DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
25CV3374·eldorado·Civil·Other
Hearing about 2 months agoCONTINUED

EMERGENCY RESTORATION & CLEANING, INC. VS. NATHAN ANDREW WRIGHT ET AL

DEMURRER; MOTION TO STRIKE – PUNITIVE DAMAGES CLAIM

Hearing date
Jul 10, 2026
Department
9
Judge
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Aug 7, 2026
Appearance
Not required

Motion type

Browse all Demurrer rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffEMERGENCY RESTORATION & CLEANING, INC.
DefendantNATHAN ANDREW WRIGHT

Ruling

July 10, 2026 Dept. 9 Civil Tentative Rulings

10. 25CV3374 EMERGENCY RESTORATION & CLEANING, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION VS. NATHAN ANDREW WRIGHT ET AL DEMURRER; MOTION TO STRIKE – PUNITIVE DAMAGES CLAIM

The court continues these matters on its own motion to August 7, 2026 at 8:30am in Department 9. TENTATIVE RULING #10: THE MOTIONS ARE CONTINUED TO AUGUST 7, 2026 AT 8:30AM IN DEPARTMENT 9. NO HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE HELD UNLESS A REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT IS TRANSMITTED ELECTRONICALLY THROUGH THE COURT’S WEBSITE OR BY TELEPHONE TO THE COURT AT (530) 621-6551 BY 4:00 P.M. ON THE DAY THE TENTATIVE RULING IS ISSUED. CAL. RULE CT. 3.1308; LOCAL RULE 8.05.07; SEE ALSO LEWIS V. SUPERIOR COURT, 19 CAL.4TH 1232, 1247 (1999).

NOTICE TO ALL PARTIES OF A REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT AND THE GROUNDS UPON WHICH ARGUMENT IS BEING REQUESTED MUST BE MADE BY TELEPHONE OR IN PERSON BY 4:00 P.M. ON THE DAY THE TENTATIVE RULING IS ISSUED. CAL. RULE CT. 3.1308; EL DORADO COUNTY LOCAL RULE 8.05.07. PROOF OF SERVICE OF SAID NOTICE MUST BE FILED PRIOR TO OR AT THE HEARING. LONG CAUSE HEARINGS MUST BE REQUESTED BY 4:00 P.M. ON THE DAY THE TENTATIVE RULING IS ISSUED AND THE PARTIES ARE TO PROVIDE THE COURT WITH THREE MUTUALLY AGREEABLE DATES ON FRIDAY AFTERNOONS AT 2:30 P.M.

LONG CAUSE ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTS WILL BE SET FOR HEARING ON ONE OF THE THREE MUTUALLY AGREEABLE DATES ON FRIDAY AFTERNOONS AT 2:30 P.M. THE COURT WILL ADVISE THE PARTIES OF THE LONG CAUSE HEARING DATE AND TIME BY 5:00 P.M. ON THE DAY THE TENTATIVE RULING IS ISSUED. PARTIES MAY PERSONALLY APPEAR AT THE HEARING.

25

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