DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CV2301648·marin·Civil·Discovery
Hearing 2 months agoAppearances required.

Stanley Twomey Gray et al. v. The Regents of the University of California et al.

Motion – Sanctions - Discovery

Hearing date
Jun 17, 2026
Department
H
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Motion for Sanctions rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffStanley Twomey Gray
DefendantThe Regents of the University of California

Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF MARIN

DATE: 6/17/26 TIME: 1:30 P.M. DEPT: H CASE NO: CIV2301648

PRESIDING: HON. SHEILA S. LICHTBLAU

REPORTER: CLERK: A. ANDRES

PLAINTIFFS: STANLEY TWOMEY GRAY ET AL. vs.

DEFENDANTS: THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA ET AL.

NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: MOTION – SANCTIONS - DISCOVERY

RULING

Appearances required.

All parties must comply with Marin County Superior Court Local Rules, Rule 2.10(B) to contest the tentative decision. Parties who request oral argument are required to appear in person or remotely by ZOOM. Regardless of whether a party requests oral argument in accordance with Rule 2.10(B), the prevailing party shall prepare an order consistent with the announced ruling as required by Marin County Superior Court Local Rules, Rule 2.11.

The Zoom appearance information for June 2026 is as follows: https://marin-courts-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/1615487764?pwd=Ob4B5J7LLKcpnkxzJjjEOSHNzEGafG.1 Meeting ID: 161 548 7764 Passcode: 502070

If you are unable to join by video, you may join by telephone by calling (669) 254-5252 and using the above-provided passcode. Zoom appearance information may also be found on the Court’s website: https://www.marin.courts.ca.gov

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