This case was last updated from California Courts of Appeal on 12/06/2022 at 03:25:26 (UTC).

Donald Crawford, Sr. v. The Hertz Corporation

Case Summary

On 09/19/2022 Donald Crawford, Sr filed an Other lawsuit against The Hertz Corporation. This case was filed in California Courts of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District - Division 2 located in Statewide, California. The Judge overseeing this case is Ottolia, Daniel. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
Case Details Parties Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ***9819

  • Filing Date:

    09/19/2022

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Other

  • County, State:

    Statewide, California

Judge Details

Trial Court Judge

Ottolia, Daniel

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Appellant

Donald Crawford, Sr.

Claremont, CA 91711

Respondent and Defendant

The Hertz Corporation

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Respondent and Defendant Attorneys

Andrew Alexander Wood

Attorney at Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP

2010 Main Street, Suite 800

Irvine, CA 92614

Benjamin J. Howard

Attorney at Severson & Werson

595 Market Street, Suite 2600

San Francisco, CA 94105

K. Erik Friess

Attorney at Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP

2010 Main Street, Suite 800

Irvine, CA 92614

Court Documents

Court documents are not available for this case.

 

Docket Entries

  • 01/12/2023
  • HearingDescription: Filed letter from:; Notes: Appellant w/copy of signed, file-stamped copy of the Aug 12, 2022, judgment of dismissal, per order of Nov 10, 2022

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 01/12/2023
  • HearingDescription: Remittitur issued.; Notes: Partial, as to the orders of August 19, 2022 and August 25, 2022

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/19/2022
  • HearingDescription: Record on appeal filed.

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/02/2022
  • DocketDescription: To court.; Notes: Letter briefs & CCIS, per order of Nov 10, 2022

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/02/2022
  • DocketDescription: Received:; Notes: Letter brief from applnt, regarding whether the Aug 12, 2022, order dismissing the action without prejudice and retaining jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement under Civil code of Procedure section 664.6 is appealable), per order of Nov 10, 2022

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/30/2022
  • DocketDescription: Letter brief filed.; Notes: Defendant and Respondent: The Hertz Corporation Attorney: Andrew Alexander Wood Attorney: Benjamin J. Howard Regarding whether the Aug 12, 2022, order dismissing the action without prejudice and retaining jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement under CCP section 664.6 is appealable, per order of Nov 10, 2022.

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/30/2022
  • DocketBrief: Letter brief filed.; Party Attorney: Defendant and Respondent: The Hertz CorporationAttorney: Andrew Alexander Wood Attorney: Benjamin J. Howard; Notes: Regarding whether the Aug 12, 2022, order dismissing the action without prejudice and retaining jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement under CCP section 664.6 is appealable, per order of Nov 10, 2022.

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/10/2022
  • DispositionDescription: Other involuntary dismissal; Disposition Type: Partial as to the orders of August 19, 2022 and August 25, 2022.

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/10/2022
  • DocketDescription: Dismissal order filed.; Notes: The court has reviewed the CCIS, notice of appeal and the three documents attached to the CCIS. 1. Appellant directed to serve and file a signed, file-stamped copy of the Aug 12, 2022, judgment of dismissal, on or before 20 days from date of this order. 2. Parties directed, on or before 20 days from date of this order, to submit letter briefs regarding whether the Aug 12, 2022, order dismissing the action without prejudice and retaining jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement under Civil code of Procedure section 664.6 is appealable. 3. The minute order for Aug 19, 2022, denying applnt's ex parte application for order reviewing and correcting settlement agreement, is not a statutorily designated appealable order, therefore the appeal as to that order is dismissed. 4. The order of Aug 25, 2022, is not appealable, because it is an order denying a peremptory challenge against a trial judge, therefore, the appeal is dismissed as to this order.

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/27/2022
  • DocketDescription: Appellant 's notice designating record on appeal filed in trial court on:; Notes: Sep 30, 2022

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/30/2022
  • DocketDescription: Civil case information statement filed.

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/30/2022
  • DocketDescription: Order waiving filing fee.

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/30/2022
  • DocketDescription: Application for waiver of filing fee filed.; Notes: By appellant

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/21/2022
  • DocketDescription: Default notice sent-appellant notified per rule 8.100(c).

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/20/2022
  • DocketDescription: Notice of appeal lodged/received.; Notes: dtd Sept 19, 2022; Donald Crawford, Sr.

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 08/19/2022
  • DocketTrial Court Name: Riverside County Superior Court; County: Riverside; Trial Court Case Number: CVRI2105194; Trial Court Judge: Ottolia, Daniel

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where The Hertz Corporation is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer Friess, K Erik

Latest cases represented by Lawyer WOOD ANDREW ALEXANDER

Latest cases represented by Lawyer Howard, Benjamin J