DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC23607342·sf·Civil·Civil
Hearing in about 1 hourDENIED

BRIAN MACGREGOR ET AL VS. SUNSHINE TRANSPORTATION ET AL

Motion To Dismiss

Hearing date
Aug 25, 2026
Department
302
Prevailing
Opposing Party

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffBRIAN MACGREGOR
DefendantSUNSHINE TRANSPORTATION
Cross-DefendantSTORAGEPRO MANAGEMENT, INC.

Ruling

Matter on calendar for Tuesday, August 25, 2026, Line 2, CROSS DEFENDANT STORAGEPRO MANAGEMENT, INC.'s Motion To Dismiss.

Defendant StoragePro Management, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss is DENIED. Defendant moves to dismiss pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 581, subdivision (f)(3). Code of Civil Procedure section 581, subdivision (f)(3), provides the court with discretion to dismiss an action when "[a]fter a motion to strike the whole of a complaint is granted without leave to amend, either party moves for dismissal." (Code Civ. Proc., 581, subd. (f)(3).)

The court declines to exercise its discretion to dismiss the action. In its July 31, 2026 Order, the court granted the motion to strike without prejudice because Cross-Complainant had not followed the proper procedural requirements for seeking leave to amend. (See Loney v. Superior Court (1984) 160 Cal.App.3d 719; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1324.) Thus, the court's ruling was based on Cross-Complainant's failure to comply with the applicable procedures for seeking leave to amend, rather than a determination that Cross-Complainant could not amend the pleading. Cross-Complainant has now sought leave to amend the Second Amended Cross-Complaint apparently consistent with the identified procedural requirements. Under these circumstances, the court declines to dismiss the action based on its prior order granting the motion to strike.

For the 9:00 a.m. calendar, all attorneys and parties may appear in Department 302 remotely or in person. Remote hearings will be conducted by videoconference using Zoom. (Dept. 302 Zoom ID 160 409 7690; Passcode 516287.) To appear remotely at the hearing, go to the court's website at sfsuperiorcourt.org under "Online Services," navigate to "Tentative Rulings," and click on the appropriate link, or dial the corresponding phone number.

Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept302tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. The text of the email shall include the name and contact information, including email address, of the attorney or party who will appear at the hearing.

Counsel for the prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order which repeats verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must email it to contestdept302tr@sftc.org prior to the hearing even if the tentative ruling is not contested.

The court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law & Motion Department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear in the courtroom or remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript may be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: their name, CSR and telephone numbers, and their individual work email address. =(302/JMQ). | |

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