Defendant's Motion to be Relieved as Counsel
Stanislaus County - Civil - https://www.stanislaus.courts.ca.gov/online-services/tentative-rulings/civil-tentati ve-rulings Civil Tentative Rulings July 15, 2026
The following are the tentative ruling for cases calendared before Judge John R. Mayne in Department 21: ***There are no tentative rulings in Department 21***
The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Stacy P. Speiller in Department 22:
CV-26-000992 - ITRIA VENTURES LLC vs PROTECH PHONE REPAIR INC - Defendant's Motion to be Relieved as Counsel - GRANTED, and unopposed. On June 8, 2026, Attorney Sam Dehbozorgi filed a motion to be relieved as counsel for Mr. Ajaypreet Singh. The motion is unopposed. The unopposed motion is GRANTED, effective on the filing of the proof of service of the signed order on the client. Attorney Dehbozorgi is ordered to file a new proposed order within five court days that checks box 5(a).
CV-26-002034 - ALFARO FARM LABOR CONTRACTOR INC vs ATHWAL INVESTMENTS LP - a) Cross-Defendant Alfaro Farm Labor Contractor Inc.'s Demurrer to Cross Complaint - SUSTAINED with leave to amend. b) Cross Defendant Alfaro Farm Labor Contractor Inc.'s Motion to Strike Cross Complaint - GRANTED with leave to amend. c) Plaintiff/Cross-Defendant's Writ of Attachment - HEARING REQUIRED.
a - b) For the reasons set forth below, the Demurrer to the Cross-Complaint's third and sixth causes of action is SUSTAINED with leave to amend; and the Motion to Strike certain punitive and emotional distress damages is GRANTED with leave to amend. Cross-Complainants shall serve and file any amended cross-complaint no later than 21 days after service of the signed order. Moving Party to submit proposed orders within five court days that conforms to this ruling.
Demurrer and motion to strike
On May 20, 2026, Plaintiff and Cross-Defendant Alfaro Farm Labor Contractor, Inc. ("Alfaro") filed a demurrer to the Cross-Complaint filed by Athwal Investments, L.P., TriNut Farm Management, Inc., Napa Farms LLC, and Sarbjit S. Athwal ("Cross-Complainants"). Alfaro demurs to the Cross-Complaint's third cause of action for fraud and sixth cause of action for negligent misrepresentation. On June 25, 2026, Cross-Complainants filed an opposition. On June 30, 2026, Alfaro filed a reply.
On May 20, 2026, Alfaro filed a motion to strike certain prayers for relief from the Cross-Complaint pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 435 and 436. On June 25, 2026, Cross-Complainants filed an opposition. On June 30, 2026, Alfaro filed a reply.
Demurrer to third cause of action for fraud
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
Alfaro demurs to the third cause of action for fraud on the basis that the Cross-Complaint does not meet the pleading requirements. "The elements of fraud, which give rise to the tort action for deceit, are (a) misrepresentation (false representation, concealment, or nondisclosure); (b) knowledge of falsity (or 'scienter'); (c) intent to defraud, i.e., to induce reliance; (d) justifiable reliance; and (e) resulting damage. [Citations.]" Lazar v. Superior Court (1996) 12 Cal.4th 631, 638 [internal quotation marks omitted].)
"In California, fraud must be pled specifically; general and conclusory allegations do not suffice." (Ibid., 645.) When pleading fraud, "a plaintiff must plead facts which show how, when, where, to whom, and by what means the representations were made. [Citations.]" (Citizens of Humanity, LLC v. Costco Wholesale Corp. (2009) 171 Cal.App.4th 1, 20 [internal quotation marks omitted], disapproved of on inapposite grounds by Kwikset Corp. v. Superior Court (2011) 51 Cal.4th 310.) "When the defendant is a corporate defendant, the plaintiff must further allege the names of the persons who made the representations, their authority to speak, to whom they spoke,