NOTICE
To request a hearing on any matter on this
calendar, you must call the Court at (916) 874-7848
(Department 54) by 4:30 p.m. today. Local rule 31(h). If
no call is made the tentative ruling becomes the order of
the court.
TENTATIVE RULINGS
Department 54
Superior Court of California
800 H Street
Joe S. Gray, Judge
Barbara Baldy, Clerk
R. Sanchez-Jacobo, Bailiff
February 2, 2000, 09:00
ITEM 1 97AS06548 JOSE LUIS VALENCIA VEGA, ET AL VS. RICHARD MALLORY, ET AL
Nature of Proceeding: MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
Filed By: HACKENBRACHT, MARY E.
Continued to 02/10/2000
***
ITEM 2 98AS00066 RANKIN & RANKIN, INC. VS. L & M CONSTRUCTION, ET AL
* JNP * Nature of Proceeding: MOTION FOR JUDGMENT
Filed By: ROSE, WILLIAM M.
Continued to 02/10/2000
***
ITEM 3 98AS03472 JEANIE S. RASMUSSEN VS. MICHAEL PATRICK EPPERSON, ET AL
Nature of Proceeding: MOTION FOR ORDER TO DETERMINE GOOD FAITH
Filed By: HOME, W. STUART III
The motion is granted, the settlement is found to be in good faith. No
opposition to the motion has been received.
This minute is effective immediately. No formal order per C.R.C. rule
391 is needed, nor is further notice of this ruling required.
Department 54
February 2, 2000
Page 2
_________________
***
ITEM 4 98AS04660 GARY W. GORSKI VS. COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, ET AL
Nature of Proceeding: SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Filed By: LAVRA, JOHN A.
A disqualification pursuant to C.C.P. 170.1 having been filed, this
matter is currently stayed until the disqualification is resolved.
***
ITEM 5 98AS05914 JENNIFER BOYER VS. BETH MATULICH
Nature of Proceeding: MOTION TO COMPEL
Filed By: WRIGHT, TIMOTHY T.
Defendant's motions are granted. Plaintiff is ordered to serve full and
complete answers, without objections, to defendant's Form
Interrogatories, set one. Plaintiff is ordered to serve a full and
complete response, without objections, to defendant's Request for
Production of Documents, set one, and to produce the documents set forth
in the response.
The answers, response and documents are to be served and produced no
later than Monday, February 14th, 2000.
The request for sanctions is denied as the motion is unopposed.
This minute order is effective immediately. No formal order per C.R.C.
rule 391 is needed, nor is further notice of this ruling required.
***
ITEM 6 99AS02910 BETTY M. HUMPHREY-GUERRA VS. THE LIMITED, INC., ET AL
Nature of Proceeding: MOTION TO COMPEL
Filed By: THROCKMORTON, JOHN S.
Dropped.
Department 54
February 2, 2000
Page 3
_________________
***
ITEM 7 99AS05850 ARIEL ARAUJO, ET AL VS. KAROL ZEE WIDEMON
Nature of Proceeding: MOTION TO WITHDRAW ATTY OF REC
Filed By: BJORKLUND, PAUL S.
Although counsel declares the service address is the last known address,
he also states mail sent to that address has not been returned as
undeliverable, in effect stating it is the client's current address.
The distinction is important, because if the service address is the
client's last known address, and the attorney has not been able to
locate a more current address, then service of the motion must be made
pursuant to C.C.P. 1011(b). See C.R.C. rule 376(c). In future motions
to withdraw, counsel is advised to use the proper terminology, lest the
motion be denied for lack of proper service.
The motion to withdraw is granted on the following conditions: 1)
Bjorklund & McCreary is to submit an order for the Court's signature
which complies with the requirements of C.R.C. rule 376(d). The order
is to be submitted to department 54 no later than Wednesday, February
2nd, 2000 2) the order is to be served, and notice is to be given,
pursuant to C.C.P. 285 and C.R.C. rule 376(d).
Until the above conditions are satisfied, the firm will continue to be
the attorney of record. Once the conditions are satisfied, the law firm
is no longer the attorney of record.
This minute order is effective immediately.
The motion to amend the complaint to add a defendant, Surety Company of
the Pacific, is granted. The Court notes that Surety Company has not
been served with the motion. The ruling is without prejudice to any
response Surety Company may wish to make once it has been served with
process.
This minute order is effective immediately. No formal order per C.R.C.
rule 391 is needed, nor is further notice of this ruling required.
***
ITEM 8 99CS02672 IN RE: GIANG HA VO
Nature of Proceeding: PETITION FOR CHANGE OF NAME
Filed By: VO, HUY KHAC
The petition for change of name is granted on condition proof of service
showing service of the petition by publication is filed in department 54
by the day of the hearing.
Department 54
February 2, 2000
Page 4
_________________
***
ITEM 9 98AM09079 ARIEL ARAUJO, ET AL VS. KAROL ZEE WIDEMON
Nature of Proceeding: MOTION TO FILE AMENDED COMPLAI
Filed By: KERR, PHILIP A.
See ruling in item #7.
***
ITEM 10 99AM00050 JAMES C. CARVER VS. DIANE LECOMPTE
Nature of Proceeding: MOTION TO COMPEL
Filed By: HIBBERT, PAIGE M.
Plaintiff/cross-defendant (hereafter plaintiff) has moved the Court to
compel defendant/cross-complainant (hereafter defendant) to respond to
discovery. Since this is a limited civil case, discovery is ordinarily
limited to any combination of discovery devices that does not exceed 35.
If a party wishes to serve more than the allowed 35, then either
permission of the Court is sought, or the parties must so stipulate.
C.C.P. 94 and 95. According to the plaintiff, the parties stipulated
that discovery could exceed the 35 number limit. The stipulation
submitted to the Court however is not executed by the defendant.
Moreover, in his argument, plaintiff admits he has attempted to secure
the stipulation but defendant has refused to comply. It seems there is
no stipulation.
The Court grants the motion, as there is no opposition, but only to the
extent defendant will have to respond to a total of 35 discovery items,
but only if she has not already done so. Plaintiff will have to pick a
total of 35 items from among the interrogatories and requests for
production of documents he served on defendant. The motion however is
denied as to the Request for Admissions. There is no provision in the
code of civil procedure which allows for a motion to compel a Response
to Admissions.
The responses are to be served no later than Monday, February 14th,
2000.
The request for sanctions is denied as the motion is unopposed.
This minute order is effective immediately. No formal order per C.R.C.
rule 391 is needed, nor is further notice of this ruling required.
Department 54
February 2, 2000
Page 5
_________________
***
ITEM 11 99AM08614 NORTHERN CAL. COLLECTION SVC., INC. VS. JOHN W. MALNAR, ETAL
Nature of Proceeding: CLAIM OF EXEMPTION
Filed By: ANDERSON, MARTY
The claim of exemption is granted but only as to the sum of $1209.91,
which corresponds to 75% of the money being held by the Sheriff pursuant
to this bank levy. According to the judgment debtor, the funds in the
checking account are traceable to his earnings. Pursuant to C.C.P.
704.070(b)(2), 75% of the judgment debtor's paid earnings are exempt.
See also, C.C.P. 703.080. The Sheriff is to release the remaining
$403.31 to the judgment creditor.
This minute order is effective immediately.
***
