Judge: Melvin D. Sandvig, Case: 21CHCV00104, Date: 2023-05-15 Tentative Ruling
Counsel wishing to submit on a tentative ruling may inform the clerk or courtroom assisant in North Valley Department F47, 9425 Penfield Ave., Chatsworth, CA 91311, at (818) 407-2247. Please be aware that unless all parties submit, the matter will still be called for hearing and may be argued by any appearing/non-submitting parties. If the matter is submitted on the court's tentative ruling by all parties, counsel for moving party shall give notice of ruling. This may be done by incorporating verbatim the court's tentative ruling. The tentative ruling may be extracted verbatim by copying and specially pasting, as unformatted text, from the Los Angeles Superior Court’s website, http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org. All hearings on law and motion and other calendar matters are generally NOT transcribed by a court reporter unless one is provided by the party(ies).
Case Number: 21CHCV00104 Hearing Date: May 15, 2023 Dept: F47
Dept. F47
Date: 5/15/23
Case #21CHCV00104
MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION
Motion filed on 4/13/23.
MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Brett C. Flaharty
RESPONDING PARTY: all other parties
RULING: The motion is placed off calendar.
On 4/13/23, Plaintiff Brett C. Flaharty (Plaintiff) filed
the instant motion which seeks an order granting Plaintiff accommodations under
the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) and California and Federal law. Additionally, Plaintiff requests an
alternative method to file and submit documents and an extension of time to
file documents. Further, Plaintiff
requests that the Court reconsider its 3/30/23 rulings.
Plaintiff has not filed a proof of service for the
subject motion. See CRC 3.1300(c)
(Proof of service of the moving papers must be filed no later than five court
days before the time appointed for the hearing.). No oppositions or other responses to the
motion have been filed from the defendants who have appeared in the action to
cure this defect in notice. Therefore, the
motion is placed off calendar.
The Court notes that Plaintiff was advised by the
Judicial Assistant that his prior request to stay all matters and continue
trial, filed on 3/24/23, and for which Plaintiff also did not file a proof of
service, was “not appropriate moving papers for such remedies and an ex parte
application or noticed motion is required.”
(See 3/30/23 Minute Order).
Despite the foregoing warning, Plaintiff still filed the instant motion
without providing proper notice to the other parties in the action.