In re the petition of Barber, Chloe

Second, Exhibit 9 includes an item for $16.28 for a court appearance on September 4, 2025. However, September 4, 2025 was the date of oral argument for the demurrer when oral argument was not requested and the tentative ruling was adopted without hearing. The could declines to award this amount. Costs are otherwise awarded in the amount of $1,063.28.

Accordingly, plaintiffs’ motion is granted in part. Plaintiffs are awarded attorneys’ fees of $16,035 and costs in the amount of $1,063.28 for a total of $17,098.28.

As the parties have settled, the court on its own motion vacates the October 20, 2026 case management conference and schedules instead an order to show cause hearing regarding dismissal on October 20, 2026 at 9:00 a.m. in Department 32.

13. S-CV-0056043 Hill Top Cntr. v. Kelly Architectural & Planning

The motion to compel responses is continued to September 15, 2026 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 32.

14. S-CV-0056372 In re the petition of Barber, Chloe

Petition for Approval of Compromise of Claim of Proceeds of Judgment for Minor

The petition for approval of minor’s compromise claim is granted. After careful consideration of the petition and attachments, the court finds the settlement is in the best interest of the minor. (Prob. Code, § 3500; Code Civ. Proc., § 372; Pearson v. Superior Court (2012) 202 Cal.App.4th 1333, 1337-38.)

15. S-CV-0056512 Jamis-Dow, Carlos v. Vector

Motion for Alternative Service

Plaintiff seeks a court order authorizing mailed service to defendant Vector Construction Development, a Corporation (“Vector”) pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 413.30. No opposition has been filed.

Code of Civil Procedure section 413.30 provides a court may direct an alternate manner of service “if a plaintiff, despite exercising reasonable diligence, has been unable to effect service of the summons by any of the methods authorized under this chapter.” Here, plaintiff has submitted insufficient evidence of diligence.

While plaintiff’s evidence includes Vector’s Statement of Information including three different addresses (a Sacramento address as the corporation’s principal address, another Sacramento address as the mailing address for the corporation, an Auburn address as the address for the agent for service of process), plaintiff presents no evidence of attempts to serve at these three addresses by service of acknowledgment and receipt pursuant to Code

8