Motion For Order Establishing Admission; Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories and Request For Production
Parties should have at least three (3) copies of any documentary evidence they intend to present in the trial-one for themselves, one for the opposing party, and one for the Court. If the parties upload any evidence to the evidence portal, or intend to present any video evidence, they must have a device available to present such evidence in the courtroom on the day of trial.
The Court Clerk is to provide notice. 6 30-2026-01567697 The Court has read and considered the Defendants’ Motion for Order to Stay Kelly vs. Solomonian Proceedings; Notice of Defendants’ Motion to Consolidate Cases (ROA 71), Declaration of Patrick Solomonian In Support of Motion to Stay Execution of Judgment (ROA 111).
The Court takes Judicial Notice of the existence of 30-2026-01552597-CU- PO-WJC, Notice of Appeal-Limited Civil-Appeals (ROA 82), Notice of Related Case (ROA 103), Notice of Default on Appeal – Appeals (ROA 89), 7/22/2026 Minute Order (ROA 91), 6/23/2026 Minute Order (ROA 43), Amended Notice of Ruling (ROA 47), Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration (ROA 52), Request for Entry of Default (ROA 65), and 7/10/2026 Minute Order (ROA 60).
Defendants move to stay this unlawful detainer action based on the pendency of Orange County Superior Court case No. 30-2026-01552597-CU-PO-WJC, in which they allege that Plaintiff wrongfully caused the death of Plaintiff's and Defendants' mother. Defendants contend that, if successful in that action, issues concerning title to the subject property may arise.
Defendants also argue that a stay is warranted because Plaintiff failed to file a Notice of Related Case pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.300. The Court is not persuaded. Rule 3.300 imposes an obligation on all parties to notify the Court of related actions; it does not assign that responsibility exclusively to any one party. The failure of either party to timely file a Notice of Related Case does not, by itself, constitute a basis to stay these proceedings. The Court further notes that Defendants filed a Notice of Related Case (ROA 103) on July 23, 2026.
Finally, Defendants seek a stay based on the filing of a petition for writ of mandate. The record reflects that on July 22, 2026, the Appellate Division of the Orange County Superior Court issued a notice of default in that proceeding. Defendants have identified no order from the Appellate Division staying the proceedings in this action.
The motion is DENIED. Unlawful detainer actions are summary proceedings that are statutorily entitled to precedence over other civil matters and are intended to be resolved expeditiously. (
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?”
Defendants’ Responses to Special Interrogatories and Request For Production of Documents.
IT IS ORDERED that the Plaintiff's Motion For Order Establishing Admission for Defendants Alan Boyer and Franiaz Mostafavi to Requests for Admission (Set One) be and hereby is granted and that the truth of all specified matters, and the genuineness of all specified documents, in the First Set of Requests for Admissions, propounded by Plaintiff and served on Defendants on June 26, 2026, be deemed admitted.
The Plaintiff's Motion to Compel Defendants’ Responses to Special Interrogatories and Request For Production of Documents is GRANTED. Defendant is hereby ordered to serve full and complete verified responses, without objection to Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents, within 5 days of service of notice hereto. Defendant is hereby ordered to serve full and complete verified responses, without objection to Special Interrogatories, within 5 days of service of notice hereto.
The Court orders the Defendants, Alan Doyer and Farinaz Mostafavi, forthwith to pay sanctions in the amount of $640 to the Plaintiff. This sum shall be made payable to "Jackson Tidus, A Law Corporation" within 5 business days and shall be delivered to 2030 Main Street, Suite 1500, Irvine, CA 92614.
The Plaintiff is ordered to provide notice of this Court’s order. 9 30-2026-01569647 The Court has read and considered the Defendant’s Motion for Temporary Due Tran, Trustee of Stay of Execution for Writ of Possession Pending Hearing on Verified the MDRLL Trust vs. Petition for Relief from Forfeiture (CCP section 1179) and Plaintiff’s Bintliff Opposition.
The Court takes Judicial Notice of the 7/13/2026 Minute Order and the 6/23/2026 Minute Order.
This matter was set for a Court Trial on 6/23/2026 in which the Defendant did not appear. After reviewing the evidence presented, the Court found judgment for the Plaintiff. On 7/13/2026 the Court denied the Defendant’s Ex Pare Application for Stay of Execution of Judgment.
The Court finds that the Defendant failed to meet it’s burden under California Code of Civil Procedure section 1179. Defendant’s Motion is DENIED.
The Court Clerk is to notify the Orange County Sheriff’s Department to proceed with the lockout.
The Plaintiff is to provide notice of the Court’s ruling. 10 30-2026-01570309 The Court has read and considered the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Mycorn vs. Velasquez Unlawful Detainer Or In the Alternative, for Relief from Forfeiture and Grace Time to Vacate (ROA 7) and Plaintiff’s Opposition (ROA 21).
The Court DENIES the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss. A Motion to Dismiss is an improper responsive pleading after being served with a complaint regarding an unlawful detainer. Pursuant to California Code of Civil