DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
22-CIV-02332·sanmateo·Civil·Contract
Hearing in about 3 hoursGRANTED in part. The court will enjoin any trustee’s sale against the San Carlos property until the sale of the Redwood City property is sold.

TIM ONDERKO VS. DONALD WILSON, ET AL

Motion to Interpret and Enforce Stipulated Appellate Security; to Stay Further Proceedings Under Notice of Default; and to Enjoin Trustee’s Sale

Hearing date
Aug 26, 2026
Department
28
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffTIM ONDERKO
DefendantDONALD WILSON

Attorneys

CHRISTINE E. JACOBfor Defendant

Ruling

August 26, 2026, Law and Motion Calendar Judge Nicole S. Healy Department 28 ________________________________________________________________________ Case Title / Nature of Case 2:00 PM LINE 1 22-CIV-02099 GOLDEN GLOBAL ENTERPRISES INC., ET AL VS. TIM ONDERKO, ET AL

GOLDEN GLOBAL ENTERPRISES INC. JOHN J. HARTFORD TIM ONDERKO DOMINIC V. SIGNOROTTI

MOTION TO INTERPRET AND ENFORCE STIPULATED APPELLATE SECURITY; TO STAY FURTHER PROCEEDINGS UNDER NOTICE OF DEFAULT; AND TO ENJOIN TRUSTEE’S SALE

TENTATIVE RULING:

On August 12, 2026, plaintiffs Golden Global Enterprises, Inc., Global Investment Trust – 2017; and 8880 Elder Creek Holdings, LLC (collectively Golden Global) filed a Motion to Interpret and Enforce Stipulated Appellate Security; to Stay Further Proceedings Under Notice of Default; and to Enjoin Trustee’s Sale in Case No., 22-CIV-02099, but not in 22-CIV-02332. On August 19, 2026, Tim Onderko filed his Opposition to Motion for Preliminary Injunction in Case No. 22-CIV-02332, but not in 22-CIV-02099.

The parties are ORDERED file the motion and supporting papers in 22-CIV-02332 and the opposition and supporting papers in 22-CIV-02099. This tentative ruling addresses the motion and opposition as to both cases, each of which is currently on appeal.

The Motion is GRANTED in part.

On June 3, 2024, Golden Global appealed the amended judgment filed on April 15, 2024, in the amount of $2,402,643.01, in Case Nos. 22-CIV-02099 and 22-CIV-02332; the appeals were consolidated on May 12, 2025. On October 24, 2025, the First District Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment confirming the arbitration award but remanded the case to the trial court for the limited purpose of allowing the trial court, in the first instance, to determine if correction of the arbitration award was warranted and proper under Code of Civil Procedure, sections 1286.6 and 1286.8. On November 13, 2025, the appellate court denied appellant’s motion for rehearing. The Supreme Court denied appellant’s petition for review on January 7, 2026. The Court of Appeal issued a remittitur on January 14, 2026.

On May 20, 2026, this court denied Gloden Global’s request to modify the judgment confirming the arbitration award and instead to issue the judgment against Golden Global Enterprises, Inc. and Global Investment Trust – 2017, rather than Donald Wilson. On July 1, 2026, Golden Global appealed that order.

While the initial appeals were pending, the parties entered into a stipulation and order, filed on August 29, 2025, titled “Stipulation for Accepting Deed of Trust as an Undertaking on Appeal.” The Stipulation provided in pertinent part that Wilson had appealed the amended judgment entered on April 15, 2024. Further the Stipulation stated that

August 26, 2026, Law and Motion Calendar Judge Nicole S. Healy Department 28 ________________________________________________________________________ 2:00 PM LINE 2 22-CIV-02332 TIM ONDERKO VS. DONALD WILSON, ET AL

TIM ONDERKO DOMINIC V. SIGNOROTTI DONALD WILSON CHRISTINE E. JACOB

MOTION TO INTERPRET AND ENFORCE STIPULATED APPELLATE SECURITY; TO STAY FURTHER PROCEEDINGS UNDER NOTICE OF DEFAULT; AND TO ENJOIN TRUSTEE’S SALE

TENTATIVE RULING:

See Line 1.

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