DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CV2026-2181·yolo·Civil·Mechanics Lien Release
Hearing todayDENIED AS MOOT; GRANTED request for attorney fees

Winters Farms LLC v. Heer Pistachio Farms, Inc.

petition for order releasing property from claim of mechanics lien

Hearing date
Sep 8, 2026
Department
Thirteen
Judge
Prevailing
Moving Party
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Petition rulings statewide →

Parties

PetitionerWinter Farms LLC
RespondentHeer Pistachio Farms, Inc.

Ruling

Case: Winters Farms LLC v. Heer Pistachio Farms, Inc. Case No. CV2026-2181 Hearing Date: September 8, 2026 Department Thirteen 9:00 a.m.

Petitioner Winter Farms LLC’s petition for order releasing property from claim of mechanics lien is DENIED AS MOOT. (Civ. Code, § 8480, subd. (a).) The Court finds that respondent Heer Pistachio Farms, Inc.’s recording of the release of claim of lien on August 17, 2026, renders the petition moot. (Civ. Code, § 8480, subd. (a); Center for Local Government Accountability v. City of San Diego (2016) 247 Cal.App.4th 1146, 1157; Heer decl., ¶ 7, Exhibit 3.)

The Court GRANTS petitioner’s request for an order awarding reasonable attorney’s fees incurred in demanding this release and bringing this petition, in an amount to be determined by motion after entry of judgment. (Civ. Code, § 8488, subd. (c).) First, petitioner achieved its goal because it obtained a release of the lien outside of the ten-day period provided under Civil Code section 8482. (Heer decl., ¶ 7, Exhibit 3.) Second, respondent voluntarily released the lien, which suggests that there is no genuine dispute as to the lien’s validity. Third, respondent’s opposition does not indicate it released the lien for a reason other than petitioner’s petition. (See generally Heer decl.) Therefore, the Court finds that petitioner is the prevailing party. (Civ. Code, § 8488, subd. (c).)

If no hearing is requested, this tentative ruling is effective immediately. No formal order pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1312 or further notice is required.

5 of 5

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