DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
26CU01127·fresno·Civil·Petition to Compromise Minor’s Claim
Hearing about 2 months agoDENIED

Okwelogu v. BSR Trucking Inc., et al

Petition to Compromise Minor’s Claim

Hearing date
Jun 25, 2026
Department
403
Judge
Prevailing
Opposing Party

Motion type

Browse all Petition rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffOkwelogu
DefendantBSR Trucking Inc.

Attorneys

Mark Naglefor Plaintiff

Ruling

(49) Tentative Ruling

Re: Okwelogu v. BSR Trucking Inc., et al Superior Court Case No. 26CU01127

Hearing Date: June 25, 2026 (Dept. 403)

Motion: Petition to Compromise Minor’s Claim

Tentative Ruling:

To deny without prejudice. Petitioner must file an amended petition, with appropriate supporting papers and proposed orders. In the event that oral argument is requested minor is excused from appearing.

Explanation:

The petition to compromise minor’s claim arises from a motor vehicle accident that occurred on December 23, 2021. According to the petition at item 6., the minor received no injuries and, according to the petition at item 12., the minor paid no medical expenses. However, the Mark Nagle Declaration at paragraph two indicates that the minor suffered minor injuries and was evaluated at the emergency room. No records were provided of the costs or the evaluation that occurred at that visit to the emergency room. Depending on the extent of injuries, additional records of recovery may also be required.

Additionally, Attachment 18b(2) of the petition, which identifies the bank the money will be deposited in, is missing from the petition.

Finally, to the extent documents identify petitioner as guardian ad litem, no order granting guardian ad litem status is on the court’s docket.

Pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1312 and Code of Civil Procedure section 1019.5, subdivision (a), no further written order is necessary. The minute order adopting this tentative ruling will serve as the order of the court and service by the clerk will constitute notice of the order.

Tentative Ruling

Issued By: SMC on June 24, 2026. (Judge’s initials) (Date)

8

Cited authorities

Extracting citations 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?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share