DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
34-2022-00319929-CU-BC-GDS·sacramento·Civil·Contract
Hearing 12 days agoCONTINUED

700 Block Commercial LP vs. Matt Delima

Motion to Vacate Final Statement of Decision and Judgment

Hearing date
Aug 10, 2026
Department
8D
Judge
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Aug 21, 2026

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

Plaintiff700 Block Commercial LP
DefendantMatt Delima

Ruling

34-2022-00319929-CU-BC-GDS: 700 Block Commercial LP vs. Matt Delima 08/10/2026 Hearing on Motion to Vacate Final Statement of Decision and Judgment in Department 8D

Tentative Ruling

NOTICE:

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that effective April 13, 2026, this department has moved to the Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye courthouse located at 500 G Street in Sacramento, CA 95814. All hearings noticed for Department 25 will be heard in Department 8D of the new courthouse. Parties who wish to contest the tentative ruling below must: (1) request a hearing by calling the Department 8D Oral Argument Request Line at (916) 874-7719 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. The Court encourages parties to appear remotely for the hearing on the tentative ruling through the Court’s Zoom Application. But, any party wishing to appear in person may do so, provided that party notifies the Court by 4:00 the Court day before the hearing. If a hearing is requested, the Court assumes that all parties will appear remotely via Zoom unless the Court orders in-person attendance.

The parties may join the Zoom session for hearing on the tentative ruling by audio and/or video through the following link: https://saccourt-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/16113421868 SIP Address: 16113421868@sip.zoomgov.com (833) 568-8864 ID: 16113421868 Parties requesting services of a court reporter will need to arrange for private court reporter services at their own expense, pursuant to Government code §68086 and California Rules of Court, Rule 2.956. Requirements for requesting a court reporter are listed in the Policy for Official Reporter Pro Tempore available on the Sacramento

34-2022-00319929-CU-BC-GDS: 700 Block Commercial LP vs. Matt Delima 08/10/2026 Hearing on Motion to Vacate Final Statement of Decision and Judgment in Department 8D

Superior Court website at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp-6a.pdf. Parties may contact Court-Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore by utilizing the list of Court Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore available at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp-13.Pdf A Stipulation and Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (CV/E-206) is required to be signed by each party, the private court reporter, and the Judge prior to the hearing, if not using a reporter from the Court’s Approved Official Reporter Pro Tempore list.

Once the form is signed it must be filed with the clerk. If a litigant has been granted a fee waiver and requests a court reporter, the party must submit a Request for Court Reporter by a Party with a Fee Waiver (CV/E-211) and it must be filed with the clerk at least 10 days prior to the hearing or at the time the proceeding is scheduled if less than 10 days away. Once approved, the clerk will be forward the form to the Court Reporter’s Office and an official reporter will be provided

Because this motion seeks to vacate the Final Statement of Decision and Judgment issued by Judge Mudryk after she presided over the court trial, this matter is continued to be heard by Judge Mudryk on August 21, 2026 at 10:30 a.m. in Department 7B.

On the Court's own motion, the Hearing on Motion to Vacate Final Statement of Decision and Judgment scheduled for 08/10/2026 is continued to 08/21/2026 at 10:30 AM in Department 7B at Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye Courthouse.

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