MOHAMMEDHOSSEIN SADGHE VS. NIKOLAS MACIAS, ET AL.
Defendants: Nikolas Macias and Alan De Silva’s Motion to be Relieved as Counsel
Motion type
Parties
Attorneys
Ruling
August 24, 2026 LAW AND MOTION CALENDAR PAGE 4 Judge: HONORABLE DAVID A. SILBERMAN, DEPARTMENT 11 ________________________________________________________________________
02:00 PM 24-CIV-00896 MOHAMMEDHOSSEIN SADGHE VS. NIKOLAS MACIAS, ET AL. LINE 2
MOHAMMEDHOSSEIN SADGHE ELIVAHU YULI KAPLUNOVSKY NIKOLAS MACIAS COREY M. POLLAK
DEFENDANTS: NIKOLAS MACIAS AND ALAN DE SILVA’S MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL
TENTATIVE RULING:
The unopposed motion of Corey M. Pollak to be relieved as counsel for defendants Nikolas Macias, Alan De Silva and Pit Stop Auto Services, LLC is denied without prejudice. The Pollak declaration states that the moving papers were served on defendants by mail at their last known address and that the address was confirmed as current by monthly statements which were not returned as undeliverable. However, the POS indicates defendants were served electronically. If the notice of motion is served electronically, California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(d) provides that it must be accompanied by a declaration stating the electronic address is current. Current is defined to mean that the address has been confirmed within 30 days before filing the motion. The Pollak declaration does not indicate that the electronic service address has been confirmed as current.
However, if Mr. Pollack can cure this procedural deficiency by filing appropriate documents establishing that service was proper and provide courtesy copies to Dept11@sanmateocourt.org prior to 2 p.m. on Monday and appears, the Court will consider granting the motion.
Any party who contests a tentative ruling must email Dept11@sanmateocourt.org with a copy to all other parties by 4:00 p.m. stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests.
Cited authorities
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?”