EAST REX USA, INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION VS. SEAKER & SONS, A CALIFORNIA GENERAL PARTNERSHIP ET AL
MOTION TO ADMIT COUNSEL PRO HAC VICE
Motion type
Parties
Attorneys
Ruling
Set for Law and Motion/Discovery Calendar on Monday, April 20, 2026, Line 1. DEFENDANTs ANSON CHAN AN INDIVIDUAL, SEAKER & SONS, YINREX USA, INC., and BONDS LAND INVESTMENT CO., LTD. MOTION TO ADMIT COUNSEL PRO HAC VICE.
Moving Defendants' unopposed Motion to Admit Pro Hac Vice Counsel Andrew Coleman is GRANTED. Good cause appearing, counsel Andrew Coleman may appear as counsel pro hac vice for Moving Party in this action. Moving Party shall 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
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.