DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CV61804·tuolumne·Civil·Boundary Line Dispute
Hearing 3 months agoPENDING

Anthony Collins vs. Michael Leonard, et al.

Motion to Set Aside/Vacate

Hearing date
Jun 3, 2026
Department
2
Prevailing
N/A

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffAnthony Collins
DefendantMichael Leonard

Attorneys

Denae Buddefor Plaintiff
Michael Abbottfor Plaintiff
Jill Cohoefor Defendant

Ruling

Superior Court of California, County of Tuolumne Consolidated Calendar Hon: Hallie Gorman Campbell

Department 2 June 3, 2026 8:30 am DA Case # Date Filed

7 CV61804 Anthony Collins vs. Michael Leonard, et al. 08/23/2018

Anthony Collins Attorney: Denae Budde

Anthony Collins Attorney: Michael Abbott

Michael Leonard Attorney: Jill Cohoe

Michael Leonard Attorney: Jill Cohoe

Anthony Collins Attorney: Michael Abbott

Anthony Collins Attorney: Denae Budde

Dept of Veterans Affairs for the Attorney: Jovanna Schmidt State of California Motion Hearing - Set Aside/Vacate void judgment and enter amended judgment 08/08/2019 Complaint File Tracking 12/28/2023 High Density

This is a boundary line dispute that has been hotly litigated for many years, before several (now retired) bench officers. During the course of that litigation, it was always assumed that the Court would cooperate with effectuating the needed lot line adjustment – but according to Leonard the County has no interest in helping make this Court’s judgment a reality. The problem with the motion, as explained by Collins, is that the motion fails to set forth just what the issue really is. This Court has no trouble issuing a citation to the Tuolumne County Community Resources Agency (CRA) and/or the Tuolumne County Surveyor’s Office to ascertain what the issues are, noting of course that if the issues relate to shortcomings on the part of Leonard (rather than the County), Leonard shall immediately bear the costs associated with the citation hearings, County employee time, and the like.

It has been almost 3 years since the Judgment was entered, so there must be a fairly robust paper trail relating to the lot line adjustment.

5/27/2026 2:07 pm

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