DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
2017-00910991·orange·Civil·Civil
Hearing 3 months agoVACATED

NNN Capital Fund I, LLC vs. Mikles

N/A

Hearing date
May 21, 2026
Department
C23
Prevailing
N/A
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffNNN Capital Fund I, LLC
DefendantMikles

Ruling

downloaded. There is nothing in the record to show this was done. Furthermore, there is no evidence to show who the individuals identified on the “Service List” are. Presumably, they are all the members of the homeowners association and the addresses lists are the mailing addresses they have provided to Petitioner. There, however, is no evidence in the record to support that presumption. As such, Petitioner has failed to show that the limited notice it provided was given “to each of the owners of the residential property within the seven tracts of Monarch Bay Terrace, as defined in the Petition” as the court ordered.

The court further notes Petitioner’s reply identifies an additional opposition it received and acknowledges that opposition was not filed with the court. Nonetheless, Petitioner has not attached a copy of that opposition to the reply or otherwise provided a copy to the court. Many of the owners are not attorneys and are not familiar with civil procedure or how to file something with the court. Based on Petitioner’s many failures to comply with the court’s specific order regarding notice of this hearing, the petition, and the specific relief being sought, the petition is DENIED.

Petitioner’s counsel is ordered to give notice of this ruling to all owners.

12. NNN Capital Fund I, LLC vs. Mikles 2017-00910991 Hearing VACATED as stated in the minute order dated May 20, 2026.

13. Shanghai Breeze Technology Company, Ltd. vs. Willard Marine, Inc. 2022-01252832 Before the court is the motion to amend judgment to add GEM Ventures Ltd. (GEM) as a co-judgment debtor as alter ego of respondent and judgment debtor Willard Marine, Inc. (Respondent) filed by petitioner and judgment creditor Shanghai Breeze Technology Company, Ltd. (Petitioner). As more fully set forth below, the motion is DENIED. Code of Civil Procedure section 187 provides, “When jurisdiction is, by the Constitution or this Code, or by any other statute, conferred on a Court or judicial officer, all the means necessary to carry it into effect are also given; and in the exercise of this jurisdiction, if the course of proceeding be not specifically pointed out by this Code or the statute, any suitable process or mode of proceeding

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