What is a Order Shortening Time to Serve A Motion?

“The court, on its own motion or on application for an order shortening time supported by a declaration showing good cause, may prescribe shorter times for the filing and service of papers than the times specified in Code of Civil Procedure section 1005.” Cal. Rules of Court 5.94(a).

“A motion to advance or specially set a trial date can be made ex parte. Otherwise, the regular 16-court-day notice requirement applies.” Weil & Brown, Civ. Proc. Before Trial, § 12:271.

Useful Rulings on Motion for Order Shortening Time to Serve A Motion

Recent Rulings on Motion for Order Shortening Time to Serve A Motion

1-25 of 10000 results

PRICE VS THE CITY OF ANAHEIM

Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction Provided that the City will stipulate to a preliminary injunction with respect to the provisions of Ordinance No. 6374 relating to immediate warrantless access to the short-term rental (STR) units, the Court DENIES the application for a preliminary injunction in all other respects, WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

  • Hearing

    Sep 29, 2030

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY VS. SANTA ANA RV STORAGE, L.P.

With respect to the first question, the Court concludes that Section 13.2(f) does not preclude SARVS from attempting to obtain compensation for any alleged loss of goodwill. Notably, nowhere in that section is there any reference to goodwill or any statement to the effect that any potential item of compensation not explicitly referenced therein is considered waived.

  • Hearing

    Apr 25, 2026

T-12 THREE, LLC VS. TURNER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

Plaintiffs T-12 and HRG (only) are granted leave to file a Second Amended Complaint on or before May 15, 2019, limited to adding contract claims against the subcontractors arising from the subcontracts based on a theory of third-party beneficiary. Rulings on Evidentiary Objections The Court DECLINES to rule on all of the parties’ objections because "the court need rule only on those objections to evidence that it deems material to its disposition of the motion." (CCP § 437c(q).).

  • Hearing

    Apr 25, 2026

VELAZQUEZ VS KIA MOTORS AMERICA INC.

Plaintiff Francisco Velazquez’s Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice as to Kim D. Stephens, Gregory F. Coleman, Paul C. Peel, Jason T. Dennett and Adam A. Edwards The pro hac vice applications of Adam A. Edwards, Gregory Coleman, Jason T. Dennett, Kim D. Stephens, and Paul C. Peel do not address whether the applicants are: (1) regularly employed in the State of California or (2) regularly engaged in substantial business, professional, or other activities in the State of California. CRC, Rule 9.40(a)(2) and (3).

  • Hearing

    Jun 20, 2021

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

CAS004001, as amended on June 16, 2015 by State Board Order WQ 2015-0075, which is remanded to you for reconsideration in light of the Decision of this Court dated April 18, 2019. Nothing herein shall limit or control in any way the discretion legally vested in you. YOU ARE FURTHER COMMANDED to file with this Court a return to this writ on or before (90 plus 30 days as per Respondents’ request) stating what you have done to comply.

  • Hearing

    Jun 20, 2021

MALIN VS AMBRY GENETICS CORPORATION

Continued to 7-19-2019

  • Hearing

    Jun 20, 2021

OSCAR ESCOBEDO, ET AL. VS EMANATE HEALTH MEDICAL CENTER , ET AL.

The Court made the following order on 9-18-20:AFTER REVIEW OF THE COURT FILE, THE COURT MAKES THE FOLLOWING ORDER: Department 28 of the Personal Injury Court has determined that the above entitled action is complicated based upon the number of pretrial hearings and/or the complexity of the issues presented. AT THE DIRECTION OF DEPARTMENT 1: This case is hereby transferred and reassigned to the following Independent Calendar Court in THE EAST DISTRICT, JUDGE GLORIA QHITE-BROWN presiding in DEPT.

  • Hearing

    Nov 10, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Medical Malpractice

VEJ POMONA 8, LP, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, ET AL. VS FRANK CURTIN, ET AL.

Under Code of Civil Procedure section 580(a), “[t]he relief granted to the plaintiff, if there is no answer, cannot exceed that demanded in the complaint, in the statement required by Section 425.11, or in the statement provided for by Section 425.115[.]” If Plaintiffs seek additional damages in addition to those set forth in the Complaint, Plaintiffs need to amend the Complaint to properly reflect the requested damages and give notice to Defendant.

  • Hearing

    Nov 09, 2020

CATHAY BANK VS ACE HARDWARE CORPORATION

Again, at this point, this does not show a willful act by Defendant JMI to entitle Plaintiffs to punitive damages discovery against it. Accordingly, the motion is DENIED.

  • Hearing

    Nov 06, 2020

CHANGLIANG DAI VS THOMAS CHEN, ET AL.

Chen advised Plaintiff that he had been operating a successful business, Tissuesco Group (“Tissuesco”), for many years and could assist Plaintiff to open a business and obtain a visa. On or around March 24, 2018, the parties signed a contract, in which Plaintiff agreed to invest $120,000.00 to Tissuesco and, in return, Tissuesco would open, operate and manage a company for Plaintiff and assist Plaintiff in applying for an L-1 visa.

  • Hearing

    Nov 02, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

MANUEL ALEJANDRE VS CAL-VILLA ESTATES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION

The court directs Defendant to prepare the order and submit it to opposing counsel for approval as to content. (Rule 3.1312) The case management conference scheduled for September 25, 2020 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 11B will remain. Ross 9/18/2020 ……………… Directions for Contesting or Arguing the Tentative Ruling: Tentative rulings for Law and Motion will be posted electronically by 1:30 p.m. the day before the hearing.

  • Hearing

    Oct 28, 2020

NATIONWIDE BANK VS WEI ZHU

IF CROSS-COMPLAINANT SEEKS STORAGE FEES ON TOP OF THE DEMANDED AMOUNT FOR THE VEHICLE, CROSS-COMPLAINANT NEEDS TO AMEND THE COMPLAINT TO PROPERLY REFLECT THE REQUESTED DAMAGES AND GIVE NOTICE TO CROSS-DEFENDANT] 2. Lack of dismissal of all parties against whom judgment is not sought or an application for separate judgment against specified parties under CCP 579, supported by a showing of grounds for each judgment. (CRC 3.1800(a)(7).) [MISSING DISMISSALS OF CROSS-DEFENDANTS LIBERTY MUTUAL INSUR.

  • Hearing

    Oct 27, 2020

  • Type

    Collections

  • Sub Type

    Collections

IN THE MATTER OF ROBERT A. MATTHEWS

A very limited number of people will be allowed in Department J6 at one time to comply with safety protocols. Face coverings (masks, etc.) are required at all times to enter the courthouse and Department J6, and appropriate social distancing in the courtroom and inside the courthouse shall be maintained at all times. You are encouraged to bring your own face covering to Court if you intend to appear in person.

  • Hearing

    Oct 20, 2020

  • Type

    Family Law

  • Sub Type

    Conservatorship

ANGELA WATSON VS GILBERT A. CABOT

. § 435.5(b) “[a] party moving to strike a pleading that has been amended after a motion to strike an earlier version of the pleading was granted shall not move to strike any portion of the pleadings on grounds that could have been raised by a motion to strike as to the earlier version of the pleading.” Here, the attorney’s fees request was included in the SAC, but Defendants did not move to strike such request. The Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Request for Attorney’s Fees is DENIED.

  • Hearing

    Oct 20, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Fraud

JINGXUAN ZHANG VS HUMMINGBIRD NEST ENTERTAINMENT CORP

(“Hummingbird”) failed to provide him with rest and meal breaks, failed to pay him all wages due, including overtime, and failed to provide him with accurate wage statements. On October 25, 2017, Plaintiff filed a complaint, asserting causes of action against Defendants Hummingbird and Does 1-50 for: Failure to Provide Rest Periods—Cal. Labor Code § 226.7 Failure to Provide Meal Periods—Cal. Labor Code § 226.7 Failure to Pay Minimum Wage—Cal. Labor Code § 1197 Failure to Pay Overtime—Cal.

  • Hearing

    Oct 19, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

PNC EQUIPMENT FINANCE, LLC, A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS SANTIAGO MENDOZA MUNIZ, AN INDIVIDUAL

In the event Plaintiff recovers the Equipment, Plaintiff shall sell the Equipment in a commercially reasonable manner and file a partial satisfaction of judgment in the amount of the net proceeds form the sale.” The Judicial Council Form CIV-100 (“Request for Entry of Default (Application to Enter default)”) reflects that a court judgment in the amount of $123,186.97 is to be entered against Muniz, Dragon and Zhang.

  • Hearing

    Oct 16, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

CHUAN JUN LI VS QI ZHAO

An Order to Show Cause Re: Failure to Proceed with Default Judgment is set for October 16, 2020. Discussion Plaintiff’s Application for Default Judgment is DENIED without prejudice. The following defects are noted: Plaintiff has failed to dismiss Does 1-10. Plaintiff has failed to provide a summary of the case. Plaintiff has not provided a calculation re interest.

  • Hearing

    Oct 16, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Landlord Tenant

ARMEN G KOJIKIAN ET AL VS AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO INC

Counsel is to contact the courtroom directly to reserve a hearing date for a new motion for preliminary approval, if such motion is going to be filed. If a new motion for preliminary approval of Class Action Settlement is filed, the motion and supporting papers must be complete and not refer to previously filed papers or exhibits filed in support of prior motions.

  • Hearing

    Oct 15, 2020

CONS. OF IVY NADINE COPANSKY

RE: PET’N FOR TERMINATION OF CONSERVATORSHIP FILED ON 07/29/19 BY MELVIN PAUL COPANSKY PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need appearances to report status Drop. Need appearances Note: First Account and Report filed by CSC Fiduciaries, Inc. filed 6-11-20. See Line # 9.D.

  • Hearing

    Oct 14, 2020

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

RE: COMPLIANCE REVIEW RE FILING 1ST ACCOUNT SET BY D14 ON 10/11/19

Need Order filed as to estate and letters issued. PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need appearances to report status

  • Hearing

    Oct 14, 2020

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

CONS OF MELVIN COPANSKY

File a verified declaration to include current address of maternal grandfather, and names and current addresses of paternal grandparents 2.

  • Hearing

    Oct 14, 2020

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

RE: DECLARATION (EX PARTE) RE TERMINATE SET BY MELVIN PAUL COPANSKY

PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need appearances to report status PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need appearances to report status

  • Hearing

    Oct 14, 2020

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

CONS OF JAMES D. BROWN

There has been no general appointment as to the estate. PrC §§ 1823, 1824 2. Capacity Declaration (Judicial Council Form GC-335) to show whether proposed conservatee lacks capacity to give informed medical consent. PrC § 1890 3. Confidential Supplemental Information Form GC-312 verified. Form filed is not signed. 4. Verified declaration by petitioner to include fiduciary’s proposed hourly fee schedule. PrC § 1821(c) 5. Verified declaration by petitioner to complete petition item # 3.c.

  • Hearing

    Oct 14, 2020

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

CONS. OF IVY NADINE COPANSKY

PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need appearances to report status PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE -- See also Line # 9 -- Need appearances to report status Note: Per 8-12-2020 minute order, conservatorship of person was terminated. JAY ZIMMER CRAIG L. JUDSON LEO F. BAUTISTA DANIEL A PRESHER MELVIN PAUL COPANSKY CAROLYN D CAIN

  • Hearing

    Oct 14, 2020

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

RE: PET’N FOR APRVL OF 1ST ACCT & RPT, FOR COMPENSATION

FILED ON 02/27/20 BY IDA ARNE PROBATE EXAMINER NOTES-SUBJECT TO REVISION AFTER REVIEW BY THE JUDGE Need appearances If this matter is continued, please set at 9:30 a.m. COLTON BOONE VALLEE IDA ARNE TRACY S REGLI SCOUT MARGARET VALLEE Need appearances to report status CLINTON P MITCHELL ERNEST EDWARD MITCHELL PATANISHA DAVIS-JENKINS PATENISHA DAVIS PATANISHA DAVIS-JENKINS

  • Hearing

    Oct 14, 2020

  • Judge

    George

  • County

    Contra Costa County, CA

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.