DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
24CV093662·alameda·Civil·Civil Dispute
Hearing todayGRANTED

KELLUM vs BRYANT, et al.

Motion to Dismiss

Hearing date
Sep 4, 2026
Department
520
Prevailing
Defendant
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffKellum
DefendantKerry E Bryant
DefendantNancy M Bryant

Ruling

24CV093662: KELLUM vs BRYANT, et al. 09/04/2026 Hearing on Motion to Dismiss filed by Kerry E Bryant (Defendant) + CRS# 965451741885 in Department 520

Tentative Ruling - 09/04/2026 Jamilah A. Jefferson

The Motion to Dismiss filed by Kerry E Bryant, Nancy M Bryant on 08/06/2026 is Granted.

Defendant's unopposed Motion to Dismiss Complaint is GRANTED. As of the posting of this tentative ruling, there is no opposition filed.

The Court notes that Plaintiff emailed to contest this tentative ruling (below) and contacted Defendants' counsel. However, Plaintiff did not appear at the hearing.

The Court ordered the parties to arbitrate their dispute on February 21, 2025.

Despite various hearings since this order, a stay in place (that was temporarily lifted), and at least one court appearance, Plaintiff has not taken steps to arbitrate the dispute as ordered. There is no indication that Plaintiff intends to initiate arbitration. Instead, Defendants' counsel declares that Plaintiff has unequivocally indicated that no arbitration will occur. Plaintiff has filed no opposition to the instant motion.

The Court, therefore, lifts the stay in place as of the February 21, 2025 and dismisses the complaint with prejudice.

NOTICE: This tentative ruling will automatically become the court’s final order on September 4, 2026 unless, by no later than 4:00 P.M. on September 3, 2026, a party to the action notifies BOTH: 1) the court by emailing Dept520@alameda.courts.ca.gov; AND 2) all opposing counsel or self- represented parties (by telephone or email) that the party is contesting this tentative ruling.

The subject line (RE:) of the email must state: “Request for CONTESTED HEARING: [the case name], [number].” When a party emails to contest a tentative ruling, the party must identify the specific holding(s) within the ruling they wish to contest via oral argument.

The court does not provide court reporters for hearings in civil departments. A party who wants a record of the proceedings must engage a private court reporter. (Local Rule 3.95.) Any privately retained court reporter must also participate via video conference. Their email must be provided to the court at the time the Notice of Contest is emailed.

ALL CONTESTED LAW AND MOTION HEARINGS ARE CONDUCTED VIA REMOTE VIDEO unless an in person appearance is required by the court. Invitations to participate in the 24CV093662: KELLUM vs BRYANT, et al. 09/04/2026 Hearing on Motion to Dismiss filed by Kerry E Bryant (Defendant) + CRS# 965451741885 in Department 520 video proceeding will be sent by the court upon receipt of timely notice of contest. A party may give email notice that they will appear in court in person for the hearing, however all other counsel/parties and the JUDGE MAY APPEAR REMOTELY.

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