Your recipients will receive an email with this envelope shortly and will be able to access it on trellis. You can always see your envelopes by clicking the Inbox on the top right hand corner.
Your subscription has successfully been upgraded.
(a) A well stimulation treatment or repeat well stimulation treatment shall not commence without a valid permit approved by the Division and shall be done in accordance with the conditions of the Division's approval. All well stimulation treatment permits approved by the Division shall include the condition that the well stimulation treatment shall not commence until the State Water Board or the Regional Water Board has provided written approval that the well stimulation treatment is covered under Water Code section 10783.(b) An application for a permit to conduct well stimulation operations shall include all of the information listed in Section 1783.1 and shall be submitted electronically to the Division on a digital form specified by the Division and available on the Division's public internet Web site at http://www.conservation.ca.gov/DOG/Pages/Index.aspx.(c) Upon receipt of a complete application for a permit to conduct well stimulation treatment, the Division will provide a copy of the permit application, including information in the application designated as trade secret or confidential, to the Regional Water Board, the Department of Toxic Substances Control, the Air Resources Board, and the local air district where the well stimulation treatment may occur, provided that the manner and timing of providing copies of permit applications has been specified in a written agreement between the Division and the receiving agency.(d) The operator shall notify the Division at least 72 hours prior to commencing well stimulation so that Division staff may witness. Between three and fifteen hours prior to commencing, the operator shall confirm with the Division that the well stimulation treatment is proceeding. Upon receipt of 72-hour notice from an operator, the Division will relay the notice to the Regional Water Board, the Department of Toxic Substances Control, the Air Resources Board, and the local air district where the well stimulation treatment may occur, provided that the manner and timing of relaying the notice has been specified in a written agreement between the Division and the receiving agency.(e) If a well is drilled, redrilled, or reworked after the Division approves a permit for a well stimulation treatment on the well, then, when providing the 72-hour notice under subdivision (d), the operator shall indicate what, if any, variance there was from the original notice of intent to drill, redrill, or rework the well.Notes
Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 14 , § 1783Note: Authority cited: Sections 3013 and 3160, Public Resources Code. Reference: Sections 3106 and 3160, Public Resources Code.
1. New section filed 12-30-2014; operative 7/1/2015 pursuant to Public Resources Code section 3161(a), as amended by SB 4, Stats.2014 , c.313 (Register 2015, No. 1). For prior history, see Register 2014, No. 26.
2. Editorial correction of section heading and History 1 (Register 2017, No. 24).
Civil Code section 1783 provides a three-year statute of limitations for claims of violation of the Consumer Legal Remedies Act. The statute of limitations in section 1783 begins to run from the time a reasonable person would have discovered the basis for the claim. (Meyer v. Sprint Spectrum L.P. (2009) 45 Cal. 4th 634, 645). Cross-Complainant has explicitly admitted that he discovered the incorrect model year in June of 2013, more than three years before Cross-Complainant filed his cross-complaint.
MOUNTAIN STATES ADJUSTMENTS A DIVISION OF MS SERVICES LLC VS HALL
37-2016-00023636-CL-BC-CTL
Oct 19, 2017
San Diego County, CA
Contract
Breach
Defendant first argues that this cause of action is barred by the statute of limitations set forth at Civil Code section 1783, which provides Any action brought under the specific provisions of Section 1770 shall be commenced not more than three years from the date of the commission of such method, act, or practice. (Civ. Code, § 1783.) Based on the November 14, 2019 date of sale, the statute of limitations expired on November 14, 2022 according to Civil Code section 1783.
SHAKA SHALURHAD, AN INDIVIDUAL VS TUSTIN COMMUNITY BANK
23STLC02367
Aug 02, 2023
Echo Dawn Ryan
Los Angeles County, CA
Code section 1783.) [T]he law is unsettled whether [Civil Code section 1783] may be tolled for delayed discovery. ( Purdum v. Holmes (2010) 187 Cal.App.4th 916, 924.) However, the statute of limitations under Civil Code section 1782 will probably run from the time a reasonable person would have discovered the basis for a claim. ( Massachusetts Mutual Life Ins. Co. v. Superior Court (2002) 97 Cal.App.4th 1282, 1295.)
BENANCIO DELGADO VS GENERAL MOTORS, LLC
22AHCV00421
May 16, 2023
Los Angeles County, CA
Here, the Court concludes the allegations within Plaintiffs operative Complaint do not sufficiently demonstrate that Plaintiffs Fifth Cause of Action is necessarily barred by the applicable statute of limitations enumerated within Civil Code section 1783.
KRISTAL AVILA, ET AL. VS GENERAL MOTORS, LLC
22PSCV00800
Nov 21, 2022
Los Angeles County, CA
Eighth Cause of Action for Violation of Consumer Legal Remedies Act: Pursuant to Civil Code section 1783 a three-year statute of limitations applies to Plaintiff’s claim for violation of the CLRA. Here, the subject vehicle was purchased by Plaintiffs on February 2, 2015. (FAC, ¶ 9.) However, Plaintiffs did not file suit until December 9, 2019. Plaintiffs raise various tolling arguments, but the FAC does not allege sufficient facts to support the application of any of their theories.
GARCIA V. KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC.
30-2019-01117071
Oct 13, 2020
Orange County, CA
May 02, 2013
Dismissal
Kern County
Kern County, CA
Dec 22, 2014
Dismissal
San Mateo County
San Mateo County, CA
Jan 31, 2014
Dismissal
Superior
Sonoma County, CA
Nov 08, 2007
Non-Jury Verdict
San Francisco County
San Francisco County, CA
COMMON COUNTS/OPEN BOOK ACCOUNT/COLLECTIONS
Creditor
Collections
Jun 24, 2008
Dismissal
San Francisco County
San Francisco County, CA
EXEMPT COLLECTIONS (RULE 3.740)
Creditor
Collections
iin San Francisco Superior Courts Information Technology Group Document Scanning Lead Sheet Oct-23-2007 11:39 am Case Number: CGC-07-466728 Filing Date: Oct-23-2007 11:34 Juke Box: 001 Image: 01919717 ANSWER ATLANTIC CREDIT AND FINANCE, INC. VS. RONALD FRAZIER et al 001001919717 Instructions: Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.Ronald Frazier ~ 4104 24" Street Apt 317 San Francisco, Ca 94114 845-5011 In pro per San Francisco County Superior Court OCT 23 2007 G…
Aug 29, 2007
San Francisco County, CA
Oct 23, 2007
COMMON COUNTS/OPEN BOOK ACCOUNT/COLLECTIONS
San Francisco Superior Courts Information Technology Group Document Scanning Lead Sheet Sep-07-2007 3:14 pm cee Case Number: CGC-07-464904 Filing Date: Sep-07-2007 3:12 Juke Box: 001 Image: 01879323 ANSWER PALISADES COLLECTION LLC VS. STANLEY STEVENS et al 001001879323 Instructions: Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.Stanley Stevens € C , 1223 Webster Street #301 San Francisco Ca 9415 415-335-8040 InProPer San Francisco County Superior Court SEP - 7 2007 GORDON…
Jul 05, 2007
San Francisco County, CA
Sep 07, 2007
COMMON COUNTS/OPEN BOOK ACCOUNT/COLLECTIONS
IVANOVA ‘San Francisco Superior Courts Information Technology Group Document Scanning Lead Sheet Sep-12-2007 10:03 am Case Number: CGC-07-464897 Filing Date: Sep-12-2007 9:59 Juke Box: 001 Image: 01882780 ANSWER MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT INC VS. MARY TAYLOR et al 001001882780 Instructions: Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.Mary Taylor 0 200 Warten Drive Y) San Francisco, Ca 94131 "| 415-665-5940 F I L E b In Pro Per Sen Francisco County Superiof Coun igep 12 …
Jul 05, 2007
San Francisco County, CA
Sep 12, 2007
COMMON COUNTS/OPEN BOOK ACCOUNT/COLLECTIONS
a SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO Document Scanning Lead Sheet Nov-10-2008 3:29 pm Case Number: CGC-08-480399 Filing Date: Nov-10-2008 3:29 Juke Box: 001 Image: 02311719 ANSWER ATLANTIC CREDIT & FINANCE INC VS. REBECCA RANDALL et al 001002311719 Instructions: Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned, TS Ss EG 2 RA PO A en1 I Rebecca Randall € t 1431 Balboa Street 2 |{San Francisco, Ca94118 3 [1415-845-2198 RWYPEETD XQ suptlior lcd ot Calfamis 4 I…
Oct 01, 2008
San Francisco County, CA
Nov 10, 2008
EXEMPT COLLECTIONS (RULE 3.740)
cc San Francisco Superior Courts Information Technology Group Document Scanning Lead Sheet Jan-31-2008 12:27 pm Case Number: CGC-07-470111 Filing Date: Jan-31-2008 12:26 Juke Box: 001 Image: 02012132 ANSWER PROFESSIONAL COLLECTION CONSULTANTS VS. JULES LONG et al 001€02012132 Instructions: Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.658 Hearst Ave San Francisco, Ca 94112 415-333-5042 In pro per FIL Superior Court of Caltomia ‘Gounty of San Francisco JAN 3.1 2008 GO…
Dec 17, 2007
San Francisco County, CA
Jan 31, 2008
COMMON COUNTS/OPEN BOOK ACCOUNT/COLLECTIONS
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Please wait a moment while we load this page.