MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES BY T.G.
damage in the form of personal injury to Plaintiff, property damage to Plaintiff’s vehicle, or otherwise. The court denies the motion entirely.
3. CASE # CASE NAME HEARING NAME T.G. VS CORONA- MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES CVRI2501478 NORCO UNIFIED BY T.G. SCHOOL DISTRICT Tentative Ruling:
Matter continued to June 15, 2026 in Department 4.
4. CASE # CASE NAME HEARING NAME FIRSTLINE ENVIRONMENTAL MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND CVRI2502502 SOLUTIONS, LLC VS VAN 2ND AMENDED COMPLAINT DYK TANK LINES, INC. Tentative Ruling:
Summary of Ruling: The Court grants the motion. It is not necessary for the court to reach the objections as all evidence in support of this motion except the proposed amended complaint and the Killem declaration are irrelevant to whether leave to amend should be allowed.
Factual / Procedural Context:
This action rises out of unpaid invoices for hazardous substance removal. Statewide Emergency Services Inc. (“Statewide”) is an emergency hazardous substance removal contractor. (SAC, ¶ 8.) Plaintiff Firstline Environmental Solutions, LLC alleges that on August 15, 2023 it purchased all right, title and interest in the accounts receivable of Statewide under a “Transition Service Agreement,” and Plaintiff is thereby entitled to all amounts earned by Statewide as of the date of the agreement and as well as any amounts it earns in the future.
This action concerns nonpayment for services rendered by Statewide from August 8, 2024, through September 25, 2024, for removal of hazardous material fuel spill in the City of Banning, referred to as the “Banning Spill.” Statewide had contracted with defendant Van Dyk Tank Lines on the Banning Spill. Defendant Federated Service Insurance Company is Van Dyk’s insurer. Plaintiff alleges that Van Dyk’s managing agent, Ronald Nuckles (also a Defendant), at the site of the Banning Spill and entered into an oral contract for Statewide’s work on the Banning Spill, under the same terms as the previous work performed by Statewide on behalf of Van Dyk on the “I-15 Spill” earlier in the year, including the manner in which payment would be made for Statewide services by Van Dyk’s insurer, Federated. Plaintiff further alleges that, on September
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?”