DecisionDepot
California Legal Research
All cases
CGC25624500·sf·Civil·Insurance Litigation
DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE

PHILADELPHIA INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY, VS. DISCOUNT PLUMBING INC. D/B/A AFFORDABLE ROOTER

MOTION TO ADMIT COUNSEL PRO HAC VICE

Hearing date
Jan 21, 2026
Department
302
Judge
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Other

Parties

PlaintiffPHILADELPHIA INDEMNITY INSURANCE COMPANY
DefendantDISCOUNT PLUMBING INC. D/B/A AFFORDABLE ROOTER

Attorneys

Thaddeus S. Kirkfor Plaintiff

Ruling

Set for Law and Motion/Discovery Calendar on Wednesday January 21, 2026, Line 9.

2 - Plaintiff Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company's unopposed Motion to Admit Counsel Thaddeus S. Kirk Pro Hac Vice is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

Counsel Thaddeus S. Kirk has failed to declare '[t]he title of each court and cause in which the applicant has filed an application to appear as counsel pro hac vice in this state in the preceding two years, the date of each application, and whether or not it was granted." (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 9.40(d)(5).) Counsel declares he "ha[s] not been admitted nor applied pro hac vice in the state of California in the past two years for any state Superior Court, " Counsel's testimony begs the question whether he has applied to appear PHV in the state appellate courts? The clear intent of the requirement is to assure the court counsel is not seeking to appear PHV with such frequency that they should seek admission to the State Bar rather than PHV status. On this record the court cannot make the necessary determination. It is notable counsel's application was previously denied for failing to satisfy the requirements of rule 9.40, which are straightforward. The court is not inclined to consider an unlimited number of applications regarding the same counsel.

Moving Party is ordered to prepare a proposed order which repeats the above text verbatim and email it to contestdept302tr@sftc.org prior to the time set for hearing.

For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 302 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 302 Zoom ID 160 409 7690; Passcode 516287.) To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number.

Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept302tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. The text of the email shall include the name and contact information, including email address, of the attorney or party who will appear at the hearing.

The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion Department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear in the courtroom or remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript may be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: their name, CSR and telephone numbers, and their individual work email address. =(302/JMQ) | |

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