| Case | County / Judge | Motion | Ruling | Date |
|---|
Motion to be Relieved as Attorney of Record for Plaintiff
14. Nebedum v. Lennar Homes, LLC, et al, Case No. CIVSB2438212 Motion to be Relieved as Attorney of Record for Plaintiff 5/8/26, 9:00 a.m., S-17 This matter was continued from its initial hearing date of March 12, 2026, to allow for a supplemental declaration
Here, the Anyiam Law Firm seeks to be relieved as counsel for Plaintiff. The motion is supported by a declaration establishing good cause pursuant to rule 1.16(b) of the Rules of Court. The Court is inclined to GRANT this unopposed motion. Relief is not final until the ruling is served on Plaintiff and a filed proof of service demonstrating that service.
*** *** *** 14. Lozano v. American New Tires LLC, et al, Case No. CIVSB2517208 Motion to be Relieved as Attorney of Record for Defendant GMA General Collision Motion to be Relieved as Attorney of Record for Defendants Galdamez and Bonilla 5/8/26, 9:00 a.m., S-17 The Court would CONTINUE the matter to allow for supplemental declarations. While the Court is mindful that the declarations need to respect the privilege of attorney-client communications, no facts or even general averments are provided to support the motions. Rather, the “declarations” simply cite the rules of professional conduct, relevant law, and then indicate that the Court may inquire in camera. A recitation of law is not a declaration nor is it, alone, sufficient to support the motions.
*** *** *** 18. Fajardo v. Veg-Fresh Farms, Inc., et al, Case No. CIVSB2102912 Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement 5/8/26, 1:30 p.m., Dept. S-17 This matter was continued from its initial hearing date of March 20, 2026
The Court would CONTINUE one last time.
At the last hearing, the Court continued the matter for clarification regarding the PAGA period, which appeared to be beyond the statute of limitations. (See Tentative, March 30, 2026.) At the hearing, the parties assured the Court that supplemental filings would rectify the concern. However, no supplemental filings have been submitted.
*** *** ***
2
Extracted by Gemini Flash 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
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
Powered by Gemini Flash Lite. Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.