June 5, 2020

A A A
Civil Tentative Ruling Announcement


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 3.12 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.

June 5, 2020

 

 

The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Marie S. Silveira in Department 21:

 

 

***There are no tentative rulings for Department 21***

 

 

The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Stacy P. Speiller in Department 22:

 

 

2017036 – OOG LLC VS. RUSSO, WAYNE DANIEL JR – Defendant Wayne Daniel Russo’s Jr’s Counsel’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel – HEARING REQUIRED.

 

The Court is inclined to deny the motion in light of the pending settlement and the motion in the companion case pending in Alameda County Superior Court.  However, the Court will grant moving counsel the right to be heard and explain why, under these circumstances and the fact that this case reaches the 5-year period within which it must be tried in March 2021, he should be relieved.

                               

 

CV-18-003504 – LIUPAOGO, ENERETA VS. BRASIL, JOHN – Defendants’ Motion to Compel Responses, Order that Matters in Request for Admissions, Set One be Deemed Admitted, and for Monetary Sanctions – GRANTED, and unopposed.

 

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 2031.300 and 2030.290, Plaintiff is ordered to provide responses to Defendants’ Request for Production of Documents, Set One — Nos. 1-4; Special Interrogatories, Set One — Nos. 1-12; and Form Interrogatories, Set One —Nos. 102.1-102.9, 104.1, 106.1-106.8, 109.1, 110.1-1 10.2, 111.1-1 1 1.2, 112.1-1 12.5, 114.1, 115.1-1 15.3, 150.1-150.11 within 20 days of this order, on or before June 25, 2020.

 

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.280, Plaintiff is deemed to have admitted the matters set forth in Defendants’ Request for Admissions.

 

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.020, Defendant is awarded sanctions of $510 (three hours of attorney time plus filing fee) against both Plaintiff and her counsel.

 

 

CV-19-006451 – RORABAUGH, VAN L VS. SANDHU, NARINDERPAL – a) Defendants’ Motion to Set Aside Default Judgment – GRANTED; b) Defendants Alvena M. Safar dba Calprime Realty and Kathleen Rae Moody’s Demurrer –  SUSTAINED with leave to amend; c) Defendants Alvena M. Safar dba Calprime and Kathleen Rae Moody’s Motion to Strike – GRANTED.

 

 

a) Motion to Set Aside Default Judgment –

 

The Motion to Set Aside Default Judgment is GRANTED. Defendants have provided the Court with sufficient evidence of “mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect” to warrant vacating the default judgment under Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (a).

 

b) Defendants’ Demurrer and c) Defendants’ Motion to Strike –

 

The Demurrer is SUSTAINED with leave to amend and the Motion to Strike is GRANTED. Plaintiff has not alleged any facts tending to prove that the moving Defendants acted in concert or conspiracy with the defendants who were Plaintiff’s landlords, or that the moving Defendants acted as Plaintiff’s landlords themselves.  Therefore, the Demurrer is granted as to all causes of action except those for breach of fiduciary duty (14th cause of action), professional negligence (15th cause of action) and unfair business practices (18th cause of action).  Similarly, the Motion to Strike is granted as to the claims for punitive damages and attorneys’ fees as against the moving Defendants.

 

 

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

 

 

CV-19-004525 – US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION VS. FAHEY, GEORGANN – Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment or in the Alternative Summary Adjudication – GRANTED.

 

Having considered the moving papers, the separate statement of undisputed material facts, and the evidence submitted in conjunction with the supporting declaration, the Court finds that Plaintiff, as the moving party, has met its burden of demonstrating that there is no defense to any of the causes of action set forth in Plaintiff’s Complaint by producing evidence of each element of the cause of action asserted therein. (Code Civ. Proc. §437c(p)(1).) The burden then shifts to Defendant to demonstrate that a triable issue exists as to one or more material facts as to the cause of action or a defense thereto.  Defendant has failed to carry her burden in this regard and has produced no controverting evidence.  Moreover, Defendant’s opposition is deficient in that she entirely failed to respond to the moving Separate Statement of Material Facts in support of the motion (Code Civ. Proc. §437c(b)(3).) Therefore, the Court finds that Plaintiff is entitled to judgment as a matter of law in the principal amount of $3.644.12.

 

Plaintiff’s Objections to Defendant’s Evidence are OVERRULED.

 

 

CV-19-005572 – COLNIZE MEDIA INC VS. GARMEX MUSIC LLC – Defendant/Cross-Complainant's Motion to Compel that Petitioner/Cross-Defendant Colonize Media, Inc. Respond to Formal Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, Request for Documents and/or Electronically Stored Information; that Request for Admissions be Deemed Admitted; and for Monetary Sanctions – DENIED, as MOOT.

 

In view of Plaintiff’s representation that responses to the subject discovery responses were served on 4-9-20 and the parties’ failure to submit a Joint Status Statement identifying any issues remaining in dispute, the Court concludes that the matter has been informally resolved by the parties and further judicial intervention is unnecessary.

 

 

CV-20-000384 – TRANSPORTATION ALLIANCE BANK INC VS. CHAHAL, KARAMJIT S – Plaintiff’s Application for Writ of Possession – DENIED, without prejudice.

 

The application appears premature, as Defendant’s time to respond to the Complaint in the action has not yet expired.

               

 

The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Sonny S. Sandhu in Department 24:

 

 

***There are no tentative rulings for Department 24***

 

 

The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Commissioner Jared D. Beeson in Department 19 located at the Turlock Division at 300 Starr Avenue, Turlock, CA:

 

 

***There are no tentative rulings for Department 19***

 

 

The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Timothy W. Salter sitting on assignment in Department 9 located at 800 11th street Modesto, CA:

 

 

CV-19-006500 – NORWOOD, MARY KATHLEEN VS. CURTIS, DENISE MARIE – Plaintiff Mary Kathleen Norwood’s Demurrer to the Answer filed by Defendant Denise Marie Curtis and Defendant Ralph Curtis – OVERRULED.

 

Defendant’s Answer sufficiently meets the requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 430.20, subdivision (a), in that it informs Plaintiff of the affirmative defenses against her.  Further details can be ferreted out in discovery.

 

 

445230 – ESTATE OF ASHLOCK, LONNIE LAMONT – a) Stacey Carlson’s Motion To “Collect” Promissory Note and Gabriel Ashlock’s Reply to Motion Objecting to Sale of Property and Cross-Motion To Compel Quit Claim Deed(s) of Reconveyance, Confirm “Payoff” of Note and Cancel Deed of Trust – HEARING REQUIRED; b) Appellate Counsel’s Petition for Fees – The petition for an award of appellate counsel attorney fees is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE at this time.  The petition was insufficiently noticed pursuant to Probate Code section 1220.  Additionally, the administrator has filed an objection to the petition on the merits which the parties must resolve prior to the Court considering an award of fees.