Adrian Ortiz v. Harvest Inn Team, LLC

Here, however, the claim of exemption is not made under sections 706.051 or 706.105 (regarding wage garnishments), but rather is made under sections 703.520 and 704.220 (regarding bank levies). (See Claim of Exemption (attached to 5/21/26 Judgment Creditor’s Submittal), § 7 [citing 704.220 and 700.160], and made on form EJ-160 as opposed to WG-006.) Thus, the 16 court day notice requirement under section 1005, subdivision (b)(3) does not appear applicable. Instead, section 703.570’s notice provisions—discussed above regarding the second point—is the only governing notice provision. (Cf.

Ahart, Cal. Practice Guide, Enforcing Judgments & Debts (The Rutter Group 2025), Ch. 6F-5, § 6:1197-98 [discussing 16 court day notice requirement for a hearing on creditor’s opposition to debtor’s claim of exemption from garnishment] and id., Ch. 6E-4, § 6:901 [discussing general 10 day notice requirement for hearing on creditor’s opposition to debtor’s claim of exemption and noting that “[t]his period is longer where the creditor opposes claims of exemption from wage garnishments; see ¶ 6:1198 ff.”].)

In addition to the Court’s independent research, Judgment Creditor also persuasively argues this point through its 6/8/26 Response.

Adrian Ortiz v. Harvest Inn Team, LLC 25CV000565

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION

TENTATIVE RULING: The matter is CONTINUED to July 10, 2026 at 8:30 a.m. in Dept B.

**at 9:30 a.m.** Christine Butler et al v. Anchor Health LLC 24CV000278

UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS SETTLEMENT

TENTATIVE RULING: The motion for preliminary approval of class action settlement is GRANTED. The Court will sign the proposed order. The matter is set for a Final Approval Hearing on October 09, 2026, at 8:30 a.m. in Dept. A. The June 10, 2026 Case Management Conference is VACATED.

4