Civil Tentative Rulings

July 30, 2026

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

CV-23-007395 - ROSA, ISIDRO DE LA vs GJ SILVA DAIRY INC - Compliance Hearing - DROPPED.

Based on the declaration of Cassandra Polites submitted on 6-24-26, the Court finds that compliance has been demonstrated and no hearing is necessary.

Class counsel shall submit a form of amended judgment directing that unclaimed settlement funds in the amount of $10,103.33, plus any accrued interest, shall be distributed to the parties’ agreed cy pres recipient                             

CV-24-004750 - GOODY,JAMES JOSEPH vs FARINELLI, ALBERT - a) Defendants Maria Luz Vargas and Jesse Vargas' Motion for Summary Judgment - GRANTED, and unopposed; b) Defendants Yolanda Arnette Mccoy's and Eulene Ramsey's Motion for Leave to File their Amended Answer - GRANTED, and unopposed.

a) The Court finds that Defendants, as the moving parties, have carried the initial burden of demonstrating entitlement to judgment pursuant to the application of the “sudden emergency” or “imminent peril” doctrine herein. Specifically, the undisputed evidence submitted herein supports the conclusion that Defendant, Maria Luz Vargas, acting with reasonable care, was suddenly and unexpectedly confronted by an emergency she did not cause. (Shiver v. Laramee (2018) 24 Cal.App.5th 395, 397.)  The burden then shifts to Plaintiff to submit admissible evidence demonstrating the existence of a material factual dispute preventing judgment as a matter of law. In view of the lack of opposition, Plaintiff has failed to carry that burden. Therefore, judgment is GRANTED in favor of the moving defendants herein.

b) Defendants Yolanda Arnette McCoy and Eulene Ramsey move to amend their answer to include three new affirmative defenses. The motion is unopposed.

“The court may . . . in its discretion, after notice to the adverse party, allow, upon any terms as may be just, an amendment to any pleading or proceeding in other particulars; and may upon like terms allow an answer to be made after the time limited by this code.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 473.) “Any judge, at any time before or after commencement of trial, in the furtherance of justice, and upon such terms as may be proper, may allow the amendment of any pleading or pretrial conference order.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 576.) “Such amendments generally may occur ‘at any time before or after commencement of trial, in the furtherance of justice’ (§ 576) so long as the amendments do not raise new issues against which the opposing party has had no opportunity to defend. [Citations.]” (Doe v. Second Street Corp. (2024) 105 Cal.App.5th 552, 577.)

Here, Defendants McCoy and Ramsey seek leave to amend their respective Answers to include three new affirmative defenses that were not included in their original Answers. The first is the assertion of the Sudden Emergency Doctrine; the second is the assertion of Negligence Per Se; and the third is the assertion of Assumption of the Risk. (Memorandum at p. 4.) Defendants contend that sufficient facts supporting the proposed affirmative defenses became known after the parties engaged in limited discovery.

Having considered the Defendants’ motion, memorandum and accompanying declaration, and proposed amendments, the Court GRANTS the motion.

The Court will sign the proposed order submitted by the moving parties. Defendants shall file their respective amended Answers within ten court days of the signed order.

CV-25-002637 - CASTANEDA, GUADALUPE vs NUTALL, DAVID EUGENE - Defendant’s Motion to Set Aside Default - DROPPED, at the request of the moving party.

CV-26-005475 - ADAME, ADRIANA vs ALBA, MELISA - Motion to Quash Service of Summons - HEARING REQUIRED.

The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Stacy P. Speiller in Department 22:

CV-23-003194 - GODINEZ, JOSE vs FOSTER DAIRY FARMS - Compliance Pursuant to Code Civil Procedure 384 - CONTINUED to August 12, 2026, at 8:30 am in Department 22.

On June 30, 2026, the Settlement Administrator submitted a declaration stating that there were 123 uncashed checks totaling $19,329.52 that remain uncashed after the deadline. The declaration further states that once directed by the Court or counsel, the settlement administrator will remit all uncashed funds to the State Controller’s Office – Unclaimed Property Fund pursuant to the terms of the settlement. Pursuant to the Court’s October 29, 2025 Amended Order Granting Final Approval and Judgment, Class Counsel shall submit a proposed amended judgment to direct that the sum of the unpaid funds be distributed to the State Controller’s Unclaimed Property Fund.

The hearing on this matter is CONTINUED to August 12, 2026, at 8:30 am in Department 22. Class Counsel shall submit the proposed amended judgment at least five court days before the compliance hearing

CV-24-004072 - ZOLLIN, TIMOTHY vs BORRAYES, ALBIN HELVIE DE LEON - Defendants Albin Helvie De Leon Borrayes and Pacific Agri-Products Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment or in Alternative for Summary Adjudication - CONTINUED to September 17, 2026, at 8:30 am in Department 22.

The hearing is continued on the Court's own motion for further review and consideration. The hearing is CONTINUED to September 17, 2026, at 8:30 am in Department 22.

PR-23-000289 - IN THE MATTER OF THE MACHADO FAMILY CREDIT BYPASS TRUST - a) Petitioner's Motion for Consolidation of Trials of Related Actions - CONTINUED to August 13, 2026, at 8:30 am in Department 22; b) Petitioner's Motion to Quash Subpoena for Production of Business Records or, in the Alternative, to Modify or Limit the Subpoena, and for Monetary Sanctions Against Petitioner, Angela Estacio and Her Counsel of Record, Rebecca H. Sem - CONTINUED to August 13, 2026, at 8:30 am in Department 22.

a-b) These matters are CONTINUED on the Court’s own motion to August 13, 2026, at 8:30 am in Department 22 for further review and consideration.

PR-25-001101 - IN THE MATTER OF EOFF, MATTHEW - a) Petitioner’s Motion to Compel Initial Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set Two; Request for Monetary Sanctions - DENIED without prejudice; b) Petitioner’s Motion to Deem Requests for Admissions, Set Two, Admitted; Request for Monetary Sanctions Petitioner's Motion for Sanctions Against Respondent's Counsel Cyril L. Lawrence and Cyril Lawrence, Inc. - DENIED without prejudice; c) Petitioner’s Motion to Compel Initial Responses and Production to Requests for Production, Set Two; Request for Monetary Sanctions - DENIED without prejudice.

a-c) According to the proof of service filed on July 8, 2026, the moving papers for each of these motions were not served until July 8, 2026. Service therefore failed to comply with Code of Civil Procedure § 1005(b); it was untimely. Accordingly, the discovery motions at issue are DENIED without prejudice.

The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Clifford Tong in Department 23:

CV-21-001610 - CATANO, BLANCA vs COMPASS FOODS INC - Compliance Hearing - DROPPED.

Based on the declarations of Tim Cunningham submitted on 3-6-26 and 7-21-26, the Court finds that compliance has been demonstrated and no hearing is necessary.

Class counsel shall submit a form of amended judgment describing the amount of unclaimed settlement funds and directing that the same be remitted to the State Controller’s Office for handling pursuant to its procedures for unclaimed property, as reflected in the parties’ agreement herein.

CV-25-007643 - PITRE, TERENCE vs TRUSTEES OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY - a) Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Production of Documents - CONTINUED, on the Court’s own motion, to September 11, 2026 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 23; b) Defendant's Board of Trustees of California State University, Alfred Petrosky and Jarrett Kotrozo's Motion for Protective Order - CONTINUED, on the Court’s own motion, to September 11, 2026 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 23.

a-b) The Court finds the parties’ meet-and-confer efforts to be insufficient under the circumstances presented herein. Further, the Court believes that the potential exists for the parties to informally resolve or substantially narrow the subject issues if genuine efforts to meet and confer are undertaken in good faith. Therefore, the hearing is continued, as above, for that purpose, and the parties are ordered to meet and confer in person or by online video conference to discuss the issues herein. The parties are further ordered to submit a Joint Status Statement by September 1, 2026, describing their efforts to meet-and-confer and any resolution or narrowing of the issues they were able to achieve.

Discovery is intended to be self-executing, and good faith communication should involve serious efforts at informal negotiation and resolution, not mere bickering between counsel. (See, e.g., Townsend v. Superior Court (EMC Mortgage Co.) (1998) 61 Cal.App.4th 1431; Obregon v. Superior Court (Cimm’s, Inc.) (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 424.) The Court expects the parties to make genuine efforts to informally resolve their differences with due civility to one another and to demonstrate their best efforts in this regard.

Lastly, if the parties are unable to demonstrate significant progress toward informal resolution of the issues herein by the time of the continued hearing, the Court will consider the appointment of a discovery referee to manage discovery and reduce the burden on the Court and the parties.

CV-25-011530 - DIAZ, KIMBERLY vs BLYTHE, HOLLY YVETTE - Defendant's Motion for Orders Compelling Plaintiff, Kimberly Diaz, To (1) Further Respond to Demand for Production and Inspection of Documents, Set One; (2) Pay Costs and Sanctions - DROPPED, at the request of the moving party.

UD-26-000355 - CHAVEZ FAMILY TRUST vs WRIGHT, SHAUN - Defendant’s Motion to Set Aside Default & Default Judgment - DENIED without prejudice.

This matter was continued from July 14, 2026. The Court’s minute order from that date indicates that the Court expressed doubt regarding proper service of the moving papers on Plaintiff’s counsel. The Court then ordered, inter alia, that Defendant “serve all motion documents along with the continued hearing date on Plaintiff’s counsel and file proper proof of service with the Court.” (Emphasis added.)

A proof of service was belatedly filed on July 29, 2026. (Defendant may wish to note for future reference that a proof of service should be filed at least five court days before any hearing date in accordance with rule 3.1300(c) of the California Rules of Court.) The proof of service fails to indicate that Plaintiff’s counsel was served with a notice of the continued hearing date, as required by the Court’s July 14, 2026 minute order.

Accordingly, the Court concludes that the motion is procedurally defective and DENIES it without prejudice.

The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge David Hood in Department 24:

***There are no tentative rulings in Department 24***

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:

UD-25-000569 - JASSO, ROSALINDA vs HERNANDEZ, KELLY PAIGE - Defendant’s Motion to Reverse, Set Aside Judgment/Seal/Wrongful Eviction - HEARING REQUIRED.

UD-26-000500 - MADRUENO, CESAR vs CARDENAS, ALBERTO N - Defendant’s Motion to Set Aside Default & Default Judgment - HEARING REQUIRED.