DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
23CECG00856·fresno·Probate·Petition to Exceed Fee Schedule
Hearing 9 days agoGRANTED

Ron Miller Enterprises Inc. v. Alex Delamora

Plaintiff’s Petition to Exceed Fee Schedule

Hearing date
Aug 13, 2026
Department
501
Prevailing
Moving Party
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Petition rulings statewide →

Monetary amounts referenced

$10,000

Parties

PlaintiffRon Miller Enterprises Inc.
DefendantAlex Delamora

Ruling

(37) Tentative Ruling

Re: Ron Miller Enterprises Inc. v. Alex Delamora Superior Court Case No. 23CECG00856

Hearing Date: August 13, 2026 (Dept. 501)

Motion: Plaintiff’s Petition to Exceed Fee Schedule

Tentative Ruling:

To grant in the reduced amount of $10,000. (Super. Ct. Fresno County, Local Rules, Appendix A1, subd. (A)(3).) Counsel should file an amended proposed default judgment (Judicial Council Form JUD-100) consistent with this ruling within ten days of service of the minute order by the clerk.

Explanation:

The court has reviewed plaintiff’s petition consistent with Fresno Superior Court Local Rules Appendix A1, subdivision (A)(3). Plaintiff’s counsel has demonstrated that counsel’s efforts and time in this matter warrants an award exceeding the fee schedule.

The court previously continued this matter for counsel to provide a supplemental declaration demonstrating hours worked solely in this matter and reducing a five percent overhead charge. Counsel provided the supplemental declaration which did remove the overhead charges and some, but not all, fees associated with other matters. Having reviewed counsel’s billing, the court is inclined to allow for attorney’s fees in the amount of $10,000.

Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1312(a), and Code of Civil Procedure section 1019.5, subdivision (a), no further written order is necessary. The minute order adopting this tentative ruling will serve as the order of the court and service by the clerk will constitute notice of the order.

Tentative Ruling

Issued By: KCK on 08/12/26. (Judge’s initials) (Date)

5

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