DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
30-2024-01434530-CU-BC-CJC·orange·Civil·Contract
Hearing todayOff calendar – withdrawn at request of moving party.

Star vs. TopRank Motorworks Inc.

Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings

Hearing date
Aug 28, 2026
Department
C31
Prevailing
N/A
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffStar
DefendantTopRank Motorworks Inc.

Ruling

2 Jefferson Capital Motion to Set Aside Dismissal Systems, LLC vs. Son The motion of plaintiff Jefferson Capital Systems, LLC to 30-2025- set aside dismissal is GRANTED. 01496753-CU- OSC re dismissal (default judgment) is scheduled for CL-CJC 9/24/2026 at 1:30 PM.

Plaintiff is ORDERED to request entry of default and submit a default prove-up package to the court before the hearing. If plaintiff fails to do so, the court will again dismiss the action unless plaintiff appears and shows good cause otherwise. (See Cal. Rules of court, rule 3.110(b); Local Rule 381.)

Plaintiff shall file and serve a status report no later than 5 court days before the hearing. Failure to comply may subject the parties and/or counsel to sanctions pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 177.5.

Clerk to give notice.

3 Star vs. TopRank Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Motorworks Inc. 30-2024- Off calendar – withdrawn at request of moving party. 01434530-CU- BC-CJC 4 DI Overnite Motion for Terminating Sanctions and Monetary Investments, Sanctions for Failure to Obey Court Orders LLC vs. Martin 30-2024- Defendants Michael Martin; Philip Nabal; and Express 01410563-CU- Overnite, LLC’s unopposed motion for terminating BT-CJC sanctions is GRANTED. Defendants’ request for additional monetary sanctions is DENIED.

Defendants’ requests for judicial notice are granted. (Evid. Code, § 452, subd. (d).)

Terminating sanctions are appropriate when the “violation is willful, preceded by a history of abuse, and the evidence shows that less severe sanctions would not produce compliance with the discovery rules.” (Mileikowsky v. Tenet Healthsystem (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 262, 279.)

Plaintiffs were ordered in May 2025 to provide further responses and verifications, and to produce responsive documents to Defendants’ requests for production. Additionally, the Court imposed monetary sanctions on Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs paid the monetary sanctions, however, never complied with the ordered discovery in over a

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