DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
24CV001391·sacramento·Civil·Personal Injury
Hearing about 2 months agoCONTINUED

Jane Doe ND-379

Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel

Hearing date
Jul 17, 2026
Department
8B
Judge
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Jul 24, 2026

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffJane Doe ND-379

Ruling

JCCP5276: CDCR Women's Facilities Cases 07/17/2026 Status Conference Compliance Hearing Re: 06-26-2026 Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel Jane Doe ND-379 (Original Case No. 24CV001391) in Department 8B

Tentative Ruling

On June 26, 2026, the Court ruled on several motions to be relieved as counsel. However, the Court noted that Counsel’s motions and Proposed Orders revealed the relevant Plaintiffs' last known addresses, without regard to the fact that Plaintiffs are proceeding under pseudonyms. The Court directed the Clerk to change the security clearance of these documents and ordered Counsel to file properly redacted versions. Counsel filed the requested Proposed Order but did not file the requested redacted copy of the motion for ND-379. The Court continued the Compliance Hearing to 7/17/26 and ordered counsel to comply forthwith. Counsel has still not complied. The Court will continue this matter once more to July 24, 2026 at 1:30 p.m. Appearances will be required if the redacted motion is not filed by July 22, 2026.

On the Court's own motion, the Status Conference Compliance Hearing Re: 06-26-2026 Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel Jane Doe ND-379 (Original Case No. 24CV001391) scheduled for 07/17/2026 is continued to 07/24/2026 at 01:30 PM in Department 8B at Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye Courthouse.

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