Plaintiff’s Motion to Continue Trial, Mandatory Settlement Conference, Trial Management Conference, and Related Pretrial Deadlines
SAVANHA WALKER v. MONTEREY PENINSULA HOTELS GROUP, LP; HARBHAJAN DADWAL (25CV002410) Plaintiff’s Motion to Continue Trial, Mandatory Settlement Conference, Trial Management Conference, and Related Pretrial Deadlines By this motion, Plaintiff seeks a trial continuance to provide the parties with additional time to pursue settlement through private mediation. The motion is uncontested, and the Defendants have stipulated in writing to the requested relief. The Motion is GRANTED. The following dates are vacated: • November 16, 2026 Trial • November 12, 2026 Trial Management Conference • October 13, 2026 Mandatory Settlement Conference
The case is set for a case management conference on September 29, 2026, at 9:30 a.m. in Dept. 13A for purposes of resetting a trial date and related pretrial dates. All discovery deadlines will run from the new trial date. The court expects the parties to have scheduled a mediation by the time of the case management conference. Plaintiff is to prepare the court’s order consistent with the tentative ruling. NOTE RE: TENTATIVE RULING This tentative ruling becomes the court’s order, and no hearing shall be held unless one of the parties contests it by complying with Rule 3.1308 of the California Rules of Court and Monterey County Local Rule 7.9.
Those parties wishing to present an oral argument must notify all other parties and the Court no later than 4:00 p.m. on the court day before the hearing; otherwise, NO ORAL ARGUMENT WILL BE PERMITTED, AND THE TENTATIVE RULING WILL BECOME THE ORDER OF THE COURT AND THE HEARING VACATED. You must notify the court by emailing TentativeRulings@monterey.courts.ca.gov or by telephoning the Calendar Department at (831) 647-5800, extension 3040, before 4:00 p.m. on the court day before the hearing.
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?”