Judge: Robert B. Broadbelt, Case: 25STCV02208, Date: 2025-03-25 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 25STCV02208    Hearing Date: March 25, 2025    Dept: 53

Woodhouse v. The State Bar of California  25STCV02208   

Ex Parte Application  3.25.25 

The court denies plaintiff’s ex parte application for reconsideration, filed March 20, 2025, for the following reasons.   

First, plaintiff’s ex parte application is not accompanied by a declaration regarding notice that complies with the requirements of California Rules of Court, rule 3.1204 (b) and Code of Civil Procedure section 2015.5. 

Second, plaintiff’s ex parte application for reconsideration is not supported by an affidavit stating what new or different facts, circumstances, or law plaintiff claims to be shown, as required by Code of Civil Procedure section 1008, subdivision (a). 

Third, the court finds that plaintiff has not satisfied the requirement of California Rules of Court, rule 3.1202, subdivision (c), that an applicant for an ex parte order must make an affirmative factual showing in a declaration containing competent testimony based on personal knowledge of irreparable harm, immediate danger, or other statutory basis for granting relief ex parte.

Fourth, the court may not grant the relief requested by plaintiff because (1) all of the defendants have filed motions to declare plaintiff a vexatious litigant and to require plaintiff to furnish security pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 391.1 (filed on March 6, 7, and 11, 2025) which are set for hearings on May 12, 13, 14, and 15, 2025, and (2) when a motion pursuant to section 391.1 is filed prior to trial, the litigation is stayed and the moving defendant need not plead, until 10 days after the motion shall have been denied, or if granted, until 10 days after the required security has been furnished and the moving defendant given written notice thereof (Code Civ. Proc., § 391.6).

The court orders plaintiff to give notice of this order.