Phoenix v. Skydance Skydiving
Motion for summary judgment and/or summary adjudication
Motion type
Parties
Ruling
Case: Phoenix v. Skydance Skydiving Case No. CV2024-1835 Hearing Date: July 22, 2026 Department Thirteen 9:00 a.m.
Motion for summary judgment and/or summary adjudication (Oakley Phoenix)
On the Court’s own motion, defendants Prestar, Inc. and Chris Peterson’s (collectively, “Skydance defendants”) motion for summary judgment and/or summary adjudication to claims brought by Oakley Phoenix is CONTINUED to September 23, 2026, at 9:00 a.m. in Department Thirteen.
Motion for summary judgment and/or summary adjudication (Jae Phoenix)
On the Court’s own motion, Skydance defendants’ motion for summary judgment and/or summary adjudication to claims brought by Jae Phoenix is CONTINUED to September 23, 2026, at 9:00 a.m. in Department Thirteen.
Plaintiff Jae Phoenix (“Jae”) filed an untimely opposition. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (b)(2) [all papers opposing a motion for summary judgment must be filed with the court and a copy served on each party no less than twenty days before the hearing].) Despite being untimely, the Court will consider Jae’s opposition. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1300(d); Rancho Mirage Country Club Homeowners Assn. v. Hazelbaker (2016) 2 Cal.App.5th 252, 262 [stating that “a trial court has broad discretion to accept or reject late-filed papers.”].)
By September 11, 2026, Skydance defendants may file a new reply to Jae’s opposition.
No other documents will be considered.
3 of 4
Cited authorities
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?”