Thompson vs. Enriching Lives, Inc.
Motion to continue the action
Motion type
Parties
Ruling
4 (Improper legal conclusion, no basis, mischaracterizes evidence – Related only to statements regarding McDaniel as noted above; overruled as to Plaintiff.)
Overruled as to Nos. 2 (Opp. Ex. B includes copy of estimate sent to McDaniel); 3 and 6 (none of the objections apply); 4 (overruled as to Plaintiff only; objections sustained as to McDaniel); 5 (personal experience, nothing in the objected to item refers to McDaniel’s liability).
Plaintiff shall give notice.
308 Thompson vs. Plaintiff Shane Thompson’s unopposed motion to Enriching Lives, continue the action on behalf of deceased plaintiff Inc. Daniel Thompson is GRANTED. (See Code of Civ. Proc. § 377.31.)
Plaintiff Shane Thompson has shown he is decedent’s successor-in-interest within the meaning of Code of Civ. Proc. § 377.11. (See Declaration of Shane Thompson ¶¶ 1-6.)
Plaintiff Shane Thompson to give notice.
309 Moshabad vs. Before the court is a Motion to Stay the Case Balboa Capital (Motion) pending the outcome of appeal on the Corporation underlying arbitration order filed by defendants Balboa Capital Corporation and Ameris Bank (collectively referred to as Defendants). The Motion is GRANTED.
The main issue on the motion is whether the Motion is controlled by the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) or by California state law. The court finds that under the express terms of the arbitration agreement between Defendants and plaintiff Sharona Moshabad (Plaintiff), the FAA applies. (ROA 17; Lamps Plus, Inc. v. Varela (2019) 587 U.S. 176, 183.) As the current appeal pertains to
Cited authorities
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.