N/A
On 6/4/26, the Court denied defense counsel’s prior motion due to multiple defects for failing to comply with Rules of Court, Rule 1362. (ROA 44.) This instant motion was filed on 6/8/26. Many of the same defects remain, necessitating denial of the instant motion.
This motion still fails to comply with the requirements of Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362.
The notice of motion fails to identify the correct address for the Court. As previously stated in the Court’s Minute Order dated 6/8/26, the address listed within the caption is the address for the Civil Complex Center, despite Department C10 being located in the Central Justice Center, located at 700 Civic Center Drive West, Santa Ana, CA 92701. Based on the above, the client did not receive adequate notice of the hearing.
Further, the mandatory declaration still left the entirety of ¶3, subd. (b) blank. (ROA 46.) Consequently, there is no indication the client’s address was confirmed. (See ¶3(b)(1) of ROA 46.) Similarly, Counsel offered no information which supports proceeding, despite a lack of confirmation. (See ¶3(b)(2) and (c) of ROA 46.) The above fails to comply with Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362(d)(1).
Lastly, on 6/4/26, Moving Attorney was ordered to give notice of the hearing (ROA 44) and the record does not reflect any notice was provided.
The moving party to give notice. 2 Huynh OFF Calendar vs. Tran 1:3 0 p. m. 1 Abers OFF Calendar man vs. Robert Loftus Constr uction Inc 2 Abdelm Defendants State Farm General Ins. Co.’s motion for summary judgment of the first through third alek causes of action of the complaint by Plaintiffs Fady Abdelmalek and St. Moses the Black, LLC vs. is GRANTED. State Farm Genera A. Legal Standard l Insura Under Code of Civil Procedure § 437c(c), a summary judgment motion shall be granted if all the nce papers submitted show there is no triable issue as to any material fact and the moving party is entitled Compa to judgment as a matter of law. ny A “party moving for summary judgment bears an initial burden of production to make a prima facie showing of the nonexistence of any triable issue of material fact . . . .” (Aguilar v.
Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 850.) “A prima facie showing is one that is sufficient to support the position of the party in question.” (Id. at 851.) A plaintiff moving for summary judgment satisfies
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?”