Judge: Joel R Wohlfeil, Case: 37-2023-00037444-CU-WM-CTL, Date: 2024-01-05 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - January 04, 2024

01/05/2024  09:00:00 AM  C-73 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Joel R. Wohlfeil

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  Writ of Mandate Motion Hearing (Civil) 37-2023-00037444-CU-WM-CTL QUILLAR VS BOARD OF PAROLE HEARINGS [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion for Reconsideration, 11/13/2023

The Motion (ROA # 21) of Petitioner LEE QUILLAR ('Petitioner') 'for reconsideration of the 'tentative decision' entered in this action at the hearing that was scheduled for November 3, 2023, before the Honorable Joel R. Wohlfeil, in Department C-73, at 9:00 a.m.,' is DENIED.

This Motion is procedurally improper because it is erroneously directed at this Court's tentative ruling (ROA # 13), and not the final order (ROA # 18). Even assuming this Motion was procedurally proper, Petitioner has not filed a proof of service evidencing service of this Motion on Respondent.

The papers filed with this Motion do not evidence service of a Notice of the original hearing date.

Even assuming the papers filed with this Motion supported reconsideration, Petitioner provides no explanation why they could not have been filed with the original Motion. New York Times Co. v. Superior Court (2005) 135 Cal. App. 4th 206, 213 ('The burden under section 1008 is comparable to that of a party seeking a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence: the information must be such that the moving party could not, with reasonable diligence, have discovered or produced it at the trial.').

The Court again emphasizes that its prior ruling is made without prejudice of Petitioner's ability to set the Petition for a new hearing date after effectuating proper service on Respondent.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3052090  9