In the Matter of EOFF, MATTHEW
Petitioner's Motion to Compel Initial Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set Two; Petitioner's Motion to Deem Requests for Admissions, Set Two, Admitted; Petitioner's Motion to Compel Initial Responses and Production to Requests for Production, Set Two
Motion type
Parties
Ruling
Here, it appears that that Plaintiff alleges that she entered the U-Haul property and fell on the property. Plaintiff suggests this is independent of the arbitration agreement, but the arbitration agreement itself appears to cover it. That such a claim might be made even without a rental contract is of no moment. Plaintiff cites Izzi v. Mesquite Country Club (1986) 186 Cal.App.3d 1309 for the proposition that the roots of the dispute must be related to the contract. To the extent this is accurate, the roots of the dispute - over the maintenance of the UHaul property - are related to contract.
The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Stacy P. Speiller in Department 22:
CV-24-001197 - BELL, WILLIAM vs BENHAM, CHRISTOPHER - Plaintiff's Motion to Lift Stay and Restore Case Civil Calendar - GRANTED. The unopposed motion is GRANTED. On August 4, 2026, Plaintiff submitted the instant motion. The motion is based on Plaintiff's declaration and exhibits filed on July 21, 2026. There is no opposition or reply on file.
The following is a brief summary of the proceedings. On March 19, 2025, the Court entered judgment by default for Plaintiff against the Defendant. On January 30, 2026, the Court denied Plaintiff's motion to amend judgment. On February 24, 2026, Defendant filed a declaration regarding bankruptcy filing and automatic stay. In the instant motion, Plaintiff further avers that Defendant's bankruptcy case has now been dismissed and thus, seeks to lift the stay. Plaintiff attached a Bankruptcy Court order dismissing Defendant's Chapter 7 proceeding, dated June 17, 2026.
PR-25-001101 - In the Matter of EOFF, MATTHEW - a) Petitioner's Motion to Compel Initial Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set Two; Request for Monetary Sanctions - CONTINUED to September 23, 2026, at 8:30 am in Department 22; b) Petitioner's Motion to Deem Requests for Admissions, Set Two, Admitted; Request for Monetary Sanctions - CONTINUED to September 23, 2026, at 8:30 am in Department 22; c) Petitioner's Motion to Compel Initial Responses and Production to Requests for Production, Set Two; Request for Monetary Sanctions - CONTINUED to September 23, 2026, at 8:30 am in Department 22.
a-c) The Court notes that there are no oppositions to the motions on file, but an attorney for Respondent just substituted into the case on August 24, 2026. In order to give Respondent's counsel an opportunity to get up to speed on these matters and to see if the motions can be resolved informally, these motions are CONTINUED to September 23, 2026, at 8:30 am in Department 22. The Court orders Respondent's counsel and the Petitioner to meet and confer in person or by videoconference no later than September 11, 2026, and to file a joint status report by no later than September 16, 2026, stating what issues still need to be resolved.
The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Clifford Tong in Department 23: ***There are no tentative rulings in Department 23***
The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge David I. Hood in Department 24: ***There are no tentative rulings in Department 24***
The following is the tentative rulings for a case calendared before Commissioner Richard Moths in Department 19 located at the Turlock Division at 300 Starr Avenue, Turlock, CA: ***There are no tentative rulings in Department 19***
Cited authorities
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?”