DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
2026CUBC060755·ventura·Civil·Civil Litigation
Hearing about 2 months agoCounsel for both Defendants ordered to appear at the CMC

LUIS ALBERTO ZARATE ZARATE vs GENERAL MOTORS LLC, et al.

Mandatory Appearance CMC; Order to Show Cause Re Sanctions/Dismissal for Failure to File Proof of Service/Default

Hearing date
Jul 23, 2026
Department
44
Judge
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Monetary amounts referenced

$200

Parties

PlaintiffLUIS ALBERTO ZARATE ZARATE
DefendantGENERAL MOTORS LLC

Ruling

2026CUBC060755: LUIS ALBERTO ZARATE ZARATE vs GENERAL MOTORS LLC, et al. 07/23/2026 in Department 44 MANDATORY APPEARANCE CMC/Order to Show Cause Re Sanctions/Dismissal for Failure to File Proof of Service/Default

This Case Management Order (“CMO”) shall govern this litigation. If the parties have questions or concerns with any aspect of the CMO, they are directed to voice those concerns at the case management conference. REMOTE APPEARANCES The Court allows Zoom appearances as a courtesy to parties and counsel. The Court does not accommodate Court Call appearances. You MUST register by 3:00 p.m. the court day before your hearing or you will be DENIED entry to the hearing: ZOOM Registration Link: https://ventura-courts-ca.zoom.us/meeting/register/iqN7uhQSQMuOqs-9TQXgEQ No advance notice is required to appear in person.

DEPARTMENT RULES Parties and counsel shall follow the Department 44 rules and Zoom protocols, available at https://www2.ventura.courts.ca.gov/Courtroom/C44. The Court updates these rules from time to time. Counsel and parties are required to follow the operative rules. CASE STATUS The case is at issue and jury fees have been posted, however, neither of the Defendants timely filed a case management statement as required by CRC 3.725. The Court will set trial to the extent Defendants agree to rely on the information provided in Plaintiff’s case management statement.

If Defendants wish to file a statement, the Court will continue the case management conference together with an OSC why counsel should not be sanctioned under CRC 177.50 in the amount of $200 for failure to timely file a case management statement as required by CRC 3.725. Counsel for both Defendants are ordered to appear at the CMC and indicate whether they will rely on Plaintiff’s CMS or seek a continuance of this CMC. LITIGATION DATES:

Event Date

Trial January 31, 2028, at 1:30 p.m.

2026CUBC060755: LUIS ALBERTO ZARATE ZARATE vs GENERAL MOTORS LLC, et al.

Pretrial Conference January 21, 2028, at 8:30 a.m.

All other Litigation Dates & Deadlines Per Code of Civil Procedure

JURY TRIAL The Court sets this matter for a 5-day jury trial on the above trial date in Department 44 of the Ventura County Superior Court. The trial date is a date certain for trial under California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1332. The Court will not grant any continuances but for a request made pursuant to, and good cause showing under, Rule 3.1332. Trial counsel are ordered to attend trial in person. PRETRIAL CONFERENCE The Court also sets a Pretrial Conference on the above pretrial conference date in Department 44.

The parties are ordered to complete mediation at least 30 days prior to the pretrial conference, and file a joint pretrial conference report in accordance with the Local Rules for Department 44, which rules are incorporated into and made part of this Case Management Order. Trial counsel are ordered to appear at the Pretrial Conference, and may attend the pretrial conference remotely so long as trial counsel provides timely registration of their intent to appear remotely in accordance with the Court’s local rules.

2

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