What is enforcement of settlement agreement?

Useful Rulings on Enforcement of Settlement Agreement

Recent Rulings on Enforcement of Settlement Agreement

1-25 of 10000 results

PRICE VS THE CITY OF ANAHEIM

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Court recognizes that in the future some Plaintiffs might be able to show imminent threat of irreparable harm, depending on the City’s conduct with respect to their STR permit renewals, Code enforcement, and other changed circumstances. For this reason, the application for preliminary injunction is denied without prejudice.

  • Hearing

    Sep 29, 2030

THE CITIES OF DUARTE VS STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD AND CITY OF GARDENA VS REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD

Stay of Enforcement of Court’s Judgment The Court is inclined to stay enforcement of its judgment pending appeal. The Court is persuaded that the status quo should be maintained pending appeal so that any different relief granted by the Court of Appeal is not rendered illusory, and to avoid interfering with those parts of the Permit which may have been successfully implemented by some cities affected by the Permit.

  • Hearing

    Jun 20, 2021

ARMEN G KOJIKIAN ET AL VS AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO INC

(¶VIII.B) This Settlement Agreement does not affect the rights of Class Members who timely and properly request exclusion from the Settlement Agreement. The Settlement Agreement does not release claims for personal injury, property damage other than to the Class Vehicles, or claims for subrogation.

  • Hearing

    Oct 15, 2020

RE: 1ST & FNL RPT & ACCT OF ADMNTR, PET’N FOR SETTLEMENT, DISTRIBUTION FILED ON 02/04/20 BY KIM WILLIAMS NEAL

PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Drop. Unable to review. Court file is unavailable at this time. Note: Order Approving First and Final Report filed 9-22-2020. KIM WILLIAMS NEAL NADER FANNYAN SHIRLEY MAE WILLIAMS PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need: ...

  • Hearing

    Oct 13, 2020

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

THE RICHARDSON 2001 TRUST

Proposed Order DENNIS ELDER HEATHER ELDER JAMES P MITCHELL PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need appearances to report status of settlement Note: Stipulation and Order approving settlement agreement filed 8-31-2020 indicates dismissals as to all matters will be filed. None has been filed. JEAN H MARTELLE TRUST JEFF MARTELLE KONSTANTINE A DEMIRIS JULIE BRUCE PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need: 1.

  • Hearing

    Oct 13, 2020

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

GRDSHP OF SCOTT

Parties entered into a mediated settlement agreement on 1/31/2020. If this matter is continued, please set at 9:30 a.m. BARBARA SCOTT ETHAN M WEISINGER BARBARA SCOTT JENNIFER R. SOLOMON CALI-LYNN SCOTT COLTON SCOTT RANDOLPH STEIN CRYSTAL MILLARD Drop. Note: Letters of Temporary Conservatorship of Estate issued to Kellie Hayes 3-12-19. JENNIFER CASSADY KELLIE HAYES JONATHAN T.

  • Hearing

    Oct 09, 2020

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

RE: TRAILING: ELIZ ROSNER'S CREDITORS CLAIM SET BY DEPT.30

Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Petition for Approval of Settlement Agreement and in Response to Linda Rosner’s Frivolous Objection filed 8- 21-2020 by Nicolas Rosner and C. Jeff Brinton requests affirmative relief and must be calendared and noticed for relief to be considered. 4. Reply to Response to Objection of Linda Fuentes Rosner filed 9-18-2020 by Linda Fuentes Rosner.

  • Hearing

    Oct 06, 2020

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

RE: STATUS OF SETTLEMENT RE PET’N DET VALIDITY SET BY DEPT.30 (FILED

09/04/18 BY C.J.BRINTON PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need appearances to report status of settlement PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need appearances to report status of settlement

  • Hearing

    Oct 06, 2020

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

PAVEL ZAMOSHNIKOV VS. CODE COMPLIANCE OF CITY OF SACRAMENTO

CODE ENFORCEMENT HARASSMENT. The body of the complaint consisted entirely of a copy of an email exchange between Petitioner and the City. The email is far from clear, but appears to concern some type of appeal of a City Code violation. It is not clear what the Code violation is for, but it may be for failure to remove certain items from property.

  • Hearing

    Oct 02, 2020

CONS. OF ARNETTA L ALTER

Settlement Conference Statement submitted by Mark Rodgers 9/21/2020 B. Settlement Conference Statement submitted by Paul Rodgers Jr. 9/18/2020 LEO P. RODGERS CHARLES A. TRIAY LEO RODGERS CHARLES A. TRIAY MARK A. RODGERS CHARLES A. TRIAY MARK RODGERS CHARLES A. TRIAY PAUL E RODGERS JR CHRISTOPHER J SCHWEICKERT THE RODGERS FAMILY TRUST DATED

  • Hearing

    Oct 02, 2020

  • Judge

    Fenstermacher

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

CITY OF EL MONTE VS CHUN C LI, ET AL.

., which reads, in relevant part, that “[e]ach and every violation of this Chapter 5.18 shall constitute a separate violation and shall be subject to all remedies and enforcement measures authorized by the El Monte Municipal Code. Additionally, as a nuisance per se . . . disgorgement and payment to the city of any monies unlawfully obtained, costs of abatement, costs of investigation, attorney fees, and any other relief or remedy available at law or in equity.

  • Hearing

    Oct 02, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    other

HAWKINS VS. SAS RETAIL SERVICES, LLC

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement and Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Costs, Representative Enhancements, and Settlement Administration Costs are granted, except that the court approves plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees only in the amount of $180,000, and approves plaintiffs’ enhancements only in the amounts of $4,000 for plaintiff Andrae Hawkins and $1,000 for plaintiff Patricia Chagalla.

  • Hearing

    Oct 02, 2020

MARLYN MILNE VS PHILLIP BACHECHI, ET AL.

“If the parties stipulate, in a writing signed by the parties outside the presence of the court or orally before the court, for settlement of the case, or part thereof, the court, upon motion, may enter judgment pursuant to the terms of the settlement. If requested by the parties, the court may retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement until performance in full of the terms of the settlement agreement.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 664.6.)

  • Hearing

    Oct 02, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

MYRNA KAWAKITA VS GEORGE TASHJIAN MD ET AL

On February 19, 2019, Plaintiff filed an unconditional Notice of Settlement of Entire Case. On March 5, 2019, Norms filed a “Notice of Acceptance of Cross-Defendant George Tashjian, M.D.’s Statutory Offer to Compromise.” On April 25, 2019, Plaintiff dismissed the entire action of all parties and all causes of action, with prejudice; that day, Norms dismissed its cross-complaint, with prejudice. Case No.

  • Hearing

    Oct 02, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

WILLIAMS VS. STAFF PRO, INC.

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement is granted, except that the court approves plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees only in the amount of $1,384,997.59. The court concludes that a reasonable attorney fee in this case is 30% of the gross settlement amount minus the deduction for the employer’s share of payroll taxes, which the court does not consider to be part of the common fund on which plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees should be calculated.

  • Hearing

    Oct 02, 2020

BAIRD VS. GRAYBAR ELECTRIC COMPANY, INC.

Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement is granted. A Final Approval Hearing is set for February 26, 2021 at 10:00 a.m.

  • Hearing

    Oct 02, 2020

FORA FINANCIAL WEST, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS ZODIAC STAR, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, ET AL.

Legal Standard Code of Civil Procedure section 708.110, subdivision (a) provides: “The judgment creditor may apply to the proper court for an order requiring the judgment debtor to appear before the court, or before a referee appointed by the court, at a time and place specified in the order, to furnish information to aid in enforcement of the money judgment.”

  • Hearing

    Oct 02, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

IN THE MATTER OF THE EVELYN LOPEZ LIVING TRUST DATED 12/11/2006

Absent objections, the Court intends to approve the settlement agreement. __________________ The court discourages in-person appearances in Department J6 during the COVID-19 pandemic period. Appearances in Department J6 should be made by CourtCall (audio or video) whenever possible. A very limited number of people will be allowed in Department J6 at one time to comply with safety protocols.

  • Hearing

    Oct 01, 2020

  • Type

    Probate

  • Sub Type

    Trust

IN THE MATTER OF ROBERT EDWARD KINYOUN

The Seller's Final Settlement Statement (Escrow) for the sale of 1575 Rugby Circle shows the seller as Scott Alan Kinyoun, Successor Trustee of the Kinyoun Family Living Trust UTD. Also see NPA filed 06/15/2020 to Execute the Approval of the Trust Account, with attached Account and Report of Trustee (of the Kinyoun Family Living Trust) which shows a distribution of $301,043.90 to the estate. Also see Mr.

  • Hearing

    Oct 01, 2020

RE: PET’N FOR SETTLEMENT OF THIRD ACCOUNT, APPROVAL OF FEES

FILED ON 05/18/20 BY PETER D LANGLEY PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need: 1. Proposed Order PETER D LANGLEY J VIRGINIA PEISER THE BENN GRANDCHILDREN'S TRUST PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Petition Approved Proposed Order Submitted No Appe...

  • Hearing

    Oct 01, 2020

  • Judge

    Fenstermacher

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

RE: FIRST ACCOUNT OF TRUSTEE AND PET’N FOR ITS SETTLEMENT

FILED ON 08/13/19 BY KIMBERLY CZIRKELBACH PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need appearances to report status Note: Residuary Beneficiaries’ Response and Objections filed by American Cancer Society, Inc., Feed the Children, Inc., Leukemia & Lymphoma Society and ALSAC/St. Judge Children’s Research Hospi...

  • Hearing

    Oct 01, 2020

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

JUAN PALMA ET AL VS KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN INC ET AL

On December 5, 2018, a Notice of Settlement was filed as between Plaintiffs and KFH, SCPMG, KFHPI and Shah. On January 16, 2019, the “Order Re: Application for Determination of Good Faith Settlement” as between Plaintiffs and KFH, SCPMG, KFHPI and Shah was filed. On June 27, 2019, a second Notice of Settlement was filed as between Plaintiffs and Aviation.

  • Hearing

    Oct 01, 2020

510PACIFICAVE VS GINA M LA PIANA

The Effect of the Pending Appeal In his declaration, Whitehead states that enforcement of the money judgment in this action should be stayed due to the pending appeal of such judgment, which has yet to be decided. “[T]he perfecting of an appeal stays proceedings in the trial court upon the judgment or order appealed from or upon the matters embraced therein or affected thereby, including enforcement of the judgment or order.” (Nielsen v. Stumbos (1990) 226 Cal.App.3d 301, 303.)

  • Hearing

    Oct 01, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

EDWARD VS. DANA POINT TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION

Furthermore, in preparation for creating the mailers, Ellis conducted research which revealed that Plaintiff had reached a settlement in the City’s lawsuit. (Ellis Decl., ¶¶ 3, 7.)

  • Hearing

    Oct 01, 2020

LEONARDO MARQUEZ, ET AL. VS MIRNA FLORES, ET AL.

Plaintiffs filed a notice of settlement on June 11, 2020. On July 10, 2020, Plaintiffs filed a petition to approve the proposed settlement as to Emely. The Court having reviewed and heard the petition, the Court finds that the settlement is reasonable, and based thereon, approves and GRANTS the petition. (CRC Rule 7.950.) The Court intends to sign the proposed Orders (MC-351, MC-355). The Court does not find personal appearance necessary, given the current COVID-19 pandemic. (CRC Rule 7.952(a).)

  • Hearing

    Oct 01, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 400     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we load this page.