DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
24CV016129·sacramento·Civil·Case Management Conference
Hearing 8 months agoCONTINUED

BRIDGES vs CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Case Management Conference

Hearing date
Jan 2, 2026
Department
25
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
May 8, 2026
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffBRIDGES
DefendantCALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Ruling

24CV016129: BRIDGES vs CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 01/02/2026 Case Management Conference in Department 25

Tentative Ruling

Notices:

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that any oral arguments regarding this tentative ruling will be heard in Department 25, located at 720 9th Street, Sacramento, CA, the Hon. Peter K. Southworth presiding. Should argument be requested by either party, the requesting party must: (1) request a hearing by calling the Case Management Oral Argument Request Line at (916) 874- 5463 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 shall become the final order of the Court.

If a hearing is requested, the Court assumes all parties will appear remotely via Zoom unless the Court orders in-person attendance. The Department 25 Zoom ID is: 161 1342 1868. To appear telephonically via Zoom, call (833) 568-8864 and enter the Department 25 Zoom ID referenced above.

Court’s Tentative Ruling:

No appearance is required under the following conditions:

On the Court's own motion, the Case Management Conference scheduled for 01/02/2026 is continued to 05/08/2026 at 9:00 AM in Department 25 at Gordon D. Schaber Superior Court.

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.

Case Management Conference has been continued to allow time for the Demurrer.

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