DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
23CV004147·sacramento·Civil·Case Management
Hearing over 2 years agoCONTINUED

SCHNEIDER vs HARDESTY

Case Management Conference

Hearing date
May 10, 2024
Department
38
Judge
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
May 23, 2025
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffSCHNEIDER
DefendantHARDESTY

Ruling

23CV004147: SCHNEIDER vs HARDESTY 05/10/2024 Case Management Conference in Department 38

Tentative Ruling

Notices: Any party who wishes to contest the tentative ruling below must: (1) request a hearing by calling the clerk in Department 38 at (916) 874-5226 no later than 4:00 p.m. on the Court day before the scheduled CMC, and (2) advise opposing counsel of the request. If a hearing is not requested by 4:00 p.m. on the Court day before the scheduled CMC, the tentative ruling will become the final order of the Court.

If a hearing is requested, the Court assumes that all parties will appear remotely via Zoom unless the Court orders in-person attendance. The Department 38 Zoom ID is: 161 0836 2593. To appear telephonically via Zoom, call (833) 568-8864 and enter the Department 38 Zoom ID referenced above.

Court’s Tentative Ruling:

No appearance is required under the following conditions:

New Case Management Statements shall be filed by all parties no later than 15 days prior to the hearing pursuant to Local Rule 2.51.

On the Court's own motion, the Case Management Conference scheduled for 05/10/2024 is continued to 05/23/2025 at 08:30 AM in Department 38 at Gordon D. Schaber Superior Court.

The Plaintiff is directed to serve the Defendants with the Complaint and shall diligently proceed to obtain the responsive pleading, default, or dismissal of Defendants as to the Complaint.

Cited authorities

Extracting citations 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

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share