DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
cl25-04157·solano·Civil·Contract
Hearing about 2 months agoGRANTED

TWO JINN, INC. dba ALADDIN BAIL BONDS v. BARROW, et al.

Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Against Defendant MARLENA COHEN

Hearing date
Jul 21, 2026
Department
3
Prevailing
Plaintiff

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Monetary amounts referenced

$5,846.70

Parties

PlaintiffTWO JINN, INC. dba ALADDIN BAIL BONDS
DefendantBARROW
DefendantMARLENA COHEN

Ruling

DEPARTMENT THREE JUDGE STEPHEN GIZZI 707-207-7303 TENTATIVE RULINGS SCHEDULED FOR TUESDAY, JULY 21, 2026

The parties may appear via Zoom with the exception of trials, trial management conferences, order for examinations and mandatory settlement conferences. The information for the Zoom meeting is set forth below.

The tentative ruling shall become the ruling of the court unless a party desiring to be heard contacts the judicial assistant of the department hearing the matter by 4:30 p.m. on the court day preceding the hearing, and further advises that such party has notified the other side of its intention to request a hearing. A party requesting a hearing must notify all parties of the request to be heard by 4:30.

TWO JINN, INC. dba ALADDIN BAIL BONDS v. BARROW, et al. Case No. cl25-04157

Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Against Defendant MARLENA COHEN

The answer by Defendant MARLENA COHEN to the complaint failed to contest any material allegations other than the amount remaining unpaid on the contract. However, this defendant later has been deemed to have admitted that amount, in admissions requests served on her to which she failed to serve responses. See January 16, 2026 minute order on Plaintiff’s motion for order deeming requests for admission admitted.

The court thus grants Plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings against Defendant MARLENA COHEN, for the claimed remaining balance of $5,846.70.

Costs and attorneys fees must be claimed after judgment, in the manner specified in CRC 3.1700 and 3.1702.

MARTINEZ v. AUTOMATIC BAR CONTROLS, INC. Case No. cu24-06154

Motion by Plaintiff for Preliminary Approval of Class Action/PAGA Settlement

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