November 20, 2019

A A A
Civil Tentative Ruling Announcement
Print

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.

November 21, 2019

 

 

The following is the tentative ruling for a case calendared before Judge Marie S. Silveira in Department 21:

 

 

2027089 – INZANA, ANTHONY VS. TURLOCK IRRIGATION DISTRICT – Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment; or in the Alternative Summary Adjudication –

 

Defendant Turlock Irrigation District’s unopposed Request for Judicial Notice is GRANTED.

 

Defendant Turlock Irrigation District’s unopposed Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.  There is no triable issue of material fact that Plaintiffs Anthony and Joye Inzana failed to file this litigation within the two year statute of limitations contained in Government Code section 945.6.  The cause of action for breach of contract arose on July 14, 2015, at the latest, and this litigation was not filed until October 6, 2017, more than two years later.

 

 

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

 

 

*** There are no tentative rulings for Department 22 ***

 

 

The following is the tentative ruling for a case calendared before Judge John D. Freeland in Department 23:

 

 

2027336 – FIELDER, LORA VS. STARK, GALEN – a) Defendants Richard Aziz and Teresa Sanches Aziz’s Motion for Summary Judgment, or in the Alternative, Summary Adjudication – HEARING REQUIRED; b) Plaintiffs’ Attorney’s Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel – HEARING REQUIRED.

 

 

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

 

 

2012003 – KLAIR REAL ESTATE VS. KNIGHT, KRISTA – a) Defendant/Cross-Complainant’s Motion for Assignment and Restraining Orders; b) Klair Real Estate Inc’s Motion of Application for Exemptions from Enforcement of a Money Judgment CCP 708.550 – HEARING REQUIRED.

 

These matters have been set for evidentiary hearing, per the Court’s order on 10-8-19.

 

 

CV-18-003453 – LEONARDO, SCOTT VS. TRAVELODGE HOTELS INC – a) Defendants Khushpal Hospitality Inc dba Travelodge Turlock and Ashish Patel’s Demurrer to Certain Causes of Action of Plaintiff’s Complaint – SUSTAINED, in part, with leave to amend; b) Defendants Khushpal Hospitality Inc dba Travelodge Turlock and Ashish Patel’s Motion to Strike Portions of Plaintiff’s Complaint – MOOT in view of Court’s ruling on Demurrer.

 

(a) The Court finds that the Complaint fails to state facts constituting the First Cause of Action for Battery and the Fifth Cause of Action for Public Nuisance. (Code Civ. Proc. §430.10€.) With regard to the battery claim, the Court finds the allegations insufficient to support the element of intent in this context. With regard to the claim for public nuisance, the Court finds the allegations insufficient to establish the “public” nature of the claim. Plaintiff is granted 20 days leave to amend in this regard.

 

With regard to the remaining claims challenged by the instant demurrer, the Court finds that the allegations of the Complaint, when liberally construed, are sufficient so support the stated causes of action at the pleading stage.

 

(b) The motion to strike is MOOT in view of the Court’s ruling sustaining the demurrer, as above.

 

 

2019833 – AYALA, MARIA VS. PENA, VINCENT – Defendant’s Motion for Leave to File Cross-Complaint – DEFERRED, until further notice of the Court and/or substitution of Plaintiffs’ counsel.

 

The Court notes and recognizes the issues regarding Plaintiffs’ counsel and makes the above ruling on that basis.

 

 

2028313 – AMERICAN EXPRESS CENTURIAN BANK VS. MARTINEZ, MIKIAL C – Plaintiff’s Motion for Order Vacating Dismissal and Entering Judgment Against Defendant Pursuant to CCP 664.6 – GRANTED, and unopposed.

 

Based on the moving papers, the Court finds that it retains jurisdiction to enforce the settlement pursuant to Code Civ. Proc. §664.6. The moving papers demonstrate that Defendant has breached the terms of the parties’ stipulation for conditional judgment, which was entered by the Court on 12-28-18, and that Plaintiff is entitled to an order vacating the dismissal of the action and to entry of judgment in the principal amount of $12,365.24. In addition, Plaintiff has demonstrated entitlement to costs in the amount of $545.00.

The Court will sign the proposed order and judgment submitted by Plaintiff.

 

 

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 ***