DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
25CV460430·santaclara·Civil·Probate/Winding Up
Hearing 19 days agoOFF CALENDAR

April Ouellette v. BAM Oullette Properties LLC, et al.

Cross-Motion for Order Authorizing Winding Up and Sale of Company Property

Hearing date
Aug 5, 2026
Department
16
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Nov 20, 2026
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffApril Ouellette
DefendantBAM Oullette Properties LLC
OtherMitchell Ouellette

Ruling

9:00 25CV460430 April Ouellette Order on Respondent Mitchell 8 v. Ouellette’s Cross-Motion for Order BAM Oullette Properties LLC, Authorizing Winding Up and Sale of et al. Company Property

On April 2, 2026, Respondent Mitchell Ouellette (“Respondent”) filed this Cross- Motion for order authorizing winding up and sale of company property. (Notice of Cross-Motion (the “Cross-Motion”) at 1:19- 2:11 (filed: April 2, 2026)).

However, on August 4, 2026, based on a written stipulation by the parties, the Court CONTINUED this Cross-Motion to November 20, 2026, at 9:00 AM in Department 16, so that it can be heard on that same date and time with Respondent’s Demurrer to the First Amended Petition and Petitioner’s Motion for Leave to File a Supplemental Pleading.

Accordingly, as this Cross-Motion is CONTINUED to November 20, 2026, it is now OFF CALENDAR for today.

SO ORDERED.

9:00 9

9:00 10

9:00 11

9:00 12

9:00 13

9:00 14

Line 8 Case Name: April Ouellette v. BAM Oullette Properties LLC, et al. Case No.: 25CV460430

See Order above (taking Cross-Motion Off Calendar for today because it has been CONTINUED to November 20, 2026, at 9:00 AM in Department 16 by Stipulation of the Parties).

36

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