DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
CL24-07157·solano·Civil·Property
Hearing 13 days agoGRANTED

Brian G. Bonn; et al. vs. John A. DiMichele; et al.

Motion for Leave to File First Amended Cross-Complaint

Hearing date
Aug 11, 2026
Department
Seven
Prevailing
Moving Party

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffBrian G. Bonn
DefendantJohn A. DiMichele

Attorneys

Lowellfor Defendant

Ruling

DEPARTMENT SEVEN JUDGE TIM P. KAM 707-207-7307 TENTATIVE RULINGS SCHEDULED FOR TUESDAY, AUGUST 11, 2026 The parties may appear via Zoom with the exception of trials, trial management conferences, order for examinations and mandatory settlement conferences. The information for the Zoom meeting is set forth below.

The tentative ruling shall become the ruling of the court unless a party desiring to be heard contacts the judicial assistant of the department hearing the matter by 4:30 p.m. on the court day preceding the hearing, and further advises that such party has notified the other side of its intention to request a hearing. A party requesting a hearing must notify all parties of the request to be heard by 4:30 p.m.

BRIAN G. BONN; ET AL. vs. JOHN A. DIMICHELLE; ET AL. Case No. CL24-07157

Motion for Leave to File First Amended Cross-Complaint

Defendants’ motion for leave to file the proposed first amended cross-complaint is granted.

The proposed amendment is not futile. A property owner must act reasonably when removing limbs or roots from adjoining trees that encroach upon the neighboring property. (Booska v. Patel (1994) 24 Cal.App.4th 1786, 1791.) The property owner does not have an absolute privilege to cut the roots if it would unnecessarily kill or injure the encroaching tree. (Russell v. Man (2020) 58 Cal.App.5th 530, 537.)

Additionally, Plaintiffs have failed to demonstrate any prejudice. Plaintiffs have not served any written discovery, Plaintiffs have not taken any depositions of Defendants, and the action has not been set for trial. (Decl. of Lowell, ¶ 9.)

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