CHRISTIAN ROETTGERS VS. AUTONET MOBILE, INC. A CORPORATION et al
Case Summary
Case Details
-
Case Number:
*******0280
-
Filing Date:
04/25/2012
-
Case Status:
Not Classified By Court
-
Case Type:
Other
-
Courthouse:
-
County, State:
San Francisco, California
Party Details
Plaintiff
ROETTGERS, CHRISTIAN
Defendants
DOES 3-25
PRATZ, STERLING
DOES 1 TO 25, INCLUSIVE
AUTONET MOBILE, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION
AUTONET MOBILE, INC. A CORPORATION
EASTON CAPITAL PARTNERS LP
AUTONET MOBILE, INC.
EASTON CAPITAL PARTNERS, LP A DELAWARE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
DOES 3 TO 25 INCLUSIVE
Attorney/Law Firm Details
Plaintiff Attorneys
GIUFFRE, BARBARA L
Attorney at LAW OFFICES OF BARBARA GIUFFRE
351 California Street, Ste. 70
San Francisco, CA 94104
PFIRRMAN, CHRISTINA RAMONA
Attorney at LAW OFFICE OF CHRISTINA R. PFIRRMAN
201 Mission Street, Suite 1200
San Francisco, CA 94105
Defendant Attorneys
JENSEN, AMY K.
Attorney at HINSHAW & CULBERTSON LLP
One California Street,, 18Th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94116
STRAZULO, DENNIS DANIEL
Attorney at STRAZULO FITZGERALD LLP
Three Embarcadero Center, 8Th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
COLT, DOUG
Attorney at COLT SINGER BEA LLP
255 Shoreline Drive, Ste 540
Redwood Shores, CA 94065
Court Documents
OTHER NON EXEMPT COMPLAINTS, COMPLAINT FILED BY PLAINTIFF ROETTGERS, CHRISTIAN AS TO DEFENDANT AUTONET MOBILE, INC. A CORPORATION DOES 1 TO 25, INCLUSIVE SUMMONS ISSUED, JUDICIAL COUNCIL CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET FILED CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE SCHEDULED FOR SEP-26-2012 PROOF OF SERVICE DUE ON JUN-25-2012 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT DUE ON SEP-11-2012 (Fee:410.00)
NOTICE TO PLAINTIFF
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT FILED BY DEFENDANT AUTONET MOBILE, INC. (Fee:410.00)
CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY DEFENDANT AUTONET MOBILE, INC. ESTIMATED TIME FOR TRIAL: 5.0 DAYS
CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY PLAINTIFF ROETTGERS, CHRISTIAN JURY DEMANDED, ESTIMATED TIME FOR TRIAL: 8.0 DAYS
NOTICE OF TIME AND PLACE OF TRIAL, JURY TRIAL SET FOR MAY-20-2013 AT 9:30 AM IN DEPT. 206. CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE ON SEP-26-2012 IS OFF CALENDAR. NOTICE SENT BY COURT.
ORDER REGARDING STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER
ORDER SHORTENING TIME ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND (HEARING: 4/10/13; OPPOS DUE: 4/05/13; NO REPLY)
ORDER SHORTENING TIME ON MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER (HEARING: 4/11/13; OPPOS: 4/05/13; REPLY IS WAIVED)
1ST AMENDED COMPLAINT FILED BY PLAINTIFF ROETTGERS, CHRISTIAN AS TO DEFENDANT AUTONET MOBILE, INC. A CORPORATION PRATZ, STERLING EASTON CAPITAL PARTNERS LP DOES 3-25
ORDER DENYING ATUTONET MOBILE'S MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER RE: FRANCISCO GARCIA'S DEPOSITION
ORDER DENYING AUTONET MOBILE'S MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER RE: STERLING PRATZ DEPOSITION
SUMMONS ISSUED TO PLAINTIFF ROETTGERS, CHRISTIAN
ORDER AND STIPULATION FOR MOTION TO BE HEARD BY A MEMBER OF THE CALIFORNIA BAR SERVING AS A TEMPORARY JUDGE
ORDER AND STIPULATION FOR MOTION TO BE HEARD BY A MEMBER OF THE CALIFORNIA BAR SERVING AS A TEMPORARY JUDGE
ORDER RE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS FOR AUTONET'S FAILURE TO APPEAR AT THREE PARTY DEPOSITIONS; AND AUTONET'S IMPROPER INSTRUCTIONS AT THE CONTINUED BONETTI DEPOSITION NOT TO ANSWER NUMEROUS QUESTIONS
NOTICE OF ENTRY OF ORDER/NOTICE OF RULING FILED DENYING PLNTF'S MOTION FOR SANCTIONS FILED BY DEFENDANT AUTONET MOBILE, INC. A CORPORATION
SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE SET FOR MAY-17-2013 AT 1:00 PM IN DEPT. 210 WITH CONFERENCE OFFICER TROY WIGGINS.
Docket Entries
- 03/03/2015
- View Court Documents
-
DocketCRC 3.1385 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE OF MAR-17-2015 IS OFF CALENDAR. DISMISSAL ON FILE. NOTICE SENT BY COURT.
[-] Read Less
- 01/12/2015
- View Court Documents
-
DocketDISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE OF 3RD AMENDED COMPLAINT (TRANSACTION ID # 15011019)
[-] Read Less
- 04/18/2014
- View Court Documents
-
DocketREMOVED FROM MASTER JURY CALENDAR SET FOR MAY-05-2014 - NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT WAS FILED ON 3/3/13. CASE IS ASSIGNED TO DEPT. 610 ON MAR-17-2015 AT 10:30 AM FOR DISMISSAL PER CRC 3.1385. (206)
[-] Read Less
- 04/01/2014
- View Court Documents
-
DocketNOTICE OF ENTRY OF DISMISSAL AND PROOF OF SERVICE FILED BY PLAINTIFF ROETTGERS, CHRISTIAN
[-] Read Less
- 04/01/2014
- View Court Documents
-
DocketNOTICE OF ENTRY OF DISMISSAL AND PROOF OF SERVICE FILED BY PLAINTIFF ROETTGERS, CHRISTIAN
[-] Read Less
- 03/25/2014
-
DocketCASE NOT ASSIGNED FOR MANDATORY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE.
[-] Read Less
- 03/21/2014
- View Court Documents
-
DocketDISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE OF 3RD AMENDED COMPLAINT AS TO DEFENDANT PRATZ, STERLING
[-] Read Less
- 03/21/2014
- View Court Documents
-
DocketDISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE OF 3RD AMENDED COMPLAINT AS TO DEFENDANT EASTON CAPITAL PARTNERS LP
[-] Read Less
- 03/03/2014
- View Court Documents
-
DocketNOTICE OF SETTLEMENT OF ENTIRE CASE/ CONDITIONAL FILED BY PLAINTIFF ROETTGERS, CHRISTIAN
[-] Read Less
- 02/10/2014
-
DocketLAW AND MOTION, 302, MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION, OFF CALENDAR PER MOVING PARTY. (D302)
[-] Read Less
- 02/01/2013
-
DocketMOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION FILED BY DEFENDANT AUTONET MOBILE, INC. HEARING SET FOR APR-18-2013 AT 09:30 AM IN DEPT 302 (Fee:500.00)
[-] Read Less
- 12/28/2012
-
DocketNOTICE OF ENTRY OF ORDER/NOTICE OF RULING FILED STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER FILED BY DEFENDANT AUTONET MOBILE, INC. A CORPORATION
[-] Read Less
- 12/12/2012
- View Court Documents
-
DocketORDER REGARDING STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER
[-] Read Less
- 11/19/2012
-
DocketFEE PAID ON STIPULATED PROTECTIVE ORDER FILED BY DEFENDANT AUTONET MOBILE, INC. (Fee:20.00)
[-] Read Less
- 09/13/2012
- View Court Documents
-
DocketNOTICE OF TIME AND PLACE OF TRIAL, JURY TRIAL SET FOR MAY-20-2013 AT 9:30 AM IN DEPT. 206. CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE ON SEP-26-2012 IS OFF CALENDAR. NOTICE SENT BY COURT.
[-] Read Less
- 09/12/2012
- View Court Documents
-
DocketCASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY PLAINTIFF ROETTGERS, CHRISTIAN JURY DEMANDED, ESTIMATED TIME FOR TRIAL: 8.0 DAYS
[-] Read Less
- 09/11/2012
- View Court Documents
-
DocketCASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY DEFENDANT AUTONET MOBILE, INC. ESTIMATED TIME FOR TRIAL: 5.0 DAYS
[-] Read Less
- 05/18/2012
- View Court Documents
-
DocketANSWER TO COMPLAINT FILED BY DEFENDANT AUTONET MOBILE, INC. (Fee:410.00)
[-] Read Less
- 04/25/2012
- View Court Documents
-
DocketNOTICE TO PLAINTIFF
[-] Read Less
- 04/25/2012
- View Court Documents
-
DocketOTHER NON EXEMPT COMPLAINTS, COMPLAINT FILED BY PLAINTIFF ROETTGERS, CHRISTIAN AS TO DEFENDANT AUTONET MOBILE, INC. A CORPORATION DOES 1 TO 25, INCLUSIVE SUMMONS ISSUED, JUDICIAL COUNCIL CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET FILED CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE SCHEDULED FOR SEP-26-2012 PROOF OF SERVICE DUE ON JUN-25-2012 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT DUE ON SEP-11-2012 (Fee:410.00)
[-] Read Less
Tentative Rulings
| Case Number: | *******0280 | |
| Case Title: | CHRISTIAN ROETTGERS VS. AUTONET MOBILE, INC. A CORPORATION et al | |
| Court Date: | SEP-26-2013 09:30 AM | |
| Calendar Matter: | DEMURRER TO 2ND AMENDED COMPLAINT | |
| Rulings: | Matter on Calendar for Thursday, September 26, 2013, Line 4, DEFENDANT EASTON CAPITAL PARTNERS LP'S DEMURRER TO 2ND AMENDED COMPLAINTDemurrer is overruled as to both causes of action. Easton Capital Partners LP is not an agent of Autonet Mobile Inc. under California agency laws, and the business judgment rule is inapplicable as Easton Capital Partners LP is not a director of Autonet Mobile Inc. (Cal. Corp. Code u00A7 309.) The pleadings sufficiently allege that Easton Capital Partners LP intentionally acted to induce a breach of contract and intentionally interfere with a contractual relationship. Pleadings also state that Easton Capital Partners LP's conduct caused the breach and disruption of the contractual relationship. Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept302tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order with the name and address of the prevailing party's counsel or the prevailing party if pro per in the top left of the first page of proposed order which repeats verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must bring the proposed order to the hearing or email it to contestdept302tr@sftc.org prior to the hearing even if the motion is not opposed or the tentative ruling is not contested. =(302/LCN) |
| Case Number: | *******0280 | |
| Case Title: | CHRISTIAN ROETTGERS VS. AUTONET MOBILE, INC. A CORPORATION et al | |
| Court Date: | AUG-29-2013 09:30 AM | |
| Calendar Matter: | DEMURRER TO 2ND AMENDED COMPLAINT | |
| Rulings: | Matter on Calendar for Thursday, August 29, 2013, Line 6. DEFENDANT EASTON CAPITAL PARTNERS LP'S DEMURRER TO 2ND AMENDED COMPLAINT. Continued on the Court's motion to September 26, 2013. Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept302tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. =(302/MJM) |
| Case Number: | *******0280 | |
| Case Title: | CHRISTIAN ROETTGERS VS. AUTONET MOBILE, INC. A CORPORATION et al | |
| Court Date: | JUL-22-2013 09:30 AM | |
| Calendar Matter: | MOTION TO STRIKE 1ST AMENDED COMPLAINT | |
| Rulings: | Matter on Calendar for Monday, July 22, 2013, Line 9, DEFENDANT EASTON CAPITAL PARTNERS LP's MOTION TO STRIKE 1ST AMENDED COMPLAINT.This motion is off calendar because Plaintiff filed a Second Amended Complaint on June 27, 2013. =(302/MJM) |
| Case Number: | *******0280 | |
| Case Title: | CHRISTIAN ROETTGERS VS. AUTONET MOBILE, INC. A CORPORATION et al | |
| Court Date: | JUN-24-2013 09:30 AM | |
| Calendar Matter: | DEMURRER TO 1ST AMENDED COMPLAINT | |
| Rulings: | Matter on calendar for Monday, June 24, 2013, Line 14, DEFENDANT AUTONET MOBILE, INC.'s DEMURRER TO 1ST AMENDED COMPLAINT.Autonet's general demurrer to Plaintiff Roettgers' First Amended Complaint is overruled as to the first, third, and fourth causes of action, and sustained as to the second cause of action. The general demurrer to the first cause of action is overruled as Plaintiff has sufficiently pled the elements of a cause of action for wage violations under Labor Code Sections 201 and 202. The general demurrer to the second cause of action for failure to provide accurate wage statements under Labor Code Section 226 is sustained with leave to amend. Plaintiff is given 15 days to plead facts, in good faith, that demonstrate an injury arose from the missing/inaccurate information in Autonet's wage statements. See Price v. Starbucks Corp, 192 Cal. App. 4th 1136, 1142-43 (2011). The general demurrer to the third cause of action for violation of Business and Professions Code Section 17200 et seq. is overruled as Plaintiff has sufficiently pled facts regarding Autonet's alleged unfair and unlawful business practices. See Khoury v. Maly's of California, Inc., 14 Cal. App. 4th 612, 619, (1993). The general demurrer to the fourth cause of action for breach of contract and/or breach of covenant of good faith is overruled. Plaintiff has pled sufficient facts that Autonet breached its oral promise to Plaintiff to repay his deferred salary if he continued to work for Autonet on a reduced salary through its liquidity crisis. (FAC 8, 25.) Plaintiff's special demurrer is overruled as to the first, third, and fourth causes of action. As to the first and third causes of action, Plaintiff is not required to allege the existence of a contract at the pleading stage to overcome a demurrer. As to the fourth cause of action, it can be ascertained from the First Amended Complaint that the alleged contract between Roettgers and Autonet was an oral agreement. (FAC 8, 25.) Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept302tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order with the name and address of the prevailing party's counsel or the prevailing party if pro per in the top left of the first page of proposed order which repeats verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must bring the proposed order to the hearing or email it to contestdept302tr@sftc.org prior to the hearing even if the motion is not opposed or the tentative ruling is not contested. =(302/MJM) |
| Case Number: | *******0280 | |
| Case Title: | CHRISTIAN ROETTGERS VS. AUTONET MOBILE, INC. A CORPORATION et al | |
| Court Date: | JUN-12-2013 09:30 AM | |
| Calendar Matter: | DEMURRER TO 1ST AMENDED COMPLAINT | |
| Rulings: | Matter on calendar for Tuesday, May 28, 2013, Line 13, DEFENDANT AUTONET MOBILE, INC.'s DEMURRER TO 1ST AMENDED COMPLAINT.Continued to June 24, 2013 on the Court's own motion. Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept302tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. = (302/MJM) |
| Case Number: | *******0280 | |
| Case Title: | CHRISTIAN ROETTGERS VS. AUTONET MOBILE, INC. A CORPORATION et al | |
| Court Date: | MAY-02-2013 09:00 AM | |
| Calendar Matter: | Notice Of Motion And Motion For Sanctions For Autonet'S Failure To Appear At Three Party Witness Depositons; And Imporper Instructions At The Continued Deposittions | |
| Rulings: | Set for hearing on Thursday, May 2, 2013, Line 4, PLAINTIFF CHRISTIAN ROETTGERS' Notice Of Motion And Motion For Sanctions For Autonet's Failure To Appear At Three Party Witness Depositons; And Improper Instructions At The Continued DepositionsPro Tem Judge Arlene Barton, a member of the California State Bar who meets all the requirements set forth in CRC 2.812 to serve as a temporary judge, has been assigned to hear this motion. Prior to the hearing all parties to the motion will be asked to sign a stipulation agreeing that the motion may be heard by the Pro Tem Judge. If all parties to the motion sign the stipulation, the hearing will proceed before the Judge Pro Tem who will decide the motion with the same authority as a Superior Court Judge. If a party appears by telephone, the stipulation may be signed via fax or consent to sign given by email. If not all parties to the motion sign the stipulation, the Pro Tem Judge will hold a hearing on the motion and, based on the papers submitted by the parties and the hearing, issue a report in the nature of a recommendation to the Dept. 302 Judge, who will then decide the motion. If a party does not appear at the hearing, the party will be deemed to have stipulated that the motion will be decided by the Pro Tem Judge with the same authority as a Superior Court Judge.The Pro Tem Judge has issued the following tentative ruling: The motion for Sanctions for Failure to Appear at Three Party Witnesses Depositions and For Improper Instructions at the Continued Deposition is Denied. The record clearly reflects plaintiff had agreed to move the deposition dates of the three party witnesses upon which Defendants relied. Plaintiff failed to provide evidence that the deposition of Ms. Bonetti was left open as to any and all questions; the transcripts fails to set forth clearly the full reason for a further deposition but it is clear there were certain objections that were made the basis for the further deposition. Further plaintiff did not provide a CRC 3.1345(a) statement as required. Sanctions are denied.Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to abarton@mckennalong.com with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. If the tentative ruling is not contested, the parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Pro Tem hearing the motion and the Pro Tem will sign an order confirming the tentative ruling. The prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order repeating verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must bring the proposed order to the hearing even if the motion is not opposed or the tentative ruling is not contested. =(302/JPT) |
| Case Number: | *******0280 | |
| Case Title: | CHRISTIAN ROETTGERS VS. AUTONET MOBILE, INC. A CORPORATION et al | |
| Court Date: | APR-23-2013 09:00 AM | |
| Calendar Matter: | Notice Of Motion And Motion For Protective Orderq | |
| Rulings: | SET FOR TUESDAY, APRIL 23. 2013 AT 9:00 AM, LINE 2, DEFENDANT AUTONET MOBILE, INC.'s Motion For Protective Order.Off calendar. Matter resolved in a previous discovery hearing. =(302/JPT) |
| Case Number: | *******0280 | |
| Case Title: | CHRISTIAN ROETTGERS VS. AUTONET MOBILE, INC. A CORPORATION et al | |
| Court Date: | APR-18-2013 09:30 AM | |
| Calendar Matter: | MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION | |
| Rulings: | Set for hearing on Thursday, April 18, 2013, Line 6, DEFENDANT AUTONET MOBILE, INC.'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATIONThe matter is off calendar per the Court's order on April 10, 2013. =(302/MJM) |
| Case Number: | *******0280 | |
| Case Title: | CHRISTIAN ROETTGERS VS. AUTONET MOBILE, INC. A CORPORATION et al | |
| Court Date: | APR-11-2013 09:00 AM | |
| Calendar Matter: | Notice Of Motion And Motion For Protective Order | |
| Rulings: | Set for Hearing on Thursday, April 11, 2013, Line 2, DEFENDANT AUTONET MOBILE, INCORPORATED'S Motion For Protective OrderPro Tem Judge Paul Renne, a member of the California State Bar who meets all the requirements set forth in CRC 2.812 to serve as a temporary judge, has been assigned to hear this motion. Prior to the hearing all parties to the motion will be asked to sign a stipulation agreeing that the motion may be heard by the Pro Tem Judge. If all parties to the motion sign the stipulation, the hearing will proceed before the Judge Pro Tem who will decide the motion with the same authority as a Superior Court Judge. If a party appears by telephone, the stipulation may be signed via fax or consent to sign given by email. If not all parties to the motion sign the stipulation, the Pro Tem Judge will hold a hearing on the motion and, based on the papers submitted by the parties and the hearing, issue a report in the nature of a recommendation to the Dept. 302 Judge, who will then decide the motion. If a party does not appear at the hearing, the party will be deemed to have stipulated that the motion will be decided by the Pro Tem Judge with the same authority as a Superior Court Judge.The Pro Tem Judge has issued the following tentative ruling: DEFENDANT AUTONET MOBILE, INC.'S MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER IS DENIED. THIS MATTER IS PRESENTLY SET FOR TRIAL ON MAY 20, 2013 AND PLAINTIFF HAS THE RIGHT TO COMPLETE THE TAKING OF HIS DEPOSITION TO PREPARE FOR TRIAL. THERE HAS BEEN NO SHOWING OF GOOD CAUSE AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 2025.420(b) TO JUSTIFY THE ISSUANCE OF A PROTECTIVE. MR. PRATZ HAS HAD ALMOST ONE MONTH TO OBTAIN SEPARATE COUNSEL IF HE HAD SO CHOSEN TO DO SO AND HIS FAILURE TO DO SO IS NOT A BASIS FOR DENYING PLAINTIFF THE RIGHT TO COMPLETE THE DEPOSITION. IF THE COURT GRANT'S PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO AMEND THE COMPLAINT AND ADD MR. PRATZ AS A NAMED DEFENDANT UNDOUBTEDLY THE PRESENT TRIAL DATE WILL BE VACATED AND COUNSEL SHOULD BE ABLE TO WORK OUT A SCHEDULE THAT WILL ACCOMMODATE THE INTERESTS OF ALL PARTIES TO THIS LITIGATION. THE COURT WILL NOT IMPOSED ANY MONETARY SANCTIONS. COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFFS SHOULD PREPARE AND APPROPRIATE ORDER, SUBMIT TO COUNSEL FOR AUTONET FOR APPROVAL AS TO FORM AND SUBMIT TO THE COURT FOR SIGNATURE AT THE HEARING ON APRIL 11, 2013.Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to rennepa@cooley.com with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. If the tentative ruling is not contested, the parties are deemed to have stipulated to the Pro Tem hearing the motion and the Pro Tem will sign an order confirming the tentative ruling. The prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order repeating verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must bring the proposed order to the hearing even if the motion is not opposed or the tentative ruling is not contested. =302/jpt |
| Case Number: | *******0280 | |
| Case Title: | CHRISTIAN ROETTGERS VS. AUTONET MOBILE, INC. A CORPORATION et al | |
| Court Date: | APR-10-2013 09:30 AM | |
| Calendar Matter: | MOTION FOR LEAVE TO Amend Complt | |
| Rulings: | Set for hearing on Wednesday, April 10, 2013, Line 12, PLAINTIFF CHRISTIAN ROETTGERS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND COMPLAINTThe motion is granted for good cause shown. The trial date is continued to November 18, 2013. The motion for summary judgment/adjudication scheduled for April 18 is off calendar. Plaintiff shall immediately file and serve the amended complaint. Discovery remains open and Defendant may bring a new motion for summary judgment. If the November 18, 2013 trial date is not mutually agreeable, the parties are to meet and confer before the hearing and be prepared to propose an alternate date. Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to contestdept302tr@sftc.org with a copy to all other parties by 4pm stating, without argument, the portion(s) of the tentative ruling that the party contests. The prevailing party is required to prepare a proposed order with the name and address of the prevailing party's counsel or the prevailing party if pro per in the top left of the first page of proposed order which repeats verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling and must bring the proposed order to the hearing or email it to contestdept302tr@sftc.org prior to the hearing even if the motion is not opposed or the tentative ruling is not contested. =(302/MJM) |
Dig Deeper
Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases