Civil Tentative Rulings Announcement
CIVIL TENTATIVE RULING ANNOUNCEMENT
If the Tentative Ruling in your case is satisfactory, you need not appear at the scheduled time, the ruling becomes final, and the prevailing party prepares the order.
However, if you are not satisfied with the Tentative Ruling, and wish to appear and argue the matter, YOU MUST NOTIFY the Clerk’s Office and opposing counsel of your intent before 4:00 p.m. TODAY. If a TELEPHONIC HEARING is requested per CCP §367.5, you MUST register online to appear telephonically using Vcourt.
When doing so, you must indicate as to which issue(s) and/or motion(s) a hearing is being requested. If requesting a hearing for clarification of a tentative ruling, specify what matter(s) and/or issue(s) need clarification.
You may request a hearing by calling the calendar line at (209) 530-3162 or the main line at (209) 530-3100, prior to 4:00 p.m. - OR- by e-mailing at civil.tentatives@stanct.org Email requests must be made prior to 4:00 p.m. AND confirmed by return e-mail. If you do not receive confirmation e-mail from the clerk, you MUST call (209) 530-3162 to request your hearing.
Please refer to Local Rule of Court 3.12 concerning Court reporter fees.
If a Hearing is required or you have requested a Hearing for a Law and Motion Matter Scheduled in Department 21, 22, 23 or 24 in Modesto, please contact the Court Reporter Coordinator at (209) 530-3105 or ctreport@stanct.org to request a reporter and determine availability. If a Staff Reporter is not available, you may need to provide your own.
Effective April 2, 2012
Staff Court Reporters may be available, though it is not guaranteed, to report law and motion matters on the following schedule:
Department 21 - Wednesdays and Fridays only. Staff Reporters may be available on Tuesdays and Thursdays. Please call to confirm.
Department 22 - Tuesdays and Thursdays only. Staff Reporters may be available on Wednesdays and Fridays. Please call to confirm.
Department 23 - Wednesdays and Fridays only. Staff Reporters may be available on Tuesdays and Thursdays. Please call to confirm.
Department 24 - Tuesdays and Thursdays only. Staff Reporters may be available on Wednesdays or Fridays. Please call to confirm.
If a Staff Reporter is not available, counsel can make arrangements to have their hearing reported by a private CSR. Please contact the Court Reporter Coordinator at (209)530-3105 to request a Staff Reporter and to determine if a Staff Reporter will be available for your hearing
The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge John R. Mayne in Department 21:
***There are no Tentative Rulings for Department 21***
The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Stacy P. Speiller in Department 22:
CV-25-010287 – MCDONALD, VENUS vs CITY OF MODESTO CITY COUNCIL – a) Petitioner's Petition of Writ of Administrative Mandate – CONTINUED to May 14, 2026, at 8:30 am in Department 22. b) Petitioner's Motion to Augment Administrative Record and for Sanctions for Respondent's Material Omissions – CONTINUED to May 14, 2026, at 8:30 am in Department 22.
a – b) Petitioner Venus McDonald filed a petition for writ of mandate against the City of Modesto, City Council, and Police Department on behalf of herself and the Modesto Smoke Shop concerning a citation for $1,500 that was issued to the smoke shop for allegedly selling flavored tobacco products. She has also filed a motion to augment the administrative record.
In opposition to both the petition and the motion, the City of Modesto (“City”) has argued that Ms. McDonald, a manager at the smoke shop, lacks standing to initiate this action, as the citation was issued to the smoke shop, not to her personally. (Indeed, it appears that she was not even present when the citation was issued.) Furthermore, Ms. McDonald does not indicate that she is a California-licensed attorney and therefore cannot represent the smoke shop. The Court agrees with both premises. The citation was issued to “Modesto Smoke Shop.” Furthermore, a review of the California Secretary of State’s website shows “MODESTO SMOKE SHOP,” with an address matching that of the entity at issue here, as a general stock corporation, for which Ms. McDonald is neither an officer nor a corporate agent.
In California, an individual who is not a licensed attorney may not represent a corporation, except in circumstances specifically authorized by law (such as small claims cases pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 116.540(b)). (See Merco Constr. Engineers, Inc. v. Municipal Court (1978) 21 Cal.3d 724, 729 [“ ‘A corporation cannot represent itself in court, either in propria persona or through an officer or agent who is not an attorney.’ [Citations.]”]; Gamet v. Blanchard (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 1276, 1284 n.5 [“In California a corporation may not represent itself, except in a small claims proceeding.”].) The Court is unaware of any authority that would allow a corporation to appear in propria persona or represented by a non-attorney agent in a writ of mandate proceeding.
Accordingly, the Court CONTINUES these matters to May 14, 2026, at 8:30 am in Department 22 and SETS for the same day and time an Order to Show Cause why the petition should not be stricken and the action dismissed as to Modesto Smoke Shop for lack of authorized representation and why the petition should not be DENIED as to Venus McDonald for lack of standing. Any brief in opposition to the Order to Show Cause may be filed and served no later than April 15, 2026. The brief is not to exceed 10 pages. Any responding brief, also not to exceed 10 pages, may be filed and served no later than May 1, 2026.
The Court encourages Modesto Smoke Shop to promptly seek legal advice from a California-licensed attorney regarding this matter.
PR-24-000047 – In the Matter of the A & T 2005 REVOCABLE TRUST – Petitioner Tina Marie Silva's Motion to Expunge Notice of Pendency of Action – CONTINUED to March 26, 2026, at 8:30 am in Department 22.
Having reviewed the supplemental briefs filed by the parties, the Court CONTINUES this matter on its own motion to March 26, 2026, at 8:30 am in Department 22, to be heard with the accounting petition. The Court orders the parties to meet and confer either in person or by online video conference by no later than March 16, 2026, to see if they can resolve their differences by stipulating to an undertaking amount. Petitioner has asked for an undertaking of $4,000,000. The supplemental reply fails to address this issue.
Under the standards set forth in Newell v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (2024) 107 Cal.App.5th 728, 735, Petitioner Julio Silva has stated a real property claim. However, the Court is unable to discern whether the interested parties have a specific interest in holding on to the properties at issue or if they would be satisfied with a bond. The Court notes that it has not yet fully analyzed the question of the probable validity of Petitioner’s claims and whether the motion to expunge should be granted on that basis. It encourages the parties to try to reach an agreement. If they are unable to do so, then the Court will engage in an analysis on the merits of the claims for the next hearing.
A joint status report or stipulated agreement, if any, is to be filed no later than March 19, 2026.
The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Marie Silveria sitting on assignment in Department 23:
***There are no Tentative Rulings for Department 23***
The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Judge Sonny S. Sandhu in Department 24:
***There are no Tentative Rulings for Department 24***
The following are the tentative rulings for cases calendared before Commissioner Jared D. Beeson in Department 19 located at the Turlock Division at 300 Starr Avenue, Turlock, CA:
***There are no Tentative Rulings for Department 19***