DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
24CV102479·alameda·Civil·Personal Injury
Hearing 2 months agoThe Court has ordered the following after review of the case. Counsel will appear to discuss the tentative ruling issued for the June 2, 2026 hearing.

POWELL, AS AN INDIVIDUAL AND AS SUCCESSOR-IN-INTEREST TO DANIELLE RENEE RILEY, DECENDANT, et al. vs AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO., INC., et al.

Case Management Conference

Hearing date
Jun 16, 2026
Department
15
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffPOWELL, AS AN INDIVIDUAL AND AS SUCCESSOR-IN-INTEREST TO DANIELLE RENEE RILEY
DefendantAMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO., INC.

Ruling

24CV102479: POWELL, AS AN INDIVIDUAL AND AS SUCCESSOR-IN-INTEREST TO DANIELLE RENEE RILEY, DECENDANT, et al. vs AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO., INC., et al. 06/16/2026 Case Management Conference in Department 15

Tentative Ruling - 06/05/2026 Peter Borkon

ORDER RE: CASE MANAGEMENT

The Court has ordered the following after review of the case.

Counsel will appear to discuss the tentative ruling issued for the June 2, 2026 hearing.

Department 15 is inviting you to a scheduled ZoomGov meeting on 06/16/2026 at 2:30 PM. The Judicial Officer prefers all parties to be on camera, and for parties to log in using their full name (first and last). This can be tested before the hearing at https://zoom.us/test. Join ZoomGov Meeting https://alameda-courts-cagov.zoomgov.com/j/16116905917?pwd=SUQrVFJYbTU0VENvVFdoWlduMVNsUT09 Meeting ID: 161 1690 5917 Passcode: 315

Clerk is directed to serve copies of this order, with proof of service, to counsel and to selfrepresented parties of record. The Court orders counsel to obtain a copy of this order from the eCourt portal.

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share