DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CIVSB2326422·sanbernardino·Civil·Civil
Hearing in about 2 hoursGRANTED

YOLANDA HILDRETH v. SILKROAD TRANZ, INC., et al

Defendant Cedrick Desroy Ranglin’s Pro Hac Vice Application

Hearing date
Aug 25, 2026
Department
S22
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffYOLANDA HILDRETH
DefendantSILKROAD TRANZ, INC.
DefendantCedrick Desroy Ranglin

Attorneys

Alexandra Serpasfor Defendant

Ruling

TENTATIVE RULING FOR August 25, 2026 Department S22 — JUDGE JANET FRANGIE (SitÝng on Assignment) This Court follows California Rules of Court, rule 3.1308(b) for tentative rulings. (See San Bernardino Superior Court Local Emergency Rule 8.) Tentative rulings for each law & motion will be posted on the internet (https://www.sb-court.org) by 3:00 p.m. on the court day immediately before the hearing. You may appear in person at the hearing although remote appearance by CourtCall is preferred during the Pandemic. (See www.sb-court.org/qeneral-information/remote-access). If you do not have Internet access or if you experience difÏculty with the posted tentative ruling, you may obtain the tentative ruling by calling the department (S-22) at (909) 521-3529 or the Administrative Assistant (909) 708-8756, who prepared the ruling.

If you (or both parties) wish to submit on the Tentative, notify the other party and call the department by 4:00 pm the day before and your appearance may be excused unless the Court orders you to appear. You must appear at the hearing if you are so directed by the court in the tentative ruling. Be prepared to address those issues set forth by the court in its ruling.

UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, THE PREVAILING PARTY IS TO GIVE NOTICE OF THE RULING.

YOLANDA HILDRETH v. SILKROAD TRANZ, INC., et al

Defendant Cedrick Desroy Ranglin’s Pro Hac Vice Application:

The application of Alexandra Serpas to appear as counsel pro hac vice for Defendant Cedrick Desroy Ranglin is granted. Moving party is directed to give notice of ruling.

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