DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
21CV003425·alameda·Civil·Class Action
Hearing 3 months agoGRANTED

DIAZ vs TRI-CITY AUTOWASH, INC. (DBA AUTOPIA CAR WASH)

Ex Parte Application to Continue the Hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion for Class Certification and Case Management Conference

Hearing date
Jun 3, 2026
Department
18
Prevailing
Moving Party
Next hearing
Jun 17, 2026

Motion type

Browse all Ex Parte Application rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffDiaz
DefendantTri-City Autowash, Inc. (DBA Autopia Car Wash)
DefendantSatwant Singh

Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ALAMEDA 21CV003425: DIAZ vs TRI-CITY AUTOWASH, INC. (DBA AUTOPIA CAR WASH) 06/03/2026 Hearing on Ex Parte Application Continuance of the class certification hearing and CMC from June 3 to June 24 CRS# A-03425-009 in Department 18 Tentative Ruling - 06/02/2026 Patrick McKinney Defendants Tri-City Autowash, Inc. and Satwant Singh’s ("Defendants’) Ex Parte Application to Continue the Hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion for Class Certification and Case Management Conference is GRANTED.

The hearings are continued to June 17, 2026 at 1:30 p.m. Defendants’ counsel must forthwith serve a copy of this order on all counsel of record and selfrepresented parties. The Court orders counsel to obtain a copy of this order from the eCourt portal. CONTESTING THE TENTATIVE RULING: If the parties do not contest the tentative ruling, it will be adopted. Any party wishing to contest the tentative ruling must notify the court by email at Dept18@alameda.courts.ca.gov, and notify all opposing counsel or unrepresented parties by 4pm the day before the hearing.

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