Law & Motion Calendar

TO JOIN ZOOM ONLINE:

D17 – Law & Motion 

TO JOIN ZOOM BY PHONE:  

  • Use same Meeting ID and Passcode as listed above
  • +1 669 254 5252

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 Judge Gaskell's Judicial Assistant by telephone at (707) 521-6723, and all other opposing parties of your intent to appear by 4:00 p.m. the court day immediately preceding the day of the hearing. Parties in small claims cases and motions for claims of exemption are exempt from this requirement.

PLEASE NOTE: The Court's Official Court Reporters are "not available" within the meaning of California Rules of Court, Rule 2.956, for court reporting of civil cases.

Tentative Rulings

Friday, August 21, 2026 3:00 p.m.   

8/21 L&M Tentative Rulings/8482

1-2. 24CV05965, White v. Alimpic

This action centers around Plaintiff’s allegation that Defendant arranged for the delivery and installation of a large amount of fill material to Plaintiff’s construction site and that Defendant installed the material improperly, resulting in the County imposing remediation orders and fines on Plaintiff. The matter is before the Court for Plaintiff’s two fundamentally identical motions to compel compliance with Plaintiff’s business-records subpoenas by two third-party trucking companies, Sunny Motors and S&S Motors Trucking (collectively the “Deponents”).

In her declarations accompanying the two motions, Plaintiff’s counsel asserts that “On March 26, 2026, my office served [each Deponent] with a Deposition Subpoena for the Production of Business Records . . . .” (Beletsis Dec, ¶ 5.) The subpoenas are attached as Exhibit A to each declaration. Each Exhibit A consists of a cover letter from the Long Beach attorney-services firm Macro-Pro, followed by the subpoena, followed by a proof of service. Each proof of service indicates service by mail on Katharine Falace, Esq., counsel for Defendant. However, neither indicates service of the subpoena on the actual deponent trucking company.

The hearing on the two motions is CONTINUED to September 11, 2026, at 3:00 p.m. in Department 17. Plaintiff may file POSs reflecting service of the subpoenas on Deponents in compliance with CCP § 2020.220 at any time up to five court days before the new hearing date. If Plaintiff does not do so, the Court will deny the motion.

3. 24CV05296, Fallis v. Loucks

Plaintiff Kathryn Mary Rottman’s counsel Sareen K. Khahk and her firm Bibiyan Law Group, P.C. seek to be relieved as counsel. The Court is inclined to grant the motion but finds that the proofs of service and attorney declaration are inconsistent. In counsel Khakh’s declaration, she affirms that Plaintiff was served with the motion via personal service under Section 3. However, the proofs of service attached to the motion, declaration, and proposed order all indicate service via mail (even though the second paragraph on the proof of service states “served by electronic transmission to the below referenced electronic e-mail address”). Furthermore, counsel provided no proof of service showing that the hearing date was served on all parties. Therefore, the motion is CONTINUED to Wednesday, September 30, 2026, at 3:00 p.m. in Department 17 to allow counsel to correct these inconsistences and serve the new September 30th hearing date on all parties and file a copy of such proof of service with the Court. 

4. 24CV04788, Otani v. Northfield

Defendant Dr. Scott Tweten’s demurrer to Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint is CONTINUED to Wednesday, August 26, 2026, at 3:00 p.m. in Department 17 to be heard with Defendant Christopher Walter’s demurrer to the Second Amended Complaint.