Motion for relief from dismissal order
Brown, et al., California Practice Guide: Civil Procedure Before Trial ¶ 8:2235 (Rutter: 2025) (increasing sanctions for further discovery abuse).
The county’s counsel must submit a written order to the court consistent with this ruling and in compliance with Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1312. The signature block should read as follows: Curtis E.A. Karnow (Ret.) Judge of the Superior Court (Sonoma) on Assignment
2. 25CV00845, Sebring v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
Plaintiff Sean N. Sebring (Sebring) moves under CCP § 473(b) for relief from the order of August 26, 2025 which dismissed his action. Sebring also asks for a Case Management Conference (CMC) and for additional time to serve and file the summons and complaint and proof of service.
There is no opposition.
A CMC was set for June 24, 2025. Sebring did not file a CMC statement and did not appear at the hearing. Thus, the court issued an order to show cause re dismissal, setting it for August 26, 2025. Sebring failed to appear and the court dismissed this case.
Sebring now states he was unable to file a CMC statement or to appear at the hearing because he was jailed in the Sonoma County Main Adult Detention Facility from April 23, 2025, through October 4, 2025. As a result, and despite repeated attempts, he was unable to hire an attorney. Sebring also notes other factors that impeded his efforts to prosecute this case: effects of criminal proceedings and anti-psychotic medications.
Pursuant to CCP § 473(b) the court has the power to afford the relief sought here. Sebring has shown the requisite mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. This motion was made within the statutory 6-month time period.
The motion is GRANTED. The August 26, 2025, order dismissing the action is vacated. A Case Management Conference is set for August 4, 2026, at 3:00 p.m. in Dept.
16. Sebring must serve defendants and file the proof of service no later than June 9, 2026.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
Sebring must submit a written order to the court consistent with this ruling and in compliance with Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1312. The signature block should read as follows: Curtis E.A. Karnow (Ret.) Judge of the Superior Court (Sonoma) on Assignment
3. 25CV02057, Looney v. Cedeno
Plaintiff Gary E. Looney dba Collectronics of California moves for an order compelling Defendant Rafael Cedeno, individually and dba Foreign Autohaus, dba A C Autohaus, to furnish responses to Plaintiff’s first set of post-judgment interrogatories and post-judgment demand for production of documents, and sanctions.
2