Demurrer
Stanislaus County - Civil - https://www.stanislaus.courts.ca.gov/online-services/tentative-rulings/civil-tentati ve-rulings Civil Tentative Rulings July 28, 2026
The following is the tentative ruling for a case calendared before Judge John R. Mayne in Department 21:
CV-23-002864 - GUTIERREZ, WENDY MARILYN QUINTERO vs MERCADO, JORGE - Defendants/Cross-Defendants The Finance Group dba Homesmart PV & Associates, Sondra Medina and Angel Covarrubias's Motion Allowing Tardy Disclosure of Expert Witness Information Under CCP Section 2034.710 - DROPPED at the request of the parties. The Court anticipates receiving a Notice of Settlement promptly.
The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Stacy P. Speiller in Department 22:
CV-23-007620 - WRIGHT, ERIKA vs VALLEY INDUSTRIAL PARK LP - Plaintiff Erika Wright's Motion to Continue Trial and Mandatory Settlement Conference Hearing Dates, and to Set Further Case Management Conference - GRANTED, and unopposed.
On June 29, 2026, Plaintiff filed a motion to continue trial and mandatory settlement conference hearing dates, and to set further case management conference pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1332.
On July 16, 2026, Counsel for Defendant/Cross-Defendant/Cross-Complainant CAS Construction filed a declaration in support of Plaintiff's motion stating that CAS Construction does not oppose the motion. The Court was unable to locate any opposition. The unopposed motion is GRANTED.
The Court VACATES the mandatory settlement conference on August 17, 2026 and the trial on September 1, 2026. The Court SETS a Case Management Conference for August 18, 2026, at 8:30 am in Department 22. Parties are to file new case management statements at least five court days before the CMC. Plaintiff is directed to submit within five court days a revised proposed order consistent with this ruling.
PR-25-001101 - IN THE MATTER OF EOFF, MATTHEW - Petitioner's Motion to Deem Requests for Admission, Set Two, Admitted; Request for Monetary Sanctions - CONTINUED to July 30, 2026, at 8:30 am in Department 22.
This matter is CONTINUED on the Court's own motion to July 30, 2026, at 8:30 am in Department 22, to be heard with the related discovery motion on calendar that day.
The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Clifford Tong in Department 23:
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
CV-23-006929 - ZAMARRIPAGONZALEZ, LILLIAN J vs PHENOS COLLECTIVE INC - Plaintiff's Motion to Withdrawal as Attorney of Record - DENIED, without prejudice. No proof of service of the instant motion on the client has been demonstrated. In addition, counsel has failed to demonstrate sufficient attempts to confirm the client's current address.
CV-24-008809 - TIMMINS, LACEY vs CLEARCAPITALCOM INC - Defendant Rocket Mortgage LLC's Motion to Seal Exhibits Attached to Motion for Summary Adjudication Pursuant to CCP 437(C) - DENIED, as MOOT. The Court notes that the referenced Motion for Summary Judgment has been vacated and is no longer pending at this time; therefore, the clerk shall return the lodged documents to the moving party. (Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 2.551.)
CV-26-001848 - ADVANCED RADIOLOGY AND INTERVENTIONAL ASSOCIATES INC vs EOH ACQUISITION GROUP LLC - Defendant's Motion to Quash Service of Summons for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction, or in the Alternative, Motion to Dismiss or Stay for Forum Non Conveniens - DENIED, without prejudice. The McClain declaration fails to comply with the requirements of Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 2015.5, rendering it inadmissible to support Defendant's motion herein.
CV-26-001863 - H, A vs COUNTY OF STANISLAUS - Defendant County of Stanislaus's Demurrer to Plaintiff's Complaint - SUSTAINED, in part, without leave to amend; OVERRULED, in part.
With regard to the First Cause of Action (Violation of Mandatory Duty/Gov. Code Sec. 815.6 - Wrongful Death), the Court finds that Plaintiffs' allegations again fail to demonstrate the applicability of any purported mandatory duty or breach thereof under the referenced Code sections, regulations, or internal department policies. As it appears that Plaintiffs are unable to demonstrate the same in this context, leave to amend is DENIED as to this cause of action.
With regard to the Second and Third Causes of Action for Vicarious Liability (Gov. Code Sec. 815.2)-Wrongful Death and Negligent Hiring, Retention and Supervision-Wrongful Death), the Court finds, preliminarily, that these claims fall within the scope of the Court's previous order granting leave, as they respond to the defects identified in the previous version of Plaintiffs' Complaint.
Further, the Court finds that Plaintiffs' Government Claim substantially complied with the statutory requirements for asserting these theories of liability, as the claim identified the relevant statutory bases in conjunction with the basic facts at issue herein. The Court further finds that the allegations are sufficient at the pleading stage to state the subject claims, specifically to the extent that the alleged failures on the part of County personnel breached an obligation to Deputy Hutsell to address alleged signs of psychological deterioration, which purportedly led to his death.
While the Court has serious reservations as to Plaintiffs' ultimate ability to overcome the pertinent statutory immunities and to demonstrate proximate causation on these facts, it appears that these issues may turn on the existence of extrinsic evidence, which is improper on demurrer. Therefore, the demurrer to Plaintiffs' Second and Third Causes of Action is OVERRULED.
The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge David Hood in Department 24: ***There are no tentative rulings in Department 24***
The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Commissioner Jared D. Beeson in Department 19 located at the Turlock Division at 300 Starr Avenue, Turlock, CA:
UD-26-000416 - JATT FARMS INC vs SINGH, SIMARJIT - Defendant's Motion for Reconsideration - HEARING REQUIRED.