Motion for Summary Adjudication
Browse all Motion for Summary Adjudication rulings statewide →
SF Superior Court - Law & Motion / Discovery Dept 302 - CGC23606566 - September 10, 2025 Hearing date: September 10, 2025 Case number: CGC23606566 Case title: JAMES O'NEILL VS. MITHRIL CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC, ET AL Case Number: | | CGC23606566 | Case Title: | | JAMES O'NEILL VS. MITHRIL CAPITAL MANAGEMENT LLC, ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-09-10 09:00 AM | Calendar Matter: | | MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION | Rulings: | | On the Law & Motion/Discovery calendar for September 10, 2025, line 2. DEFENDANTS MITHRIL CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, LLC, MITHRIL L.P., MITHRIL GP EMPLOYEE FEEDER LLC'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION.
Mithril Capital Management, LLC, Mithril L.P., Mithril GP Employee Feeder LLC's Motion for Summary Adjudication is CONTINUED TO November 4, 2025, at 9 am in this department. Moving Parties need to plan better. They seek to seal certain evidence they submitted with their MSA reply, and their MSA is on calendar for today, yet their sealing request isn't even on file.
Public access to all adjudicative facts is presumed. (See California Rules of Court, rule 2.550(c).) In connection with a non-discovery motion, the court will not consider materials filed "conditionally under seal." To review papers, conduct a hearing and issue an order presuming the materials are sealed would be directly contrary to the law, which presumes public access, not confidentiality. It follows that any sealing issues must be resolved before the underlying motion is on for hearing.
Here, the Moving Parties filed reply evidence "conditionally under seal" without even filing a motion under rules 2.550 and 2.551 and, importantly, without seeking a continuance to allow the court to act on the sealing request (on the motion the court can only hope is soon to come). Management of Moving Parties' motions, including ancillary motions, is the Moving Parties' responsibility. Their current approach is contrary to law and wholly unworkable.
No later than 8:30 am on September 10, 2025, Moving Parties must submit a proposed order setting forth the above text.
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.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
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) | |