DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
25-01526978·orange·Civil·General Civil
Hearing 3 months agoVACATED

Powell vs. Daryani

Demurrer to Complaint

Hearing date
Jun 5, 2026
Department
C12
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Jul 24, 2026

Motion type

Browse all Demurrer rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffPowell
DefendantDaryani

Ruling

3. Gallagher vs. Razavi

25-01522835

1. Motion to Compel Answers to Form Interrogatories 2. Motion to Compel Production

These Motions are CONTINUED to June 26, 2026, to be heard with the motion already on calendar for that date.

THIS RULING IS FINAL.

Clerk to give notice.

4. Sneary vs. Gauntlet Holdings LLC

21-01220042

1. Motion to Compel Answers to Form Interrogatories 2. Motion to Compel Answers to Special Interrogatories

WITHDRAWN on June 2, 2026.

5. Powell vs. Daryani

25-01526978

Demurrer to Complaint

VACATED as MOOT based on Filing of FAC.

Demurrer to FAC will be heard on July 24, 2026

6. Blain vs. Ayers

23-01361840

Motion for Protective Order

The hearing for Plaintiff’s motion for protective order is VACATED, as the Court has granted responding Defendant’s ex parte application seeking an order permitting them to invoke the arbitration agreement. (See Minute Orders dated 3/10/26 (ROA 406) [granting RE/MAX Defendants’ ex parte request] and 11/3/25 (ROA 376) [Granting Defendant Pillsbury’s Motion to Compel Arbitration and providing “If the REMAX Defendants choose to contend there is a risk of conflicting rulings between the arbitration and court action, then REMAX defendants may promptly, seek to have Plaintiffs’ remaining claims against the REMAX Defendants referred to arbitration.

The REMAX Defendants may raise this issue via ex parte application, in light of the fast-approaching trial date...].) Since Plaintiff’s claims against Pillsbury and REMAX are all part of the arbitration proceeding, the remainder of this matter is STAYED pending arbitration. (See Code Civ. Proc. §1281.4.)

Since the court has granted the REMAX Defendants’ ex parte application to compel Blain to pursue his claims against them in the arbitration proceeding, the matter is stayed pending the outcome of the arbitration, and there is no basis to hear Plaintiff’s motion for protective order.

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