JACKSON, NICHOLAS TYLER vs DOCTORS MEDICAL CENTER OF MODESTO

The Court finds additional meet-and-confer efforts are appropriate before ruling on the motion and sanctions request. Accordingly: 1. The hearing on Defendant's Motion to Compel Deposition and Request for Monetary Sanctions is CONTINUED to September 9, 2026, at 8:30 am in Department 24.

2. No later than ten days from the date of this hearing, counsel shall meet and confer in good faith regarding the scheduling of Plaintiff's deposition. The meet-and-confer shall occur by videoconference or in person.

3. During the meet-and-confer process, Plaintiff shall provide specific dates on which he is available for deposition, and counsel shall make reasonable efforts to select a mutually agreeable deposition date.

4. If the parties are able to schedule and complete Plaintiff's deposition before the continued hearing date, Defendant shall promptly notify the Court whether the motion is withdrawn or whether any issues remain for determination.

5. If any disputes remain, the parties shall file supplemental declarations, not exceeding five pages each, no later than five court days before the continued hearing. The supplemental declarations shall address: (a) the meet-and-confer efforts undertaken after issuance of this order; (b) whether a deposition date was provided and/or selected; (c) whether the deposition has occurred; and (d) the parties' respective positions regarding monetary sanctions. The Court reserves ruling on both the motion to compel and Defendant's request for monetary sanctions pending completion of the additional meet-and-confer process.

CV-26-000068 - JACKSON, NICHOLAS TYLER vs DOCTORS MEDICAL CENTER OF MODESTO - a) Defendant Doctors Medical Center of Modesto, Inc.'s Motion to Strike Portions of Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint - HEARING REQUIRED; b) Defendant Doctors Medical Center of Modesto, Inc.'s Demurrer to the First Amended Complaint - HEARING REQUIRED; c) Defendant's Motion to Strike the First Amended Complaint - HEARING REQUIRED; d) Defendant's Demurrer to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint - HEARING REQUIRED.

a-d) Before addressing the merits of these demurrers and motions to strike, the Court has questions regarding the sufficiency of service on the Plaintiff. The proofs of service reflect service solely by electronic transmission. Plaintiff is in propria persona. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1010.6(c)(3) and rule 2.251 of the California Rules of Court, a self-represented plaintiff must affirmatively consent to electronic service. The act of electronic filing alone is insufficient to manifest that consent.

The Court was unable to locate in the court file for this case a Consent to Electronic Service and Notice of Electronic Service Address (Judicial Council form EFS-005-CV) signed and filed by the Plaintiff or any other document filed by the Plaintiff affirmatively providing consent to electronic service. It therefore seeks clarification from the Moving Parties as to what written authorization the Plaintiff has given them regarding an agreement to electronic service.

The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Commissioner Richard D. Moths in Department 19 located at the Turlock Division at 300 Starr Avenue, Turlock, CA: ***There are no Tentative Rulings for Department 19***