DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CGC24614595·sf·Civil·Real Property
Hearing about 1 year agoDENIED

CHERYL CZEKALA VS. GREENVIEW PLANNING AND DESIGN, LLC, A CALIFORNIA ET AL

MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE ACTIONS OF CASE(S) CGC-24-620499 WITH CASE CGC-24-614595

Hearing date
Jun 12, 2025
Department
501
Prevailing
Opposing Party

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffCHERYL CZEKALA
DefendantGREENVIEW PLANNING AND DESIGN, LLC

Ruling

Real Property/Housing Court Law and Motion Calendar for June 12, 2025. Line 3. MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE ACTIONS OF CASE(S) CGC-24-620499 WITH CASE CGC-24-614595 / NOTICE OF MOTION TO CONSOLIDATE ACTIONS FOR ALL PURPOSES is DENIED.

Consolidation in this matter will significantly delay the trial of Czekala v. Greenview Planning and Design LLC, Case No. CGC-24-614595, which has a trial date of July 14, 2025. Trial in the other matter, Gough/Fell Associates, L.P. v. Greenview Planning and Design, LLC, Case No. CGC-24-620499, has not even been set. Discovery in the Czekala case has already proceeded, and discovery is set to close around the time this motion is set to be heard. Consolidation will also severely prejudice the plaintiff in the Czekala case, who has been displaced from her home of over 40 years and lost all of her personal belongings. =(501/CFH)

Parties may appear in-person, telephonically or via Zoom (Video - Webinar ID: 160 560 5023; Password: 172849; or Phone Dial in: (669) 254-5252; Webinar ID: 160 560 5023; Password: 172849).

Parties who intend to appear at the hearing must give notice to opposing parties and the court promptly, but no later than 4:00 p.m. the court day before the hearing unless the tentative ruling has specified that a hearing is required.

Notice of contesting a tentative ruling shall be provided by sending an email to the court to Department501ContestTR@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. A party may not argue at the hearing if the opposing party is not so notified, and the opposing party does not appear. | |

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