Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney's Fees
Stanislaus County - Civil - https://www.stanislaus.courts.ca.gov/online-services/tentative-rulings/civil-tentati ve-rulings Civil Tentative Rulings August 14, 2026
The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge John R. Mayne in Department 21:
CV-23-001402 - MARQUEZ, CESAR JIMENEZ vs GONZALEZ & CASAS FLC CORP - Plaintiff Cesar Jimenez Marquez's Motion to Enforce Settlement and Compel Payment by Defendants According to the Terms of the Settlement Agreement, or in the Alternative, to Enter Judgment Against Defendants Gonzalez & Casas FLC Corp and Oscar Vivanco - HEARING REQUIRED. The Court has questions. Did Mr. Vivanco agree to personally guarantee the settlement? Why should judgment be for more than the amount owed by contract?
CV-26-001562 - AMAYA, SALVINO vs DOCTORS MEDICAL CENTER OF MODESTO INC - Defendant's Amended Petition to Compel Arbitration and to Stay Action Pending Completion of Arbitration Proceeding - CONTINUED on the Court's own motion to September 3, 2026 at 8:30 a.m. The Court needs more time to consider Plaintiff's response.
CV-26-002823 - COLE, KAYLA RENEE vs UHAUL BUSINESS CONSULTANTS' INC - Defendant U-Haul Co. of California's Motion to Compel Arbitration and to Stay Proceedings - HEARING REQUIRED. The Court still doesn't have the First Amended Complaint. It appears to have been rejected again for lack of a proof of service.
The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Stacy P. Speiller in Department 22: ***There are no Tentative Rulings for Department 22***
The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Clifford Tong in Department 23:
CV-22-004004 - GRAY, EDWARD vs SKY HOTELS INC - Plaintiff's Motion for Final Approval of Class Action and PAGA Settlement and Class Counsel Award and Service Awards - DENIED, without prejudice. Proof of service demonstrates notice of less than 16 court days, as required by Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 1005(b) and contemplated by the Court's order granting preliminary approval of the instant settlement on 1-22-26.
CV-25-002053 - MILLER, JOSHUA vs GENERAL MOTORS LLC - Plaintiff's Motion for Attorney's Fees for Time Actually Expended and Reasonably Incurred - CONTINUED, on the Court's own motion, to October 14, 2026 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 23. The Court notes that counsel herein has experience with these types of matters and is presumably well-acquainted with the law governing the determination of reasonable fees and expenses pursuant to the statute.
Nevertheless, these types of fee disputes are commonplace and appear to reflect a default pattern of refusing to compromise in favor of "trying their luck" before the court, thus wasting judicial resources in the hopes of obtaining a ruling favoring their side. The Court believes that the potential exists for the parties to informally resolve the issues presented herein if genuine efforts to meet and confer as to such issues are undertaken in good faith.
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?”
Therefore, the hearing is continued, as above, for that purpose, and the parties are ordered to meet and confer in person or by online video conference to discuss the issues herein. The parties are further ordered to submit a Joint Status Statement by October 2, 2026, describing their efforts to meet-and-confer and any resolution or narrowing of the issues they were able to achieve.
The Court strongly encourages the parties to make genuine efforts to informally resolve their differences with due civility to one another. Should counsel for the parties be unable to reach a reasonable compromise of any of the issues presented by the instant motion, the Court may require personal appearances at the time of the continued