McCARRELL v. A & I OLIVIERI, LLC
PLAINTIFF MARCY McCARRELL’S MOTION TO BE RELIEVED
Motion type
Parties
Ruling
LAW AND MOTION TENTATIVE RULINGS DATE: JUNE 4, 2026 TIME: 8:30 A.M.
TENTATIVE RULINGS ARE NOT POSTED IN UNLAWFUL DETAINER CASES
Notice to prevailing parties: Local Rule 2.10.01 requires you to submit a proposed formal order incorporating, verbatim, the language of any tentative ruling – or attaching and incorporating the tentative by reference - or an order consistent with the announced ruling of the Court, in accordance with California Rule of Court 3.1312. Such proposed order is required even if the prevailing party submitted a proposed order prior to the hearing with two exceptions: (1) in unopposed matters where the moving party has provided a detailed proposed order or JCC form of order, or (2) where the tentative is simply to “grant”. Failure to comply with Local Rule 2.10.01 may result in the imposition of sanctions following an order to show cause hearing, if a proposed order is not timely filed.
No. 22CV01739
McCARRELL v. A & I OLIVIERI, LLC
PLAINTIFF MARCY McCARRELL’S MOTION TO BE RELIEVED
The unopposed motion is granted and the Court will sign the proposed order submitted by counsel.
No. 16CV01899
GRANNY PURPS, INC., et al. v. COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ, et al.
CROSS-COMPLAINANT COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
The motion is continued so that the parties can provide supplemental briefing to the Court, as outlined below.
This case, and an associated case, resulted from the Sheriff’s Department’s raid and destruction of cannabis plants on Plaintiff’s property. Plaintiff presented two government claims related to the raids. Both claims were rejected.
On July 26, 2016, Plaintiff filed the complaint herein and a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) on June 23, 2017 against the County of Santa Cruz (“the County”) and other defendants. The County’s demurrer was sustained. Plaintiff appealed, and the Sixth District Court of Appeal reversed in part this Court’s order sustaining that demurrer to the FAC. On February 11, 2021, Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint and petition (“SAC”) for writ of mandate and for specific recovery. The SAC alleged that Granny Purps assigned the rights to the
Cited authorities
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?”