Matthew R. Silver and Civica Law Group APC v. Curtis R. Wright

the plaintiff will prevail based on the weight of the evidence. Defendant has also failed to provide any argument or authority as to how, on these facts, plaintiff’s claim fails as a matter of law. (See Mtn. Memo. P&As, in passim.)

Defendant’s request for judicial notice is GRANTED. (See Evid. Code, § 452, subds. (d), (h).)

Trial is set for September 21, 2026 at 9:30 a.m. in Department C28. The parties are ordered to comply with the court’s standing order and Local Rule 317. Should plaintiff desire a trial by jury, plaintiff is ordered to post jury fees on or before August 21, 2026. Failure to post jury fees could result in a waiver of the right to a jury trial.

Defendant shall give notice of this ruling.

52. Matthew R. Petitioners Matthew R. Silver and Civica Law Group APC’s Silver and motion to appoint receiver is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Civica Law (Code Civ. Proc., § 564 [authorizing receivership].) Group APC While moving petitioners request a receivership to enforce an v. Curtis R. injunction which does not appear mandatory on its face, the Wright practical effect of the requested relief, allowing appointment of 2025- a receiver with broad powers over respondents’ business, is 01478015 barred by the appellate stay. (Code Civ.

Proc., § 916, subd. (a) [“the perfecting of an appeal stays proceedings in the trial court upon the judgment or order appealed from or upon the matters embraced therein or affected thereby”]; Daly v. San Bernardino County Bd. of Supervisors (2021) 11 Cal.5th 1030, 1040-1041 [appellate stays re: mandatory vs. prohibitory injunctions]; Varian Medical Systems, Inc. v. Delfino (2005) 35 Cal.4th 180, 189-190 [“In determining whether a proceeding is embraced in or affected by the appeal, we must consider the appeal and its possible outcomes in relation to the proceeding and its possible results ...