Stanislaus County Superior Court
Home  |  Tentative Rulings  |  Court Calendar  |  Jury Service  |  Forms  |  Español Search  Click to Search
Services & Resources

Appeals
Civil
Court Interpreters
Criminal
Family Law
Juvenile
Probate
Self Help
Small Claims
Traffic
Court Information

ADR Information
Case Index Lookup
Contact/Locations
Operating Hours
OnLine Options
Employment
Fee Schedule
General Information
Grand Jury
History
Holidays
Media
Press Releases
Public Information
Related Links
Vendor Resources
Rules of Court
Videos

Civil Tentative Ruling Announcement

 

Tentative Ruling Announcement

 

October 24, 2014

 

If the Tentative Ruling in your case is satisfactory, you need not appear at the scheduled time, the ruling becomes final, and the prevailing party prepares the order.

 

However, if you are not satisfied with the Tentative Ruling, and wish to appear and argue the matter, YOU MUST NOTIFY the Clerk’s Office and opposing counsel of your intent before 4:00 p.m. TODAY.  If a TELEPHONIC HEARING is requested per CCP §367.5, COURT CALL MUST be notified AND the Clerk’s Office MUST also be notified before 4:00 p.m. TODAY.

                                                                                                                                  

When doing so, you must indicate as to which issue(s) and/or motion(s) a hearing is being requested.  If requesting a hearing for clarification of a tentative ruling, specify what matter(s) and/or issue(s) need clarification. 

                                                            

You may request a hearing by calling the calendar line at (209) 530-3162 or the main line at (209) 530-3100, prior to 4:00 p.m. - OR- by e-mailing at civil.tentatives@stanct.org  Email requests must be made prior to 4:00 p.m. AND confirmed by return e-mail. If you do not receive confirmation e-mail from the clerk, you MUST call (209) 530-3162 to request your hearing.

 

Please refer to Local Rule of Court 3.21 (b) concerning Court reporter fees.

                                                                                                   

If a Hearing is required or you have requested a Hearing for a Law and Motion Matter Scheduled in Department 21, 22, 23 or 24 in Modesto, please contact the Court Reporter Coordinator at (209) 530-3105 to request a reporter and determine availability. If a Staff Reporter is not available, you may need to provide your own.

 

Effective April 2, 2012,

 

Staff Court Reporters may be available, though it is not guaranteed, to report law and motion matters on the following schedule:

 

Department 21 -- Wednesdays and Fridays only.  Staff Reporters may be available on Tuesdays and Thursdays.  Please call to confirm.

 

Department 22 -- Tuesdays and Thursdays only.  Staff Reporters may be available on Wednesdays and Fridays. Please call to confirm.

 

Department 23 -- Wednesdays and Fridays only.  Staff Reporters may be available on Tuesdays and Thursdays. Please call to confirm.

 

Department 24 -- Tuesdays and Thursdays only.  Staff Reporters may be available on Wednesdays or Fridays. Please call to confirm.

 

If a Staff Reporter is not available, counsel can make arrangements to have their hearing reported by a private CSR.  Please contact the Court Reporter Coordinator at (209)530-3105 to request a Staff Reporter and to determine if a Staff Reporter will be available for your hearing.

 

 

 

The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge William A. Mayhew in Department 21: 

 

 

680988 – ALI, GALIA VS. AVALON CARE CENTER–NEWMAN, LLC – Defendant Doctors Medical Center of Modesto’s Motion for Summary Adjudication of Plaintiff Galia Ali’s 3rd Cause of Action for Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress – DENIED.   The Defendant as moving party met its burden of establishing a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment on the Third Cause of Action and the burden then shifted to Plaintiff to submit admissible evidence which raises a triable issue of material fact.  The Court finds the Plaintiff has met her burden in this regard.  Therefore, the motion is denied.

 

Defendant’s Objections Nos. 1,3,5,6,7,8, and 9 are OVERRULED.  Objections Nos. 2 and 4 are SUSTAINED.

 

Plaintiff’s Objections Nos. 1-23 are OVERRULED.  The medical records were properly authenticated by counsel’s declaration and the Court will accept Nurse McNeill’s expert opinions regarding the mechanics of “aspiration pneumonia”.  Nurse McNeill’s declaration does not opine as to whether Defendant met the standard of care here, nor is an opinion on that point of law necessary in this particular motion. Therefore, it was not necessary for her to review any of decedent’s medical records.

 

 

684358 – RIVERBANK LOCAL REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VS. DAYTON SUPERIOR CORPORATION – Plaintiff’s Motion to Enforce Court’s Order for Further Responses to Plaintiff’s Special Interrogatories, Set One and Request for Production of Documents, Set Two; Request for Attorneys’ Fees and Sanctions – CONTINUED, on the Court’s own motion, to be heard in conjunction with another motion on calendar for Tuesday,

October 28, 2014, at 8:30 a.m. in Department 21.

 

 

2003038 – INDERJIT S. TOOR CONSTRUCTION, INC. VS. PETERSON, KENNETH – a) Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set Eleven, from Defendant, Kenneth Peterson and b) Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Request for Admissions, Set Three, from Defendant – a) and b) are hereby CONTINUED on the Court’s own motion to be heard in conjunction with two other discovery motions scheduled for November 20, 2014, at 8: 30 a.m. in Department 21.  Upon review of the Court’s file in this matter it is apparent that counsel for Plaintiffs’ zealous representation of his clients has prevented him from properly meeting and conferring regarding the disputed discovery responses, as required by statute, with newly retained counsel for Defendants. Counsels are ordered to meet and confer in good faith on these motions. While the Court appreciates counsel’s dedication to his clients, discovery disputes require the ability to reason free from passion.  Based on the evidence before the Court, the Court hereby cautions counsel for Plaintiffs from becoming personally invested in this matter to the point that he loses any objectivity.  The Court also notes that the demurrer and motion to strike filed by Defendants’ former counsel will remain on calendar for October 31, 2014 – as the case should be placed at issue as soon as possible.

  

 

The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Timothy W. Salter in Department 22: 

 

 

679076 – CARTER, LEANDER VS. SAVE MART SUPERMARKETS – a) Defendant’s Motion to Compel Further Responses and Production and Defendant’s Request for Sanctions and b) Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend Complaint – a) The motion of Defendant Save Mart to compel further responses by Plaintiff to its third set of document production requests is GRANTED.  Plaintiff shall provide further responses on or before November 4, 2014.  Save Mart’s second relief request that Plaintiff be “ordered to comply” with its third production request is DENIED without prejudice as vague.  If Defendant wants Plaintiff to produce any items pursuant to its third production request, it should so state in a further motion after Plaintiff provides the further responses. b) The motion of Plaintiff Leander Carter for leave to serve and file a first amended complaint is GRANTED.  He shall serve and file it on or before November 4, 2014.

 

 

2006727 – ROBERTS, RONI VS. CITY OF TURLOCK – a) Defendants’ Demurrer to Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint and b) Defendants’ Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Prayer for Punitive Damages in His First Amended Complaint – The demurrer of Defendants City of Turlock, et al, is OVERRULED.  Their motion to strike is DENIED.

 

Defendants sought relief for all of them together against the entire complaint rather than more precisely targeting their relief requests, which means their motions must be denied if Plaintiff states one cause of action against one Defendant with a proper punitive damages request.  Plaintiff’s third cause of action states a valid cause of action against Defendant Shaw for excessive force, and properly seeks punitive damages against him.  See Paragraph 23 of the general allegations.

 

 

The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge John D. Freeland in Department 23:

 

 

**There are no tentative rulings for Department 23**

 

 

The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Roger M. Beauchesne in Department 24:

 

 

672152 – VAFADOUSTE, GHOLAMREZA VS. EMANUEL MEDICAL CENTER – Plaintiff’s Motion for Evidentiary and/or Issue Sanctions for Failure to Comply with

April 15, 2014 Court Order Regarding Request for Production, Set Four – DROPPED from calendar pursuant to the stipulation of counsel at the teleconference held on October 22, 2014 with the Court. Furthermore, the Court issued a minute order ruling regarding in camera review of documents on October 21, 2014.

 

 

2001122 – AGCS MARINE INSURANCE VS. C&D II RANCH, LLC – a) Plaintiff AGCS Marine Insurance Company’s Motion to Compel Responses from Defendant, C & D II Ranch, LLC to Special Interrogatories, Set One and b) Plaintiff AGCS Marine Insurance Company’s Motion to Compel Responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set One and Request for Sanctions and c) Plaintiff AGCS Marine Insurance Company’s Motion to Compel Responses from Defendant, C & D II Ranch, LLC to Form Interrogatories, Set One – All three motions a), b), and c) are DROPPED.  Moving party contacted the Clerk’s Office on October 20, 2014, indicating the responses had been received.

 

 

2008832 – HOYT, MICHAEL VS. NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY – Defendant Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company’s Motion to Strike Punitive Damages Claim – MOOT.  The matter has been dismissed pursuant to an entire action dismissal filed with the Clerk’s Office on October 14, 2014.

 

 

 

Last Updated: 10/23/2014 01:07:27 PM

Related Information:
Family_Law_Tentative_Rulings
Disclaimer  |  Privacy Statement  |  Feedback
Copyright © 2014 Stanislaus County Superior Court. All Rights Reserved.