrick A. Pooler Respondents: No timely opposition filed POS: Moving OK This is a boundary encroachment lawsuit brought between neighbors. The complaint was filed by Plaintiff Gina Gomez (“Gomez”) in propria persona on 9/14/15. On 9/29/15, Gomez filed a First Amended Complaint.

  • Hearing

    Mar 28, 2017

JOMAR GOMEZ VS. CALIFORNIA STATE PERSONNEL BOARD

De Fehr, who is currently counsel for both Gomez and Calhoun, also initially represented both at the outset of the administrative appeal below but had to withdraw based on a conflict of interest shortly after the hearing before the ALJ commenced. Given that prior conflict, why is it now proper for Mr. De Fehr to represent both Petitioners in these proceedings, especially given what appears to be a disparity between Gomez’ and Calhoun’s alleged misconduct?

  • Hearing

    Sep 20, 2019

GUARDIANSHIP OF WALTER ANTONIO ALVAREZ GOMEZ

Code, § 1511), OR Consent to Appointment of Guardian and Waiver of Notice (Judicial Council form GC-211) OR adequately supported request to dispense with notice (CRC 7.52; see Local Court form SC-6014). 2) Proof of timely mailed service of the notice of hearing and a copy of the petition on Filomena Gonzalez Gomez, Elosia Alvarez Gomez, Karely Alvarez Gomez (Prob.

  • Hearing

    Jul 01, 2019

  • Judge Jed Beebe
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

JORGE URBINA VS VORTEX MAINTENANCE INC

This ruling is without prejudice to Plaintiff's ability to re-file this motion should the motion for summary judgment in Gomez be denied.

  • Hearing

    Aug 20, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

  « first    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 178     last » 

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

Please wait a moment while we load this page.