civil tentative rulings

The court does not issue tentative rulings on Writs of Attachment, Writs of Possession, Claims of Exemption, Claims of Right to Possession, Motions to Tax Costs After Trial, Motions for New Trial, or Motions to Continue Trial.

Under California Rules of Court, rule 3.1308 and Local Rule 701, any party opposed to the tentative ruling must notify the court, and other parties, by 4:00 p.m. on the court day before the hearing of their intention to appear for oral argument. The court's notice must be made by facsimile to 559-733-6774.

Timestamp: 10/09/2015 at 8:57am

The Tentative Rulings for Thursday October 8, 2015 are:

Re:          Solario v. LA Center, Core Medical Group, et al.

Case No: VCU 261405

Date:       October 8, 2015

Time:       8:30 a.m.

Dept.:      2- The Honorable Lloyd L. Hicks

Motion:  Defendant Core Medical Group dba LA Center’s Motion to Transfer Action

Tentative Ruling:  The motion is denied without prejudice.

California Rule of Court 3.1110(g) states that “Exhibits written in a foreign language must be accompanied by an English translation, certified under oath by a qualified interpreter.”

Exhibit “A” to defendant’s motion appears to be the contract for services that is at issue in this case.  But where this purported contract is written entirely in Spanish with no English translation nor any verified certification of the contents of this “Exhibit A” by a qualified interpreter, this exhibit is inadmissible based on the moving party’s failure to comply with Rule 3.1110(g). 

Absent an English translation of the contract at issue in this case, the Court cannot determine the terms of this agreement, and most importantly, the Court cannot confirm where this contract was executed to determine the proper venue for this action.

Additionally, any writing offered into evidence in support of a motion must be authenticated by declaration or other evidence to establish that the writing is what is purported to be.  See Evidence Code §§250 and 1401(a); O’Laskey v. Sortino (1990) 224 Cal.App.3d 241, 273.

It is “routine in law and motion practice” for the moving party’s attorneys, who have personal knowledge of the referenced exhibits to attach declarations that establish their authenticity (i.e. how they obtained the documents, who identified them, and their status as “true and correct” copies of the originals.  See Greenspan v. LADT, LLC (2010) 191 Cal.App.4th 486, 523.

Here, the declaration of defendant’s counsel Manny Ibay filed in support of this motion to transfer this action merely alleges that plaintiff “reviewed” the Exhibit “A” attached to defendant’s moving papers, but does not identify or attempt to authenticate the “Exhibit A” as a true and correct copy of the contract at issue in this case.

The above-indicated defects in the defendants warrant a denial of the defendant’s motion to transfer this action to Los Angeles County without prejudice.

If no one requests oral argument, under Code of Civil Procedure section 1019.5(a) and California Rules of Court, rule 3.1312(a), no further written order is necessary. The minute order adopting this tentative ruling will become the order of the court and service by the clerk will constitute notice of the order.


Re:           North Kern Water Storage District v. City of Bakersfield

Case No: VCU 251748 (Consolidated with Case No. VCU 251598 and VCU 251535)

Date:       October 8, 2015

Time:       8:30 A.M. 

Dept.:      2 - The Honorable Lloyd Hicks

Motions:   (1) Motion by Northern Petitioners for Attorney Fees; (2) Motion by Petitioner Kern Water Bank Authority to Recover Attorneys’ Fees; and (3) Motion by Petitioner Kern Delta Water District for Attorneys’ Fees.

Tentative Ruling:  There is no tentative ruling for these matters.  Parties are directed to appear.

Re:           Buck v. Saputo Cheese USA, Inc.

Case No: VCU 256347

Date:       October 8, 2015

Time:      8:30 A.M. 

Dept.:     2 - The Honorable Lloyd Hicks

Motion:   Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement

Tentative Ruling:  There is no tentative ruling for this motion.  Parties are directed to appear.  CourtCall appearances are permitted for this matter.




This concludes the civil tentative rulings