February 6, 2026

The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge John R. Mayne in Department 21:

CV-24-008628 – TIMED OUT LLC vs XREGNANDO 2021 INC – a) Plaintiff's Motion for Order Compelling Further Responses to Special Interrogatories and Imposing Monetary Sanctions Against Defendant – HEARING REQUIRED. b) Plaintiff's Motion for Order Compelling Further Responses to Requests for Production of Documents and Imposing Monetary Sanctions Against Defendant – HEARING REQUIRED.

a) The parties should be prepared to address the late filing of the moving separate statement on January 29, 2026. Plaintiff’s position may have some merit, but separate statements are not an idle requirement generated to vex practitioners.

b) As to the insurance policy and related document requests, it appears code compliant responses have been provided.

The Court requires more information as to the Facebook and Instagram accounts. It appears that Defendant may have additional access to past social media posts.

The Court is inclined to grant the motion as to RFP 35. Organizational structure documents are typically discoverable.

The Court is inclined to grant the motion as to RFP 36.

As to other financial requests, RFP’s related to financial status only require a motion under Code Civ. Proc. section 3295(c) when punitive damages are at issue. The Court nonetheless views the requests as overbroad at this stage and wants to discuss protective orders and timeframes.

CV-25-003281 – MEDINA, BERTOLDO SALOMON vs CERPAS, JOSE LUIS – Defendant's Demurrer to Second Amended Complaint Code of Civil Procedure Sections 430.10(e), (f). – SUSTAINED without leave to amend for failure to state facts sufficient to constitute any cause of action pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 430.10(e).

The Second Amended Complaint continues to lack the necessary factual allegations to support the elements of a fraud claim, which must be pled with specificity. Stansfield v. Starkey (1990) 220 Cal.App.3d 59,73.

The Court warned that it was likely to sustain a demurrer without leave to amend on the last attempt. The allegations still lack the specificity necessary to determine the terms of any contract, the defamatory statements, or what, exactly, constituted any fraud.

The Court has given Plaintiff multiple opportunities to improve these to a point where a viable complaint would lie, but this has not occurred. The Court therefore sustains the demurrer without leave to amend.

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 are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Marie Silveria sitting on assignment in Department 23:

CV-22-005740 – THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA vs CARRANZA, EMILIANO – Receiver's Motion to Sell Real Property – DROPPED, at the request of the moving party/receiver.

CV-24-006920 – DISCOVER BANK vs GONGORA, ADRIANNA – Plaintiff's Motion for Order Vacating Satisfaction of Judgment – GRANTED, and unopposed.

Plaintiff has demonstrated entitlement to the requested relief.

CV-25-009498 – VARGAS, JOSE BALTAZAR vs SPINNATO, AMANDA MELISSA – Defendant's Motion to Strike Prayer and Claims for Punitive Damages – DENIED, as MOOT in view of Plaintiff’s submission of his First Amended Complaint on 1-8-26.

The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Sonny S. Sandhu in Department 24:

CV-24-002556 – MAYER, JOHN vs MODESTO MOBILITY CENTER – Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Requests for Production of Documents – CONTINUED, on the Court’s own motion.

The Court notes that Defendant has served Amended Responses, and Production, though unverified.

Based on said Amended Responses, and Production, the court is of the view that progress has been made and further meet and confer would resolve any pending disputes regarding this discovery.

Accordingly, the parties are hereby ordered to further meet and confer and to file a Joint Stipulated Statement thereon no later than five (5) court days before the next hearing.

The Court notes the tone of Plaintiff’s Counsel’s meet and confer correspondence and reminds both Counsel that meet and confer is to be undertaken with civility. (Clement v Allegre, (2009) 177 Cal. App. 4^th 1277).

This matter is continued to Wednesday, February 25, 2026, at 8:30 am in Department 24 of this Court.

CV-25-004703 – GUZMAN, ROSALBA vs NEWMAN PIONEER DRUG INC – Plaintiff's Motion to Set Aside Dismissal and Reinstate Case – GRANTED.

Good cause existing, Plaintiff’s motion is granted. (Code of Civ Proc. Section 473(b); Rodrigues v. Superior Ct., (2005)127 Cal. App. 4th 1027; Minick v. City of Petaluma, (2016) 3 Cal. App. 5th 15.)

The Court’s order of November 6, 2025, dismissing this case without prejudice is hereby set aside.

A Case Management Conference is set for Monday, August 17, 2026, at 8:30 am in Department 24 of this Court.

CV-25-007027 – JAKOBS, KEITH C vs REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA – Plaintiff's Motion for an Order Sealing a Record – HEARING REQUIRED.

The Court has some concerns regarding this motion. Notably, the motion is not supported by the required declaration. (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 2.551).

Additionally, Defendants appear entitled to an unredacted copy of said declaration for due process purposes.

Furthermore, Plaintiff’s redaction of the declaration at issue appears overbroad.

CV-25-010329 – COUNTY OF STANISLAUS vs DEPAUW, PHILLIP C – Plaintiff's Motion for Order of Prejudgment Possession – GRANTED.

The Court finds that Plaintiff has discharged its burden of demonstrating it is entitled to acquire  (a) a 2,607+/- square foot permanent road easement, (b) a 1,491+/- square foot permanent easement for maintenance purposes, (c) a 1,332+/- square foot permanent utility easement, and (d) a 1,939+/- square foot thirty-six (36) month temporary construction easement (collectively “Subject Property”) located at 22006 Kilburn Road, Crows Landing, County of Stanislaus, California, and bearing Stanislaus County Assessor’s Parcel Number 049-011-009 owned by : PHILLIP C. DEPAUW, Trustee of the P.C. DePauw Trust, U/A/D 09/27/10, as amended, Fee Owner; RONALD K. DEPAUW, Trustee of the R & S DePauw Trust, U/A/D 02/07/11, as amended, Fee Owner ; SUSAN DEPAUW, Trustee of the R & S Fee Owner DePauw Trust, U/A/D 02/07/11, as amended, by eminent domain for the construction of the Kilburn Road Bridge over Orestimba Creek Project (the “Project”), and all uses necessary, incidental and convenient thereto.

The Court further finds Plaintiff has, based on an appraisal, deposited the sum of $4,360 into the State Treasury as probable compensation that will be awarded Defendants in the eminent domain proceeding. (California Code of Civil Procedure §§ 1255.410 and 1255.010 et seq.).

 

Accordingly, Plaintiff is hereby authorized and empowered to enter upon and take prejudgment possession of the subject property. Plaintiff shall be entitled to take possession of the subject property thirty (30) days after service of this Order.

Service of this Order shall be made in the manner specified in Code of Civil Procedure section 1255.450, subdivisions (d) and (f).  

If the owner(s) or occupant(s), if any, fail to deliver possession of the Property upon the demand of County pursuant to this Order, a Writ of Assistance may issue ex parte upon the affidavit of a representative of County showing that such owner(s) or occupant(s), if any, have failed to deliver possession of the Property.

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***