This case was last updated from San Francisco County Superior Courts on 04/11/2016 at 21:20:54 (UTC).

MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION et al VS. RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION et al

Case Summary

On 06/29/2012 MT TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION filed a Contract - Professional Negligence lawsuit against RONALD P GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION. This case was filed in San Francisco County Superior Courts, Civic Center Courthouse located in San Francisco, California. The case status is Not Classified By Court.
Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******1973

  • Filing Date:

    06/29/2012

  • Case Status:

    Not Classified By Court

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Professional Negligence

  • County, State:

    San Francisco, California

 

Party Details

Appellants and Plaintiffs

MEIER, KAROL JAN

MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION

SELIG-FARNEY, SANDI

Defendants and Respondents

DOES 1 TO 20 INCLUSIVE

GOLDMAN, RONALD

RONALD P GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION DOING BUSINESS AS THE GOLDMAN LAW FIRM

GOLDMAN, RONALD AN INDIVIDUAL

RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION DOING BUSINESS AS THE GOLDMAN LAW FIRM

RONALD P. GOLDMAN A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION

Other

WOLF, LAURENCE E.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Appellant and Plaintiff Attorney

BRADSHAW, DREXEL A.

Attorney at BRADSHAW & ASSOCIATES, P.C.

One Sansome, 34Th Floor

San Francisco, CA 94104

Defendant and Respondent Attorneys

FRASSETTO, PAUL A

Attorney at FRASSETTO LAW OFFICES

505 Montgomery Street, 10Th Flr.

San Francisco, CA 94111

SHAUGHNESSY, GREGORY ROBERT

Attorney at THE LAW OFFICES OF GREGORY R SHAUGHNESSY

55 Main Street

Tiburon, CA 94920

GOOD, ROBERT V.

Attorney at THE GOLDMAN LAW FIRM

55 Main Street

Tiburon, CA 94920

Other Attorney

GOLDMAN, RONALD PAUL

Attorney at THE GOLDMAN LAW FIRMMERCHANT BANK BUILDING

55 Main Street

Tiburon, CA 94920

 

Court Documents

GENERIC CIVIL FILING (NO FEE)

POS RE: REPLY TO OPPOS TO MTN TO TRANSFER VENUE FILED BY DEFENDANT RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION DOING BUSINESS AS THE GOLDMAN LAW FIRM GOLDMAN, RONALD AN INDIVIDUAL

GENERIC CIVIL FILING (NO FEE)

DIRECTORY NOTICE TO REPORTER - SANDY CARRANZA

DISMISSAL

DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE OF COMPLAINT AS TO DEFENDANT GOLDMAN, RONALD AN INDIVIDUAL

ORDER

ORDER : PENDING CONSIDERATION OF THE PETITION, ALL PROCEEDING ARE TEMPORARILY STAYED, SUBJECT TO FURTHER ORDER OF COA (A138019 DIV 3)

MOTION (CIVIL GENERIC)

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION FILED BY PLAINTIFF MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION MEIER, KAROL JAN SELIG-FARNEY, SANDI HEARING SET FOR APR-04-2014 AT 09:30 AM IN DEPT 302 (Fee:60.00)

PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT

SUMMONS ON COMPLAINT FILED BY PLAINTIFF MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION MEIER, KAROL JAN SELIG-FARNEY, SANDI SERVED JUN-29-2012, PERSONAL SERVICE ON DEFENDANT RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION DOING BUSINESS AS THE GOLDMAN LAW FIRM

GENERIC CIVIL FILING (NO FEE)

POS OF: DEC OF CLINTON WOODS; PLTFS' MEMO OF P&A ISO OPPOS FILED BY PLAINTIFF MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION MEIER, KAROL JAN SELIG-FARNEY, SANDI

DEMURRER

DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT FILED BY DEFENDANT RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION DOING BUSINESS AS THE GOLDMAN LAW FIRM HEARING SET FOR NOV-30-2012 AT 09:30 AM IN DEPT 302 (Fee:60.00)

Order Continuing Case Management Conference

CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE OF NOV-28-2012 CONTINUED TO JAN-16-2013 AT 10:30 AM IN DEPARTMENT 610. NOTICE SENT BY COURT.

120 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 01/27/2016
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketRETURN OF EXECUTION FOR MONEY ISSUED TO MARIN COUNTY, RETURNED AND FILED, FULLY SATISFIED AS TO PLAINTIFF MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/19/2015
  • DocketEXECUTION FOR MONEY ISSUED TO MARIN COUNTY AS TO PLAINTIFF MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION (Fee:25.00)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/04/2015
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketTHE COURT ORDERED THE FOLLOWING AMENDED JUDGMENT ENTERED: IT IS ADJUDGED THAT PLAINTIFF MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION MEIER, KAROL JAN SELIG-FARNEY, SANDI TAKE NOTHING FROM DEFENDANT RONALD P. GOLDMAN A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION ON THE COMPLAINT, SAID DEFENDANT TO HAVE JUDGMENT THEREON FOR $7,276.90 COSTS, TOTAL JUDGMENT $7,276.90, SEE SCANNED DOCUMENT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/21/2015
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketMEMORANDUM OF COSTS AND DISBURSEMENTS, $419.00 TOTAL COSTS, MATURE DATE OCT-12-2015,, (TRANSACTION ID # 15263068) FILED BY DEFENDANT RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION DOING BUSINESS AS THE GOLDMAN LAW FIRM

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/14/2015
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketREMITTITUR AFFIRMED (A141939 DIV. 3)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/03/2014
  • DocketREFUND/REIMBURSEMENT OF $100.00 RE 32766 FOR TRANSACTION W2814714A002 (REPORTERS COSTS DEPOSITED), PAYABLE TO BRADSHAW & ASSOC, DOC #1906398502, WARRANT #38203517, DATED NOV-03-2014

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/03/2014
  • DocketREFUND/REIMBURSEMENT OF $100.00 RE 32766 FOR TRANSACTION W2814714A002 (REPORTERS COSTS DEPOSITED), PAYABLE TO CSR VAUGHN, DOC #1906398458, WARRANT #38203524, DATED NOV-03-2014

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/21/2014
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketCERTIFICATION NOTICE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/21/2014
  • DocketAPPEAL RECORD CERTIFIED TO THE COURT OF APPEAL - 8.124, 4 VOLS RT (APPEAL FILED 5/19/14, A141939 DIV 3)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/15/2014
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketDIRECTORY NOTICE TO REPORTER - SANDY CARRANZA

    Read MoreRead Less
365 More Docket Entries
  • 08/13/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketDISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE OF COMPLAINT AS TO DEFENDANT GOLDMAN, RONALD AN INDIVIDUAL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/27/2012
  • DocketCOURT REPORTING SERVICES LESS THAN 1 HOUR FILED BY DEFENDANT RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION DOING BUSINESS AS THE GOLDMAN LAW FIRM GOLDMAN, RONALD AN INDIVIDUAL (Fee:30.00)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/27/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketDECLARATION IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FILED BY DEFENDANT RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION DOING BUSINESS AS THE GOLDMAN LAW FIRM GOLDMAN, RONALD AN INDIVIDUAL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/27/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketMEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FILED BY DEFENDANT RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION DOING BUSINESS AS THE GOLDMAN LAW FIRM GOLDMAN, RONALD AN INDIVIDUAL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/27/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE OF MOTION FILED BY DEFENDANT RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION DOING BUSINESS AS THE GOLDMAN LAW FIRM GOLDMAN, RONALD AN INDIVIDUAL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/27/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketNOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO TRANSFER VENUE FILED BY DEFENDANT RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION DOING BUSINESS AS THE GOLDMAN LAW FIRM GOLDMAN, RONALD AN INDIVIDUAL HEARING SET FOR AUG-27-2012 AT 09:30 AM IN DEPT 302 (Fee:900.00)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/02/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketSUMMONS ON COMPLAINT FILED BY PLAINTIFF MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION MEIER, KAROL JAN SELIG-FARNEY, SANDI SERVED JUN-29-2012, PERSONAL SERVICE ON DEFENDANT RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION DOING BUSINESS AS THE GOLDMAN LAW FIRM

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/02/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketSUMMONS ON COMPLAINT FILED BY PLAINTIFF MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION MEIER, KAROL JAN SELIG-FARNEY, SANDI SERVED JUN-29-2012, PERSONAL SERVICE ON DEFENDANT RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION DOING BUSINESS AS THE GOLDMAN LAW FIRM

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/29/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketNOTICE TO PLAINTIFF

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/29/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketPROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE, COMPLAINT FILED BY PLAINTIFF MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION MEIER, KAROL JAN SELIG-FARNEY, SANDI AS TO DEFENDANT RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION DOING BUSINESS AS THE GOLDMAN LAW FIRM GOLDMAN, RONALD AN INDIVIDUAL DOES 1 TO 20 INCLUSIVE SUMMONS ISSUED, JUDICIAL COUNCIL CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET FILED CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE SCHEDULED FOR NOV-28-2012 PROOF OF SERVICE DUE ON AUG-28-2012 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT DUE ON NOV-13-2012 (Fee:410.00)

    Read MoreRead Less

Complaint Information

Paul A. Frassetto (Bar No. 114802) Frassetto Law Offices

505 Montgomery St., 10" Floor $&h Francisco County Superior Court San Francisco, CA 94111 ' Telephone: (415) 354-2700 MAY 14 2014

Email: paulfrassetto@yahoo.com

| | | CLEBK OF,THE COURT Att(gé)rneys foét Defendant RONALD P. GOLDMAN, Bv = e

A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

MT TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CASE NO. CGC-12-521973 CORPORATION, KAROL JAN MEIER, and - S ANDI SELIG FARNEY )(posed] ORDER DENYING

PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR

Plaintiffs, LEAVE TO FILE FIRST AMENDED

| COMPLAINT

V. DATE: May 14, 2014 RONALD P, GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL | TIME: 9:30 a.m. LAW CORPORATION, et al. DEPT: 302

Defendants.

The motion of Piamtlfis MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION,

KAROL JAN MEIER and SANDI-SELIG-FARNEY for a leave to file a first amended | complamt came on for hearing in Department 302 of the above-entitled Court on May 14, 20]J|4 The Court, having considered the papers filed in support of and in opposition to the |

morlon, having issued its tentative ruling to deny the motion, and the Court having heard

the|oral argument of counsel, rules as follows:

O 0 ~J & W A~ W N

:/‘\& | f/‘—\

The motion is denied. Judgment was entered on April 16, 2014, and the Court lacks

the é@luthority to grant leave to amend because the judgment has not been vacated. See

Tentative Rulings

Case Number:*******1973
Case Title:MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION et al VS. RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION et al
Court Date:MAY-02-2014 09:30 AM
Calendar Matter:Notice Of Motion For Leave To File First Amended Complaint
Rulings:Matter on calendar for Friday, May 2, 2014, Line 8, PLAINTIFFs MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION, KAROL MEIER and SANDI SELIG-FARNEY's Motion For Leave To File First Amended Complaint.The motion is continued to May 14, 2014, to be heard by Judge Goldsmith. 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 subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. =(302/MJM)


Case Number:*******1973
Case Title:MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION et al VS. RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION et al
Court Date:APR-04-2014 09:30 AM
Calendar Matter:Notice Of Intention To Move For New Trial
Rulings: Matter on calendar for Friday, April 4, 2014, Line 10, PLAINTIFFS MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION, KAROL MEIER, SANDI SELIG-FARNEY'S Notice Of Intention To Move For New Trial. The motion is continued to April 10, 2014, on the court's 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. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. =(302/EHG)


Case Number:*******1973
Case Title:MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION et al VS. RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION et al
Court Date:FEB-07-2014 09:00 AM
Calendar Matter:Notice Of Motion And Motion To Compel Production Of Documents By Dr. Wolf In Response To Request For Production No. 10 And For Monetary Sanctions
Rulings:Set for hearing on Friday, February 7, 2014, Line 1, PLAINTIFFS MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION, KAROL MEIER AND SANDI SELIG-FARNEY'S Motion To Compel Production Of Documents By Dr. Wolf In Response To Request For Production No. 10 And For Monetary Sanctions.Pro Tem Judge Rebecca Woodson, 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: DENIED. The responsive documents identified are protected by the attorney-client privilege, and Plaintiffs' have failed to show the responsive documents identified are relevant to the instant matter. Plaintiffs' request for sanctions is DENIED. Defendant's request for sanctions is DENIED.Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to rwoodson@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. The subject line of the email shall include the line number, case name and case number. 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:*******1973
Case Title:MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION et al VS. RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION et al
Court Date:DEC-19-2013 09:00 AM
Calendar Matter:Ntc Of Mtn For Terminating, Issue And Evidentiary Sanctions Against Pltffs
Rulings:Set for hearing on Thursday, December 19, 2013, Line 3, DEFENDANT RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION's Motion For Terminating, Issue And Evidentiary Sanctions Against Plaintiffs.Continued on the court's own motion to January 2, 2014. 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/JPT)


Case Number:*******1973
Case Title:MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION et al VS. RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION et al
Court Date:DEC-05-2013 09:30 AM
Calendar Matter:MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT And/Or Summary Adjudication
Rulings:Matter on calendar for Thursday, December 5, 2013, Line 8: DEFENDANT RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION DOING BUSINESS AS THE GOLDMAN LAW FIRM'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT And/Or Summary AdjudicationHearing required. =302/MJM


Case Number:*******1973
Case Title:MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION et al VS. RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION et al
Court Date:OCT-25-2013 09:00 AM
Calendar Matter:Notice Of Motion For Compliance With The Court'S February 26, 2013 Order; Or, In The Alternative, For Clarification Or Modification Of The Court'S February 26, 2013 Order; And For Monetary Sanctions Against Defts For Misuse Of The Discovery Process And Failure To Comply With The Court'S February 26, 2013 Order
Rulings:Set for hearing on Friday, October 25, 2013, Line 6: Plaintiffs MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION'S, KAROL MEIER'S, and SANDI SELIG-FARNEY'S Motion For Compliance With The Court's February 26, 2013 Order; Or, In The Alternative, For Clarification Or Modification Of The Court's February 26, 2013 Order; And For Monetary Sanctions Against Defendants For Misuse Of The Discovery Process And Failure To Comply With The Court's February 26, 2013 OrderPro Tem Judge Robert Kane, 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 has not issued a tentative ruling on this motion. Each party is required to bring a proposed order to the hearing. =(302/JPT)


Case Number:*******1973
Case Title:MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION et al VS. RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION et al
Court Date:OCT-24-2013 09:30 AM
Calendar Matter:Ntc Of Mtn For Judgment On The Pleadings
Rulings:Matter on calendar for Thursday, October 24, 2013, Line 11, DEFENDANT RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION's Motion For Judgment On The Pleadings.Defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings as to the first and fourth causes of action in Plaintiffs' Complaint is denied. Plaintiffs' and Defendant's requests for judicial notice are granted. Plaintiffs have alleged sufficient facts to state a claim for legal malpractice and breach of fiduciary duty. (See Complaint 44-64, 78-81; Coscia v. McKenna & Cuneo (2001) 25 Cal.4th 1194, 1199.) Taking the facts as true, but for Defendant's breaches of duty, Plaintiffs would not have been exposed to additional liability in the Killips matter and would not have incurred attorney's fees and costs defending the additional claims. (See Complaint 57-59.) It is a factual question whether Plaintiffs could have achieved a better result in the underlying action but for Defendant's alleged breach of duty. (See Lazy Acres Market v. Tseng 152 Cal.App.4th 1431, 1435 (2007).) 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/EHG)


Case Number:*******1973
Case Title:MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION et al VS. RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION et al
Court Date:OCT-23-2013 09:00 AM
Calendar Matter:Notice Of Defts Motion To Compel Further Responses To Requests For Production And For Monetary Sanctions
Rulings:Set for hearing on Wednesday, October 23, 2013, Line 3: Defendant RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION'S Motion To Compel Further Responses To Requests For Production And For Monetary SanctionsPro Tem Judge Katherine Huibonhoa, 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 has not issued a tentative ruling on this motion. Each party is required to bring a proposed order to the hearing. =(302/JPT)


Case Number:*******1973
Case Title:MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION et al VS. RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION et al
Court Date:SEP-27-2013 09:30 AM
Calendar Matter:Ntc Of Mtn For Judgment On The Pleadings
Rulings:Matter on Calendar for Friday, September 27, 2013, Line 11, DEFENDANT RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION'S Notice Of Motion For Judgment On The PleadingsThe motion is continued to October 24, 2013, on the Court's 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/LCN)


Case Number:*******1973
Case Title:MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION et al VS. RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION et al
Court Date:SEP-19-2013 09:00 AM
Calendar Matter:Notice Of Defts Motion To Compel Further Responses To Requests For Production And For Monetary Sanctions
Rulings:Set for hearing on Thursday, September 19, 2013, Line 3: Defendant RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION DOING BUSINESS AS THE GOLDMAN LAW FIRM'S Motion To Compel Further Responses To Requests For Production And For Monetary SanctionsPro Tem Judge Katherine Huibonhoa, 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.Hearing required.The Pro Tem has not issued a tentative ruling on this motion. Each party is required to bring a proposed order to the hearing. =(302/JPT)


Case Number:*******1973
Case Title:MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION et al VS. RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION et al
Court Date:AUG-28-2013 09:30 AM
Calendar Matter:Notice Of Motion And Motion For Evidentiary, Issue, Terminating, And Monetary Sanctions
Rulings:Matter on Calendar for Wednesday, August 28, 2013, Line 13, PLAINTIFFS MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION, KAROL MEIER, SANDI SELIG-FARNEY'S Notice Of Motion And Motion For Evidentiary, Issue, Terminating, And Monetary SanctionsHearing required. The court will not provide a court reporter for this discovery hearing. If any party wishes a reporter, the parties must meet and confer and agree on a single reporter. =(302/MJM)


Case Number:*******1973
Case Title:MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION et al VS. RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION et al
Court Date:AUG-05-2013 09:00 AM
Calendar Matter:Notice Of Motion And Motion For Evidentiary, Issue, Terminating, And Monetary Sanctions
Rulings:Set for hearing on Monday, August 5, 2013, Line 8: Plaintiffs MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION'S, KAROL MEIER'S, and SANDI SELIG-FARNEY'S Motion for Evidentiary, Issue, Terminating, and Monetary SanctionsPro Tem Judge Philip Andersen, 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 has not issued a tentative ruling on this motion. Each party is required to bring a proposed order to the hearing. =(302/JPT)


Case Number:*******1973
Case Title:MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION et al VS. RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION et al
Court Date:JUL-22-2013 09:00 AM
Calendar Matter:Notice Of Motion And Motion For Evidentiary, Issue, Terminating, And Monetary Sanctions
Rulings:Hearing set for Monday, July 22, 2013, Line 1: Plaintiffs MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION'S, KAROL MEIER'S, and SANDI SELIG-FARNEY'S Motion for Evidentiary, Issue, Terminating, and Monetary SanctionsContinued on the court's own motion to August 5, 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/JPT)


Case Number:*******1973
Case Title:MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION et al VS. RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION et al
Court Date:FEB-19-2013 09:00 AM
Calendar Matter:Mtn To Compel Deft'S Further Responses To Req For Admission
Rulings:Set for hearing on Tuesday, February 19, 2013, Line 6, PLAINTIFF MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION, KAROL MEIER, SANDI SELIG-FARNEY Mtn To Compel Deft'S Further Responses To Req For Admission.Pro Tem Judge Robert Kane, 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: Parties to appear and be prepared to responded specifically in order to each of the matters set forth in Plaintiffs' separate statement.Any party who contests a tentative ruling must send an email to rkane1089@aol.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:*******1973
Case Title:MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION et al VS. RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION et al
Court Date:FEB-14-2013 09:30 AM
Calendar Matter:Mtn To Reecuse Pltf'S Counsel
Rulings:Set for hearing on Thursday, February 14, 2013, Line 20, DEFENDANT RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION'S Motion To Recuse Plaintiff's CounselDenied. Even assuming some of the testimony of Plaintiffs' counsel may be appropriate, the Court is not inclined to deprive plaintiffs of their chosen counsel in light of their certification under oath in their declarations that they want to keep current counsel notwithstanding the possibility that counsel may become a witness. It will be left to future proceedings to determine what discovery or testimony may properly be elicited from counsel. 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/PJB)


Case Number:*******1973
Case Title:MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION et al VS. RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION et al
Court Date:NOV-30-2012 09:30 AM
Calendar Matter:DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT
Rulings:Set for hearing on Friday, November 30, 2012, Line 11. DEFENDANT RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION'S DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT. Hearing required. = (302/MJM)


Case Number:*******1973
Case Title:MT. TAM LASER AND SKIN CARE CORPORATION et al VS. RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION et al
Court Date:AUG-27-2012 09:30 AM
Calendar Matter:Notice Of Motion And Motion To Transfer Venue
Rulings:Matter on calendar for Monday, August 27, 2012, Line 11, DEFENDANTs RONALD P. GOLDMAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION, RONALD GOLDMAN's Motion To Transfer Venue.Granted. Plaintiffs' second and third causes of action relate to misrepresentations that were made in Marin County. As venue is not proper as to all causes of action, Defendant is entitled to a transfer of the action. Sanctions are not awarded. 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 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/MJM)


related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases represented by Lawyer GOLDMAN, RONALD P.