Sep 16, 2019
Wednesday, September 11, 2019, 2:00 p.m.
Courtroom 19 – Hon. Elliot Daum – to be called in Courtroom 17
3035 Cleveland Avenue, Suite 200, Santa Rosa
CourtCall is available for all Law & Motion appearances, EXCEPT motions for claims of exemption which are mandatory appearances.   Please contact CourtCall directly at (888) 882-6878.
The following tentative rulings will become the ruling of the Court unless a party desires to be heard. If you desire to appear and present oral argument as to any motion, YOU MUST notify the Court by telephone at (707) 521-6602, and all other opposing parties of your intent to appear by 4:00 p.m. Tuesday, September 10, 2019. Parties in motions for claims of exemption are exempt from this requirement.
PLEASE NOTE: The Court WILL provide a Court Reporter for this calendar. If there are any concerns, please contact the Court at the number provided above.

 1.        MCV-218644, Portfolio Recovery v. Weldon



            Motion to Vacate Judgment GRANTED. The judgment is hereby vacated and the matter is dismissed without prejudice in accordance with the request in the notice of motion.
            The prevailing party is to prepare an order conforming with the order of the Court, submitting it to the opposing party for review five days prior to submitting it to the Court.

2.        SCV-258804, Deas v. G&G



Defendant’s motion to compel responses to its supplemental interrogatory and supplemental request for production of documents is GRANTED. Plaintiff is ORDERED to provide full and complete verified responses, without objections, within ten (10) days of service of the Court’s final ruling. Defendant’s request for $1,392.00 in monetary sanctions is also GRANTED. Plaintiff is ORDERED to pay $1,392.00 in sanctions to Defendant within ten (10) days of service of the Court’s final ruling.     

3.        SCV-259837, London v. Citibank, N.A.



            Appearances required by all parties, including Plaintiffs Michael and Karen London. Courtcall is available.
Plaintiffs’ counsels’ motion to be relieved is denied without prejudice.
The motion is defective for the following reasons:
There is no proof of service of the proposed order as required by California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362(d).
Additionally, the declaration of counsel is not signed and is not on the mandatory Judicial Council form as required by California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362(c). Subdivision (c) of Rule 3.1362 provides in relevant part: “The motion to be relieved as counsel must be accompanied by a declaration on the Declaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel--Civil (form MC-052).”As stated in Weil and Brown, Cal. Prac. Guide Civ. Pro. Before Trial Ch. 9(I)-G, §9:385.11: “Failure to use these forms is a common error in seeking to be relieved as counsel. Judges should never grant the motion if it is not on the Judicial Council forms.”
If Counsel chooses to appear to either gainsay this tentative ruling or to bring corrective documentation consistent with the Rules of Court, the Court will entertain those amendments subject to proper notice.
*This is the end of the Tentative Rulings*
© 2019 Superior Court of Sonoma County