DecisionDepot
California Legal Research
All cases
CV0006751·marin·Civil·Motion for Leave to Intervene
GRANTED

EDUARDO COLIN-ARRIUGA v. SPEC DRILLING & SHORING, INC., ET AL

MOTION - LEAVE

Hearing date
May 13, 2026
Department
H
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Petition

Parties

PlaintiffEDUARDO COLIN-ARRIUGA
DefendantSPEC DRILLING & SHORING, INC.
OtherFalls Lake Fire and Casualty Company

Ruling

Intervenor Falls Lake Fire and Casualty Company (“Intervenor”) has filed a motion for leave to intervene in the matter. A notice of hearing was served on all parties and no opposition was filed to the motion. A failure to oppose a motion may be deemed a consent to the granting of the motion. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.54, subd. (c).) Failure to oppose a motion may also lead to the presumption that [plaintiff] has no meritorious arguments. (See Laguna Auto Body v. Farmers Ins. Exchange (1991) 231 Cal. App. 3d 481, 489, disapproved of by Garcia v. McCutchen (1997) 16 Cal.4th 469, on other grounds.)

In light of the non-opposition, Intervenor’s motion for leave to intervene is granted. Intervenor shall file its complaint in intervention within 20 days of service of this order.

All parties must comply with Marin County Superior Court Local Rules, Rule 2.10(B) to contest the tentative decision. Parties who request oral argument are required to appear in person or remotely by ZOOM. Regardless of whether a party requests oral argument in accordance with Rule 2.10(B), the prevailing party shall prepare an order consistent with the announced ruling as required by Marin County Superior Court Local Rules, Rule 2.11.

The Zoom appearance information for May, 2026 is as follows: https://marin-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615487764?pwd=Ob4B5J7LLKcpnkxzJjjEOSHNzEGafG.1

Meeting ID: 161 548 7764 Passcode: 502070

If you are unable to join by video, you may join by telephone by calling (669) 254-5252 and using the above-provided passcode. Zoom appearance information may also be found on the Court’s website: https://www.marin.courts.ca.gov

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…

Extracted by Gemini Flash from the ruling text. Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Powered by Gemini Flash Lite. Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Source

Share