What is a Notice of Lodging?

The court calls for a Notice of Lodging in several circumstances. e.g., proposed orders, trial exhibits, original wills, financial statements, and relief of counsel.

The Notice of Lodging requirements vary by county. For example, here's San Diego's lodging procedure for trial:

  1. A Notice of Intent to Lodge Documents (form SDSC D-235 or in pleading form) listing the name or description of the exhibit must be filed and timely served with the moving, opposition and reply papers
  2. The documents themselves must be lodged with the court no sooner than 10 court days and no later than three court days prior to the hearing, absent a court order
  3. Lodged documents will be stamped "received" by the court.
  4. Lodged documents must be tabbed to correlate to the notice of lodgment.
  5. A conformed copy of the notice of lodgment must be the face page of the lodged documents.

(The rest of the San Diego's trial lodging rules can be found here.)

For more information inquire with your court.

Useful Rulings on Notice of Lodging

Recent Rulings on Notice of Lodging

GRACIELA BOLTIANSKY VS CITY OF BEVERLY HILLS

(Notice of Lodging, Exh. #2; Declaration of Charles H. Abbott, Exh. G.) Plaintiff cannot create a triable issue by submitting a declaration in connection with her opposition that contradicts her past sworn statements. (See, e.g., Whitmire v. Ingersoll-Rand Co. (2010) 184 Cal.App.4th 1078, 1087.) The Court may disregard such declarations and sustains Defendant’s objections on this basis. (Ibid.)

  • Hearing

    Sep 17, 2020

KAREN HORWITZ, ET AL. VS THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA , ET AL.

Similarly, the youtube video provided by Plaintiffs depict a “Monica Martinez” who complains about pay issues and the need to work a second job. (9/1/20 Notice of Lodging). Plaintiffs also argue that Martinez has specific and detailed information as to chronic understaffing in the Defendant hospital within the meaning of various elder and dependent abuse case law. Plaintiffs do not identify any source for these allegations.

  • Hearing

    Sep 15, 2020

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

MANUEL CARLOS LOPEZ VS DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES

On August 21, 2020, Respondent filed a notice of lodging of administrative record (AR 1-49.) Standard of Review Under CCP section 1094.5(b), the pertinent issues are whether the respondent has proceeded without jurisdiction, whether there was a fair trial, and whether there was a prejudicial abuse of discretion.

  • Hearing

    Sep 08, 2020

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

CUNNIFF VS. BREA MALL

The Court’s ROA does not include a notice of lodging of exhibits. Thus, there is no evidence in support of Plaintiff’s contention that there is a triable issue of material fact. Finally, Plaintiff argues Defendant breached its duty by (1) failing to move with urgency to clean the spill, and (2) failing to give notice of the spill to patrons. (Opp. 5:6-8.) She argues Defendant failed to act expeditiously while notifying security. (Opp. 5:9-10.) But this point is not well-taken.

  • Hearing

    Sep 04, 2020

DAVID ALOMATSI VS KINDRED HOSPITAL

DISCUSSION Plaintiff requests that the court seal the following documents listed in “Attachment 1” to his motion: 1. 12/3/19 notice of lodging of exhibits in support of opposition to motion to quash 2. 12/3/19 declaration in support of motion to quash 3. 6/29/20 separate statement 4. 6/29/20 notice of lodging of exhibits in support of MSJ 5. 6/29/20 declaration of S. Lee in support of MSJ 6. 6/29/20 declaration of N. Noble in support of MSJ 7. 6/29/20 declaration of W.

  • Hearing

    Sep 03, 2020

ELLIE ACEVEDO VS BEVERLY PACIFIC HOLDINGS INC ET AL

(see Sandler MTC Decl. ¶¶ 6-8, Exhibits D-E to Notice of Lodging.) No responses have been received as of the date of Sandler’s Declaration. (Sandler Decl. ¶ 9.)

  • Hearing

    Sep 02, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

ROMAN POLANSKI VS ACADEMY OF MOTION PICTURE ARTS AND SCIENCES

The court has received Respondent’s opposition, the declaration of Dawn Hudson in support, Petitioner’s reply, the notice of lodging of administrative record and joint appendix, and the declaration of Kristen Bird in support.

  • Hearing

    Aug 25, 2020

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

CARDOSO VS. DATA CLEAN CORPORATION

Upon further review, the Court ORDERS that the clerk permanently delete the conditionally sealed notice of lodging. (CRC 2.551(b)(6).) This, in effect, terminates the motion to seal as to the documents noted above, as well as the remaining portions of Exhibit B whose consideration was continued to this hearing. Deletion of the conditionally sealed notice of lodging does not end the Court’s inquiry, however.

  • Hearing

    Aug 21, 2020

ELI LILLY AND COMPANY VS THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA ON BEHALF OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO CAMPUS

As set forth in The University's Notice of Lodging Documents Containing Confidential Information Pursuant to the Parties' Stipulated Protected Order [ROA 123], if a timely motion or application to seal under CRC 2.551 is not filed as to the unredacted document, the clerk shall file the unredacted document in the court public file. CRC 2.551(b)(3)(B).

  • Hearing

    Aug 20, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

ELI LILLY AND COMPANY VS THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA ON BEHALF OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO CAMPUS

As set forth in The University's Notice of Lodging Documents Containing Confidential Information Pursuant to the Parties' Stipulated Protected Order [ROA 123], if a timely motion or application to seal under CRC 2.551 is not filed as to the unredacted document, the clerk shall file the unredacted document in the court public file. CRC 2.551(b)(3)(B).

  • Hearing

    Aug 20, 2020

  • Type

    Contract

  • Sub Type

    Breach

SOFIA VERGARA VS NICHOLAS LOEB ET AL

The court requires courtesy copies of the unredacted versions of the following missing documents which should have been conditionally filed under seal: · Moving Separate Statement and Moving Declaration for Loeb's Motion to Compel Further re RFA/RFP filed (5/15/2020) · Motion to Seal (Res No. 0507), the moving declaration, and the notice of lodging for that motion (filed 08/3/2020) Finally, the court requests courtesy copies of the following: · Loeb’s replies, if any, to his two motions to compel further

  • Hearing

    Aug 14, 2020

CITRUS OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLGY VS CITRUS VALLEY HEALTH

Sealing On August 2, 2019, Emanate filed a “Notice of Lodging. . . Motion for Summary Adjudication of Issues Conditionally Under Seal,” a “Notice of Lodging. . . Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts in Support of. . . Motion for Summary Judgment, or in the Alternative, Summary Adjudication of Issues” and a “Notice of Lodging Compendium of Evidence in Support of. . .

  • Hearing

    Aug 06, 2020

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

CITRUS OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLGY VS CITRUS VALLEY HEALTH

Sealing On August 2, 2019, Emanate filed a “Notice of Lodging. . . Motion for Summary Adjudication of Issues Conditionally Under Seal,” a “Notice of Lodging. . . Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts in Support of. . . Motion for Summary Judgment, or in the Alternative, Summary Adjudication of Issues” and a “Notice of Lodging Compendium of Evidence in Support of. . .

  • Hearing

    Aug 06, 2020

  • Type

    Business

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

JAMES E. SPEARS VS CALIFORNIA UNEMPLOYMENT OFFICE APPEALS BOARD

On July 20, 2020, Petitioner filed a reply brief and a notice of lodging of administrative record. Petitioner did not file proof of service of these documents. In the reply, Petitioner declined to accept CUIAB’s proposed stipulation to remand the matter. On or about July 20, 2020, Petitioner lodged the certified administrative record (AR). Petitioner attached to the administrative record an “addendum” brief and Exhibits A-E. The addendum and exhibits were lodged, but not filed.

  • Hearing

    Aug 04, 2020

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

GARY S CASSELMAN VS GARO MARDIROSSIAN ET AL

([Response to SSF (“R-SSF”) No. 30] D-EIS, Tab 12, Plaintiff Depo 79:4-24; 108:5-17 [Note: page 108 is not included in Defendants’ EIS, and Plaintiff has not provided a transcript of the deposition; however, on June 24, 2020, Defendants filed a Notice of Lodging of Original Deposition Transcript with the Court]; 109:20-24.) Plaintiff similarly argues that he expected to be paid directly by Mardirossian upon Mardirossian receiving payment on the contingent attorneys’ fees at the conclusion of Amaya.

  • Hearing

    Jul 30, 2020

JOSE CARRANZA VS P & M MANAGEMENT, INC., ET AL.

Therefore, the opposition/objection to the Notice of Lodging is without merit. The court notes that on 7/15/20 Plaintiff filed an “Amended Notice of Hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion to Quash/Limit Defendants’ Business Records Subpoena Served Upon Department of Public Social Services” indicating that the hearing will take place on 7/28/20. However, the motion is not on the court’s calendar for 7/28/20.

  • Hearing

    Jul 28, 2020

  • Type

    Other

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

RONALD GALINDO VS LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

On September 3, 2019, Respondent filed an opposition to the petition, a supporting declaration, a request for judicial notice, and a notice of lodging of exhibits. This opposition was superseded by the opposition filed by Respondent on March 10, 2020, pursuant to the court’s briefing schedule. On September 26, 2019, at a trial setting conference, the court set the petition for hearing and set a briefing schedule.

  • Hearing

    Jul 28, 2020

2108- BRYANT V. FAY SERVICING, LLC

[Notice of Lodging (“NOL”) 63.] Prior to that, on 8/8/19, Defendants recorded a new notice of default (“NOD”). [NOL 64.] Plaintiff applied again for a loan modification after the August 2019 NOD was recorded, and the November 2019 borrower assistance application was denied on December 2, 2019. [NOL 65 and 66; Fay Decl., ¶ 31.] Plaintiff did not appeal the December 2, 2019 denial and on January 14, 2020 a Notice of Trustee’s Sale was recorded setting a sale date of February 19, 2020.

  • Hearing

    Jul 27, 2020

MARIA RODRIGUEZ VS WALMART INC

The Court orders Defendant to file a revised notice of lodging with the exhibits within ten (10) days of notice of this order. The Court’s clerk shall provide notice. DATED: July 20, 2020 ___________________________ Stephen I. Goorvitch Judge of the Superior Court

  • Hearing

    Jul 22, 2020

JANE DOE, ET AL. VS EMPLOYERS HR, LLC, ET AL.

Plaintiffs concurrently filed a notice of lodging under seal exhibits 5 through 7 in support of Plaintiffs’ reply. Despite the notice of lodging, the court has not received any lodging of exhibits under seal. Therefore, the court is unable to grant Plaintiffs’ application for order to seal. In addition, any party seeking an order allowing for documents to be filed under seal must make a CRS reservation and file a noticed motion.

  • Hearing

    Jul 21, 2020

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Wrongful Term

  • Judge Elaine Lu
  • County

    Los Angeles County, CA

WARNER VS. FRY'S ELECTRONICS

For cases subject to the electronic filing order, the notice of lodging conditionally under seal is filed electronically, but the actual sealed copy of the documents to be lodged must be provided physically to the clerk’s office. (See Electronic Case Filing Standing Order, Par. VII.) Because the Court does not have the sealed document, it can decide neither the motion to seal nor the motion to approve the settlement.

  • Hearing

    Jul 16, 2020

GRACE ALBA, A MINOR, BY AND THROUGH HER GUARDIAN AD LITEM, SYLVIA ALBA VS SPARKLETTS, INC., A CORPORATION, ET AL.

While the proposed orders submitted by DS Services in connection with the motion herein and the motion to seal below seek to seal the entirety of Coombs’ deposition transcript and all exhibits thereto, the “Notice of Lodging Records Conditionally Under Seal Pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 2.551” is comprised of excerpts of Coombs deposition testimony and Exhibits 10-18 and 22 thereto, as well as the unredacted motion.

  • Hearing

    Jul 16, 2020

  • Type

    Personal Injury/ Tort

  • Sub Type

    Products Liability

TERESA OWENS VS MALIPEP, LLC

The Court has considered: (1) Plaintiff’s Motion and supporting documents (Separate Statement (“SSF”), Declarations of Fidel Alonso (“Alonso”) and Richard Daggenhurst (“Daggenhurst”), Request for Judicial Notice, and Notice of Lodging); (2) Defendants’ Opposition and supporting documents (Response to Separate Statement (“R-SSF”), including Additional Material Facts (“AMF”), Evidentiary Objections to Plaintiff’s Evidence, Declarations of Belcher, Teresa, and Freddie Fletcher (“Fletcher”), and Request for Judicial

  • Hearing

    Jul 14, 2020

  • Type

    Real Property

  • Sub Type

    Quiet Title

CARDOSO VS. DATA CLEAN CORPORATION

of lodging (ROA 102).

  • Hearing

    Jul 10, 2020

FRANCISCA EUGENIA NUNEZ VS DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES

On June 25, 2020, four court days before the hearing, Respondent filed and served a Notice of Lodging of Administrative Record. That same date, Respondent lodged a certified, 63-page administrative record Standard of Review Under CCP section 1094.5(b), the pertinent issues are whether the respondent has proceeded without jurisdiction, whether there was a fair trial, and whether there was a prejudicial abuse of discretion.

  • Hearing

    Jul 02, 2020

  • Type

    Administrative

  • Sub Type

    Writ

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8     last » 

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

Please wait a moment while we gather your results.