DecisionDepot
California Legal Research
All cases
CL0003210·nevada·Civil·Collection
OSC re Dismissal is vacated.

WELLS FARGO BANK, NA vs. MARTIN B BARRON JR

OSC re Dismissal

Hearing date
Mar 23, 2026
Department
Judge
Prevailing
Plaintiff
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Other

Parties

PlaintiffWELLS FARGO BANK, NA
DefendantMARTIN B BARRON JR

Ruling

March 23, 2026 Truckee Civil Law & Motion Tentative Rulings

1. CL0003210 WELLS FARGO BANK, NA vs. MARTIN B BARRON JR, an individual

No appearances required. In light of the proof of service of the Summons and Complaint filed on March 9, 2026, the OSC re Dismissal is vacated.

2. CL0003462 Velocity Investments LLC vs. Jessica Kepfer

Appearance required by Plaintiff to show cause as to why this case should not be dismissed and/or Plaintiff sanctioned for failure to serve the Summons and Complaint on Defendant despite the fact this case has been pending for over four (4) months. Absent good cause being shown, the Court intends, on its own motion, to set the matter for dismissal pursuant to CCP section 583.420 and vacate the trial date set for July 17, 2026 at 11:00 a.m.

3. CL0003511 Barclays Bank Delaware vs. Owen Manville

No appearances required. On the Court’s own motion and in light of the Declaration of Non- Service filed by Plaintiff, the Court continues the OSC re Dismissal to May 11, 2026 at 1:30 p.m. in Dept. A. Plaintiff shall file a proof of service, an application to serve by publication (if deemed appropriate), or a request for dismissal of defendant in advance of the continued order to show cause date.

4. CL0003535 American Express National Bank vs. Heidi Petyo et al

No appearances required. On the Court’s own motion and in light of the Declaration filed by counsel for Plaintiff, the Court continues the OSC re Dismissal to May 11, 2026 at 1:30 p.m. in Dept. A. Plaintiff shall file a proof of service, an application to serve by publication (if deemed appropriate), or a request for dismissal of Defendant The Good Wolf Brewing Company LLC in advance of the continued order to show cause date.

5. CU0001835 Christopher Holden vs. India Ledward

Appearance required by Plaintiff to show cause as to why this case should not be dismissed and/or Plaintiff sanctioned for failure to file a Request for Dismissal despite the fact a Notice of Settlement was filed over three (3) months ago. Absent good cause being shown, the Court intends, on its own motion, to set the matter for dismissal pursuant to CCP section 583.420.

6. CU0002654 Luz Maria Alanis Mireles vs. Justin Oconnor

This matter is before the Court on a petition for compromise of minor’s claims. Appearances by counsel for Petitioner and the Petition/guardian ad litem are required. Petitioner is directed to file a corrected Petition to correct the below deficiencies prior to the hearing. If not filed prior to the hearing, the Court intends to continue the hearing to April 13, 2026 at 1:30 p.m.

1

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