Mohammed v. Fresno 62 Investment, LLC et al.

(35) Tentative Ruling

Re: Mohammed v. Fresno 62 Investment, LLC et al. Superior Court Case No. 23CECG04542

Hearing Date: August 6, 2026 (Dept. 502)

Motion: By Defendant Fresno Property Management, Corp. to Enforce Settlement

Tentative Ruling:

To deny as moot. (Code Civ. Proc., § 664.6.)

Explanation:

Defendant Fresno Property Management, Corp. (“Defendant”) seeks to enforce a settlement entered with plaintiff Raj Mohammed (“Plaintiff”). However, the terms of the settlement provide that the matter stay active until the settlement is completed. (Hoppe Decl., ¶ 3, Ex. B, ¶ 10.) On June 15, 2026, and as noted on reply, the matter as to Defendant was dismissed. On reply, Defendant both concedes that the present motion is now moot, but also appears to seek enforcement of the settlement.

From the terms of the settlement, the entry of a dismissal of Defendant suggests that Plaintiff believes the matter is concluded. However, on July 29, 2026, Plaintiff filed an untimely opposition. The court exercises discretion and considers the untimely filing. (Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 3.1300(d).) Nothing in the opposition challenges the fact that on June 15, 2026, Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed Defendant from this action. Rather the opposition appears to state legal theories as to avoiding the settlement agreement, which do not affect the above singular fact. The motion is denied as moot. The request for attorney fees is denied as Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the action as to Defendant.

Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1312(a), and Code of Civil Procedure section 1019.5, subdivision (a), no further written order is necessary. The minute order adopting this tentative ruling will serve as the order of the court and service by the clerk will constitute notice of the order.

Tentative Ruling

Issued By: lmg on 8-4-26. (Judge’s initials) (Date)

4