DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
23CV1030·eldorado·Civil·General Civil
Hearing in about 3 hoursGRANTED

MULLEN v. CRAZY BAKERY, LLC

Motion to Correct Clerical Errors Nunc Pro Tunc

Hearing date
Aug 21, 2026
Department
Not specified
Prevailing
Moving Party
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffMullen
DefendantCrazy Bakery, LLC

Ruling

LAW AND MOTION CALENDAR AUGUST 21, 2026

2. MULLEN v. CRAZY BAKERY, LLC, 23CV1030

Motion to Correct Clerical Errors Nunc Pro Tunc

TENTATIVE RULING # 2: ABSENT OBJECTION, MOTION GRANTED AS REQUESTED. THE

JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THIS CASE ON JUNE 27, 2023, AND THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT

OF PARTIAL SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT FILED ON MARCH 4, 2024, SHALL BOTH

INSERT THE CORRECT NAME OF THE DEFENDANT, “CRAZY GOOD BAKERY AND CAFE,

LLC” IN PLACE OF “CRAZY BAKERY, LLC.” THIS ORDER IS AN ORDER NUNC PRO TUNC.

NO HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE HELD (LEWIS v. SUPERIOR COURT (1999) 19

CAL.4TH 1232, 1247), UNLESS A NOTICE OF INTENT TO APPEAR AND REQUEST FOR

ORAL ARGUMENT IS TRANSMITTED ELECTRONICALLY THROUGH THE COURT’S

WEBSITE OR BY TELEPHONE TO THE COURT AT (530) 573-3042 BY 4:00 P.M. ON THE

DAY THE TENTATIVE RULING IS ISSUED. NOTICE TO ALL PARTIES OF AN INTENT TO

APPEAR MUST BE MADE BY TELEPHONE OR IN PERSON. PROOF OF SERVICE OF SAID

NOTICE MUST BE FILED PRIOR TO OR AT THE HEARING.

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