Plaintiff's Motion for Order of Prejudgment Possession
e.g., Townsend v. Superior Court (EMC Mortgage Co.) (1998) 61 Cal.App.4th 1431; Obregon v. Superior Court (Cimm's, Inc.) (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 424.) The Court believes that many, if not all, of the disputes herein are amenable to informal resolution, and the parties are expected to demonstrate their best efforts in this regard.
CV-25-012169 - STANISLAUS COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS vs AZEVEDO, MANUEL J - Plaintiff's Motion for Order of Prejudgment Possession - GRANTED, and unopposed. The Court finds Plaintiff has discharged its burden of demonstrating it is entitled to a 103,180 sq. ft. fee acquisition from a portion of the subject property located at 342 North Hart Road, Modesto, County of Stanislaus, California, County Assessor's Parcel Number 012-039-014 by eminent domain for its planned State Route 132 West Freeway/Expressway Project for the public benefit and for all uses necessary, incidental and convenient thereto pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1255.410.
The Court further finds Plaintiff has, based on an appraisal, deposited the sum of $129,200.00 into the State Treasury as probable compensation that will be awarded Defendants in the eminent domain proceeding. (California Code of Civil Procedure Sec.Sec. 1255.410 and 1255.010 et seq.). Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion is GRANTED. Plaintiff is hereby authorized and empowered to enter upon and take prejudgment possession of the subject property. Plaintiff shall be entitled to take possession of the subject property within (30) days of service of this Order.
Service of this Order shall be made in the manner specified in Code of Civil Procedure section 1255.450, subdivisions (d) and (f). If the owner(s) or occupant(s), if any, fail to deliver possession of the Property upon the demand of County pursuant to this Order, a Writ of Assistance may issue ex parte upon the affidavit of a representative of Plaintiff showing that such owner(s) or occupant(s), if any, have failed to deliver possession of the Property.
CV-26-001432 - CARLOS, JUAN vs TEEPLES PLUMBING & DRILLING INC - Defendant Teeples Plumbing & Drilling, Inc's Demurrer to Plaintiff's Complaint - DROPPED, at the request of the moving party.
CV-25-000613 - LOPEZ, CORRINA PAULA vs DUNHOUSE, ROBERT FRANCIS, III - a) Defendant's Dunhouse & Citizens Medical Response's Motion to Compel Plaintiff's Responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One - CONTINUED, on the Court's own motion, to July 21, 2026 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 23.
b) Defendant's Dunhouse & Citizens Medical Response's Motion to Compel Plaintiff's Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One - CONTINUED, on the Court's own motion, to July 21, 2026 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 23.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
c) Defendant's Dunhouse & Citizens Medical Response's Motion to Compel Plaintiff's Responses to Requests for Production of Documents, Set One - CONTINUED, on the Court's own motion, to July 21, 2026 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 23.
d) Defendant's Dunhouse & Citizens Medical Response's Motion to Deem Admitted Requests for Admissions, Set One - CONTINUED, on the Court's own motion, to July 21, 2026 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 23.
a-d) The Court notes that Plaintiff is now self-represented, due to the Court's order granting her counsel's motion to withdraw on 4-15-26. Therefore, the Court believes that defense counsel should provide the outstanding discovery requests to Plaintiff directly to allow her an opportunity to respond before the Court rules on the instant motions. The hearings are CONTINUED, as above, for this purpose, and defense counsel shall serve the outstanding requests on Plaintiff by June 5, 2026, with corresponding proof of service of the same to be filed herein. Defense counsel shall also promptly serve notice of the continued hearing dates for the instant motions on Plaintiff.
The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Sonny S. Sandhu in Department 24: ***There are no tentative rulings in Department 24***
The following is the tentative ruling for a case calendared before Commissioner Jared D. Beeson in Department 19 located at the Turlock Division at 300 Starr Avenue, Turlock, CA: ***There are no tentative rulings in Department 19***