CRP/VDH Fiddyment Ranch v. Richardson, Latoya Denise

copy of the answer or other pleading proposed to be filed therein, otherwise the application shall not be granted...

Even if defendant demonstrated mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect, which she has not, her motion is not accompanied by a proposed answer or other pleading to be filed.

Finally, possession of the subject property was restored to plaintiff on or about March 3, 2026. Defendant provides no authority for the contention that a judgment for possession may be set aside under these circumstances.

Based on the foregoing, defendant’s motion is denied.

4. M-CV-0096159 CRP/VDH Fiddyment Ranch v. Richardson, Latoya Denise

Application to Stay Execution of Judgment

In this unlawful detainer matter, defendant Latoya Denise Richardson seeks a stay of execution of judgment through July 7, 2026. The court’s June 23, 2026 and June 24, 2026 orders scheduling this hearing directed defendant to serve plaintiff copies of the application for stay and the court’s orders and to file proof of service with the court. These orders further provided, “Failure to timely serve and timely file a proof of service with the court is a sufficient basis for the court to deny further relief.” There is no evidence in the court’s file that defendant served plaintiff the application or the court’s orders. The court declines to extend the stay of execution of judgment and the current stay will expire, as previously ordered, on June 30, 2026 at 11:59 p.m.

5. M-CV-0097039 US Housing Partners v. Hennen, Kevin R

Motion to Stay Execution of Judgment

In this unlawful detainer matter, defendant Kevin Hennen seeks a stay of execution of judgment through December 12, 2026. The court’s June 9, 2026 and June 23, 2026 orders scheduling this hearing directed defendant to serve plaintiff copies of the application for stay and the court’s orders and to file proof of service with the court. These orders further provided, “Failure to timely serve and timely file a proof of service with the court is a sufficient basis for the court to deny further relief.” There is no evidence in the court’s file that defendant served plaintiff the application or the court’s orders. Plaintiff filed an opposition specifying defendant never served these documents. The court declines to extend the stay of execution of judgment. The current stay will expire, per the court’s June 23, 2026 order, on June 30, 2026 at 11:59 p.m.

6. S-CV-0024903 All Points Capital v. Fill, Daniel

The motion to vacate judgment is dropped from calendar as no moving papers were filed with the court.