Petition to preserve evidence
thus does not allow sufficient time for Respondent to respond to the petition.
The court therefore will CONTINUE the hearing as stated above to ensure Respondent is given sufficient statutory notice.
Counsel for Petitioner shall give notice of this ruling to all interested parties and file a proof of service thereof at least five court days prior to the hearing. Such notice shall be given both by mailing and posting at the property.
10. Anderson vs. Please see the above notice regarding oral argument on Nordstrom, June 25. 2026 Inc. Before the court is the verified petition to preserve evidence 2025-01534989 filed by petitioner Yvonne Anderson (Anderson) on December 19, 2025. As more fully set forth below, the petition is DENIED.
A Petition to preserve evidence under Code of Civil Procedure section 2035.010 et seq. must be served in the manner provided for service of summons. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2035.040, subd. (a).) No proof of service reflecting valid service, or any service whatsoever, on respondent Nordstrom, Inc. (Nordstrom), however, has been filed in this case. Moreover, a notice of hearing must be served on the expected adverse party at least 20 days before the date set for the hearing. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2035.040, subd. (c).) No such notice has been filed here, nor any proof of service reflecting notice.
In addition, the Petition fails to comply with Code of Civil Procedure section 2035.030, subdivision (b)(2), as Anderson has not shown why she was presently unable to bring the intended action. The petition also appears to be inconsistent with Code of Civil Procedure section 2035.010, subdivision (b), which prohibits the use of section 2035.010, et seq. for purposes of either ascertaining the possible existence of a cause of action or defense to it, or of identifying those who might be made parties to an action not yet filed. Indeed, Nordstrom has expressly assured Anderson that it has preserved all surveillance footage.
Based on the foregoing, the petition is DENIED.
Anderson’s counsel is ordered to serve notice of this ruling.
11. Naama vs. Please see the above notice regarding oral argument on Dubai June 25. 2026 Holdings, LLC
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”