10 Respondent ) Presiding: DANIEL FLORES ) ) Tentative rulings in San Francisco County Superior Court for the state of California are posted on the court's website prior to each law and motion hearing for civil cases. ) 6 MICHAEL JOHN NAPOLITANA, ) Case Number: FDI-18-790530 Generally, supplemental demands to interrogatories may be served twice prior to trial setting, and once after the initial setting of a trial date, requesting that the prior answers to interrogatories be updated and affirmed. 13 TENTATIVE RULING A judge may require that a copy of that case must be lodged. 10 Respondent ) Presiding: JUDITH HARDING ) ) 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM ) A party may apply to the court ex parte but with written notice of the application to the other parties, at least 24 hours before the memorandum is due, for permission to file a longer memorandum. 11 ) 12 ) G. Seventh, Eighth, and Tenth Causes of Action - Wage Loss, Loss of Earning Capacity, and Possible Diminution of Life Span, SRMH asserts the causes of action for Wage Loss, Loss of Earning Capacity, and Possible Diminution of Life Span should fail because they are not causes of action but rather damages. 7 Petitioner ) Hearing Date: January 10, 2023 The information provided is on its face sufficient for these purposes. 11 ) A motion to strike may be based on failure to comply with form or procedures applicable to pleadings. 6 ELIZABETH MORRIS, ) Case Number: FDI-13-780247 ) 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER OF CHANGE OF CHILD C 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO ) 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER RE: COMPEL PETITION 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO Nor is there any evidence making clear to that Court that SFPKOA was entirely blameless in the discovery abuses, as they signed the initial verified responses which the Court found deficient. For Case Management Conferences, Law and Motion hearings, and Ex Parte hearings, parties may appear remotely pursuant to Civil Code of Procedure section 367.75 and California Rule of Court, rule 3.672. . ) ) 6 CHITRA AKILESWARAN, ) Case Number: FDI-20-793853 ) ) Aside from the prayer for attorney fees and cost of suit, it fails to specify the portions of the complaint which SRMH asks the court to strike. ) 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER CHILD 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 9 JUAN J CRUZ, ) Department: 403 (Subd (l) relettered effective January 1, 2008; adopted as subd (h) effective July 1, 1997; relettered as subd (i) effective July 1, 2000; previously amended effective January 1, 2003; previously amended and relettered as subd (k) effective January 1, 2004, and as subd (m) effective January 1, 2007.). ) 10 Respondent ) Presiding: MARIA EVANGELISTA 10 Respondent ) Presiding: MARIA EVANGELISTA 6 JASON A YURASEK, ) Case Number: FDI-12-778342 The Court clearly has jurisdiction over Defendant as trustee, as he is properly named in the FAC, he is properly served, and he is adequately named in the default in this capacity. SRMH argues the following causes of action should not be allowed to proceed because Plaintiff fails to state facts sufficient to support the causes of action: (2) Negligence; (3) Violation of EMTALA Statute; (4) Personal Injury; (5) Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress; (6) Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress; (7) Wage Loss; (8) Loss of Earning Capacity; (9) Negligent Supervision; (10) Possible Diminution of Life Span; and (11) Punitive Damages. CCP 2030.300(c) (relating to interrogatories), and CCP 2031.310(c) (relating to requests for production of documents) each provide that a monetary sanction shall be imposed against the party losing a motion to compel further responses unless the court finds substantial justification for that partys position or other circumstances making sanctions unjust. The purpose of monetary sanctions is to mitigate the effects of the necessity of discovery motions and responses on the prevailing party. 9 SHAUN MICHAUX, ) Department: 404 9 SIDDHARTH BREJA, ) Department: 404 6 DARIA DOGALAKOVA, ) Case Number: FDV-21-815634 ) Mandatory relief is only appropriate in matters of default or dismissal and does not provide relief from orders or other proceedings taken against a party or counsel. Leader v. Health Industries of America, Inc.(2001) 89 Cal.App.4th 603, 616, quoting CCP 473(b). CCP 396b(a). Plaintiff shall submit a written order to the court consistent with this tentative ruling and in compliance with Rule of Court 3.1312(a) and (b). 6 DIANA AI HUANG, ) Case Number: FDI-22-796207 7:4-5; 6:7-9). In its finding the Supreme Court stated, in relevant part, [t]his analysis [by the Court of Appeal] necessarily implies that the same factual predicate can give rise to two independent obligations to exercise due care according to two different standards. 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER FOR CHANGE O 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO ) 6 JENNIFER HSIN-SHENG CHANG, ) Case Number: FDI-20-794060 The right of privacy protects a partys medical records even if the information is relevant to the litigation. (Central Pathology Service Med. 6 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, ) Case Number: FCS-22-355494 ) Based on the foregoing, motion is DENIED. See CCP 437. 12 OTHER REVIEW HEARING ) ) ) 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT ) 7 Petitioner ) Hearing Date: January 10, 2023 ) ) 12 REVIEW HEARING ON STEP UP VISITATION TO OVE 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO ) ) The page limit does not include the caption page, the notice of motion and motion, exhibits, declarations, attachments, the table of contents, the table of authorities, or the proof of service. ) The court may construe the absence of a memorandum as an admission that the motion or special demurrer is not meritorious and cause for its denial and, in the case of a demurrer, as a waiver of all grounds not supported. 10 Respondent ) Presiding: MARIA EVANGELISTA 9 GEORGE FAVVAS, ) Department: 403 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT SCV-270126, Lopes v. Petaluma City School District. ) The Court signed the order regarding the sanctions on June 15, 2022, in open court, with Ms. Smith present. However, when a plaintiff suffers a single personal injury by reason of the wrongful act of a defendant, there is ordinarily only one cause of action. You have reviewed and understand the law and motion rules of your assigned Civil department. 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM ) 9 JEFFREY T PASHALIDES, ) Department: 404 ) Quality Assurance v. Gherardini (1979) 93 Cal.App.3d 669, 679. ) Department 406 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM 7 Petitioner ) Hearing Date: January 12, 2023 10 Respondent ) Presiding: DANIEL FLORES No in-person appearances will be permitted. See also rule 1.200 concerning the format of citations. Even very personal, confidential matters may need to be disclosed if essential to a fair determination of the lawsuit. Morales v. Sup.Ct. 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM (See Saunders v. Cariss (1990) 224 Cal.App.3d 905, 908.) 7 Petitioner ) Hearing Date: December 27, 2022 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER RE: AM 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO Before filing a demurrer, the demurring or moving party is required to meet and confer with the party who filed the pleading demurred to for the purposes of determining whether an agreement can be reached through a filing of an amended pleading that would resolve the objections to be raised in the demurrer. 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM (Chan) (1997) 57 CA4th 1546, 1551, 67 CR2d 804, 807 (disapproved on other grounds by Wilcox v. Birtwhistle (1999) 21 Cal.4th 973, 982, fn. CCP 2030.070 (a)-(b). ) However, whenever a party files a petition under the California Arbitration Act (CAA), the court in which such petition was filed retains jurisdiction to determine any subsequent petition involving the same agreement to arbitrate and the same controversy, and any such subsequent petition shall be filed in the same proceeding. CCP 1292.6. Plaintiff shall submit a written order to the Court consistent with this tentative ruling and in compliance with Rule of Court 3.1312(a) and (b). 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM ) 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT ) 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER FOR CHANGE OF VISITATIO 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 11 ) If the tentative ruling is accepted, no appearance is necessary unless otherwise indicated. 5 ) 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER RE SPOU 3 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO It is clear that the Court has no jurisdiction over Defendant as an individual. Los Angeles County Superior Court Writs and Receivers. (Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2007; previously amended effective January 1, 2004.). ) Food 4 Less Supermarkets, Inc. v. Superior Court(1995) 40 Cal.App.4th 651, 657. Insight. 7 Petitioner ) Hearing Date: December 22, 2022 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT 11 ) 5 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM It is worth noting that Defendants reply asserting this point was also late, filed only four court days prior to hearing. 10 Respondent ) Presiding: JUDITH HARDING Plaintiff is evidently not claiming any further conditions and the information provided is sufficient on its face to provide Defendant with enough information regarding it. 9 JOSE LUIS MARTINEZ, ) Department: 404 ) Lang v. Hochman(2000) 77 Cal.App.4th 1225, 1248. If you're before Judge Warren in law and motion, you better have your . ) 7 Petitioner ) Hearing Date: December 29, 2022 ) 5 5 Defendant points out on reply that Plaintiffs opposition was late. Defendant moves the Court to set aside his default. Legal advertisement. Respondent filed Fresno County Court Case 20CECL04302 on August 17, 2020. 9 ANTHONY SINGER, ) Department: 404 ) 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT 5 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT Reputation. Law & Motion Calendars Informal Discovery Calendars Tentative Rulings Court Reporting Forms & Filing Local Forms Judicial Council Forms Self-Prep and File Fee Schedule Self-Help Being Your Own Lawyer About the SHC/FLF Divorce or Separation Child Custody & Parenting Child Support Abuse & Harassment Guardianship Conservatorship Landlord/Tenant If papers are served by personal service, service must be made at least 16 court days before the hearing. 10 Respondent ) Presiding: DANIEL FLORES 6 DAIANA CHERHYNETS, ) Case Number: FDI-22-796786 All cases that are assigned to a civil direct calendar department receive a Notice of Assignment. 12 ORDER OF EXAMINATION ISSUED 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER RE: CHANGE OF CHILD SUPPORT 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT 9:11-13.) The item number (to the left of your case number on the Tentative Ruling) South San Francisco, CA 94080 . 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM ) ) ) Where no response was served to a RPOD, there is no time requirement in moving to compel, nor any requirement to show good cause for the production requested. 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT Attorneys offices are only located in California. 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER RE: RECONSIDERATION OF 1 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO If you are unable to find your San Francisco Family Law dissolution case online, please contact Client Support at 888-529-7587. 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM ) Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) sections 1985.3(g), 1985.6(f), 1987.1; see also Monarch Healthcare v. Sup.Ct. ) ) 5 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT Ct. (Marshalls of CA, LLC) (2017) 3 Cal. Finally, as Plaintiff and Joe argue, Joe is not a party to this litigation and has not himself put his own medical condition at issue. CRC 3.1304(c) and (d) (amended eff 1/1/16) > > Read More.. NEW RULE AMENDMENTS EFFECTIVE APRIL 1 . ) ) 6 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, ) Case Number: FCS-20-354495 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM 9 LEEANN JEANETTE BAILEY, ) Department: 403 Hours: Public Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. The court must balance the interests, weighing the privacy right at issue against the public interest in obtaining just results. If a proposed order or judgment is submitted, it must be lodged and served with the moving papers but must not be attached to them. ) Roney & Co. (1952) 112 Cal.App.2d 420, 425 (amendment to designate true name of judgment debtor); Davis v. Rudolph (1947) 80 Cal.App.2d 397, 405; Jack Farenbaugh & Son v. Belmont Const. (415) 551-3962, Civic Center Courthouse (CCP) 435. 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM ) 6 ROBERT ELLIOTT WHITEMAN, ) Case Number: FDV-22-816509 If only part of an item or category demanded is objectionable, the response must contain an agreement to comply with the remainder, or a representation of the inability to comply. The purpose of monetary sanctions is to mitigate the effects of the necessity of discovery motions and responses on the prevailing party. Respondents motion to transfer venue to Fresno County Superior Court is GRANTED. 9 IVAN D DAVCHEV, ) Department: 403 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT CCP 1292.2. ) (Subd (c) amended effective January 1, 2007; previously amended effective July 1, 1984, January 1, 1992, and January 1, 2004.). Service of Motion Papers Personal Service 16 Days Before Hearing. 10 Respondent ) Presiding: MARJORIE SLABACH Cal. 573, 574; Thomson v. L.C. 5 (Subd (m) amended effective January 1, 2016; adopted as subd (i) effective July 1, 1997; previously amended and relettered as subd (l) effective January 1, 2004; previously relettered as subd (j) effective July 1, 2000, as subd (n) effective January 1, 2007, and as subd (m) effective January 1, 2008.).