DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
23CV000320·sacramento·Civil·Case Management Conference
Hearing about 1 year agoThis case is referred to Trial Setting Process for selection of Trial and Mandatory Settlement Conference dates.

TENANGO vs THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, et al.

Case Management Conference

Hearing date
May 23, 2025
Department
25
Prevailing
N/A
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

Plaintiff (Minor)Ivan Manuel Tenango
DefendantThe Regents of the University of California
DefendantMelissa Carol Matulich, M.D.
DefendantAnthony Nicholas Karnezis, M.D.
DefendantJeanette Patricia Tom-Lerman, M.D.
DefendantLisa Diane Mills, M.D.
DefendantErik Gopal Laurin, M.D.
DefendantMichael David Trifiro, M.D.
DefendantGene H Kurosawa, M.D.
DefendantTehani Liyanage, M.D.
DefendantScott Zakaluzny, M.D.
DefendantZahabiya H Chithiwala, M.D.
DefendantAustin Holmes, M.D.

Attorneys

Samuel Raye Dordulianfor Ivan Manuel Tenango
Carolyn Laney Northropfor The Regents of the University of California
Carolyn Laney Northropfor Melissa Carol Matulich, M.D.
Carolyn Laney Northropfor Anthony Nicholas Karnezis, M.D.
Carolyn Laney Northropfor Jeanette Patricia Tom-Lerman, M.D.
Carolyn Laney Northropfor Lisa Diane Mills, M.D.
Carolyn Laney Northropfor Erik Gopal Laurin, M.D.
Carolyn Laney Northropfor Michael David Trifiro, M.D.
Carolyn Laney Northropfor Gene H Kurosawa, M.D.
Carolyn Laney Northropfor Tehani Liyanage, M.D.
Carolyn Laney Northropfor Scott Zakaluzny, M.D.
Carolyn Laney Northropfor Zahabiya H Chithiwala, M.D.
Carolyn Laney Northropfor Austin Holmes, M.D.

Ruling

23CV000320: TENANGO vs THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, et al. 05/23/2025 Case Management Conference in Department 25

Tentative Ruling

Notices:

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that any oral arguments regarding this tentative ruling will be heard in Department 28, located at 720 9th Street, Sacramento, CA, the Hon. Richard C. Miadich presiding. Should argument be requested by either party, the requesting party must: (1) request a hearing by calling the clerk in Department 25 at (916) 874-8727 no later than 4:00 p.m. on the Court day before the scheduled CMC, and (2) advise opposing counsel of the request. If a hearing is not requested by 4:00 p.m. on the Court day before the scheduled CMC, the tentative ruling shall become the final order of the Court.

If a hearing is requested, the Court assumes that all parties will appear remotely via Zoom unless the Court orders in-person attendance. The Department 28 Zoom ID is: 160 3906 2174. To appear telephonically via Zoom, call (833) 568-8864 and enter the Department 28 Zoom ID referenced above. ALL APPEARANCES, WHETHER REQUESTED BY A PARTY OR ORDERED BY THE COURT, WILL BE HEARD AT 9:00 A.M. IN DEPARTMENT 28 ON THE DATE OF THE SCHEDULED HEARING.

Court’s Tentative Ruling:

No appearance is required under the following conditions:

This case is referred to Trial Setting Process for selection of Trial and Mandatory Settlement Conference dates. All counsel (including parties appearing in pro per) shall confer and agree upon trial and settlement conference dates. Available dates can be obtained on the court's web site at http://www.saccourt.ca.gov. Plaintiff's counsel must notify the court of the selection of Mandatory Settlement Conference and Trial dates no later than 60 days after 05/23/2025, by completing the request form at http://www.saccourt.ca.gov/civil/trial-setting.aspx. If the parties have not agreed on dates before the 60th day, court staff shall assign Mandatory Settlement Conference and Trial dates that are next available, unless an extension of time has been granted by the appropriate Case Management Program Judge.

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