DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
25CV-06342·merced·Civil·Sanctions / Case Management
Hearing about 2 months agoAppearance required.

TD Bank USA, N.A. vs. Joseph Ragus

Order to Show Cause Why Sanctions Should Not Be Imposed; Case Management Conference

Hearing date
Jul 23, 2026
Department
9
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Motion for Sanctions rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffTD Bank USA, N.A.
DefendantJoseph Ragus

Ruling

627 W. 21st Street, Merced

Thursday, July 23, 2026 10:00 a.m.

The following tentative rulings shall become the ruling of the court unless a party gives notice of intention to appear as follows: 1. You must call (209) 725-4240 to notify the court of your intent to appear.

2. You must give notice to all other parties before 4:00 p.m. of your intent to appear. Per California Rules of Court, rule 3.1308(a)(1), failure to do both items 1 and 2 will result in no oral argument. Note: Notifying CourtCall (the court’s telephonic appearance provider) of your intent to appear does not satisfy the requirement of notifying the court.

Case No. Title / Description

25CV-06342 TD Bank USA, N.A. vs. Joseph Ragus

Order to Show Cause Why Sanctions Should Not Be Imposed on Plaintiff’s Counsel

Appear to show cause why monetary sanctions should not be imposed on Plaintiff’s counsel of record for failing to attend the case management conference on May 8, 2026, and failure to file a case management conference statement.

Case Management Conference

Appearance required.

26CV-00583 [Parties’ names withheld pursuant to CCP § 1161.2(a)(1)]

Motion to Set Aside Default and Default Judgment

Defendant’s motion to set aside the default and vacate the default judgment is DENIED due to lack of notice. Defendant has not filed proof of service to show Plaintiff received notice of the motion and no written opposition has been filed by Plaintiff indicating waiver of notice. Even if Defendant had provided notice to Plaintiff, the Court notes

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