CHURCHMAN, JAMES v. FCA US
Motion to Substitute Trustee Jeffrey R. Churchman in Place of Deceased Plaintiff, James Churchman
Motion type
Parties
Ruling
PLACER COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT THURSDAY, CIVIL LAW AND MOTION DEPARTMENT 3 THE HONORABLE MICHAEL W. JONES TENTATIVE RULINGS FOR MAY 14, 2026, AT 8:30 A.M.
Accordingly, defendants’ motion for leave to file a cross-complaint is granted. Defendants shall file and serve the cross-complaint attached to the supplemental declaration of Cynthia Lawrence on or before May 21, 2026.
Trial Setting Conference
Appearances of the parties are required. Trial counsel are to personally appear. Remote appearance is not authorized. Trial counsel shall bring their respective trial calendars and schedules.
The parties are ordered to meet and confer in good faith prior to the hearing, which includes acting within the spirit and meaning of the California Attorney Guidelines of Civility and Professionalism, to select mutually agreed upon trial dates.
6. S-CV-0051706 NERSESYAN, OVSEP v. JUERN, JEREMY S. M.D.
The motion for summary judgment is continued to May 21, 2026, at 8:30 a.m. in Department 3.
7. S-CV-0051886 CHURCHMAN, JAMES v. FCA US
Plaintiff’s Motion to Substitute Trustee Jeffrey R. Churchman in Place of Deceased Plaintiff, James Churchman
Plainitff’s motion to substitute trustee Jeffrey R. Churchman in place of deceased plaintiff James Churchman is granted. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 377.30, 377.31, 377.32.) Jeffrey R. Churchman, surviving son and trustee of plaintiff, James Churchman, is hereby substituted in place of plaintiff James Churchman.
8. S-CV-0052434 GALVAN, MARIA v. LAWTON CONSTRUCTION
Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement
The unopposed motion is granted. The court has broad discretion in determining whether a class action settlement is (1) fair and reasonable, (2) the class notice is adequate, and (3) certification of the class is proper. (In re Cellphone Fee Termination Cases (2010) 186 Cal.App.4th 1380, 1389.) Further, the court reviews the moving papers along with the entirety of the court file to determine that the settlement is genuine, meaningful, and consistent with the underlying purposes of the PAGA-related statute. (Labor Code section 2699(s); O’Connor v. Uber
PLACER SUPERIOR COURT – DEPARTMENT 3 Thursday Civil Law and Motion – Tentative Rulings
Cited authorities
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?”