ROACH, et al. vs CALIFORNIA STATE TEACHERS’ RETIREMENT SYSTEM (CALSTRS), et al.

23CV004850: ROACH, et al. vs CALIFORNIA STATE TEACHERS' RETIREMENT SYSTEM (CALSTRS), et al. 05/22/2026 Hearing on Motion to be Admitted Pro Hac Vice (Wail Jihadi) in Department 8A

Tentative Ruling

The matter is DROPPED due to defective notice.

California Rules of Court, Rule 9.40(c)(1) provides:

A person desiring to appear as counsel pro hac vice in a superior court must file with the court a verified application together with proof of service by mail in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure section 1013a of a copy of the application and of the notice of hearing of the application on all parties who have appeared in the cause and on the State Bar at its San Francisco office. The notice of hearing must be given at the time prescribed in Code of Civil Procedure section 1005 unless the court has prescribed a shorter period. (Emphasis added.)

Here, the moving party untimely served the moving papers on May 18, 2026, via E-service, which, counting backward from the date of hearing pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1005, was only four court days prior to hearing. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1005(b), moving party was required to serve the moving papers 16 court days plus two additional court days prior to the date of hearing. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1010.6(a)(3).) Defective service deprives the court of jurisdiction (Lee v. Placer Title Co. (1994) 28 Cal.App.4th 503, 509), and requires the motion be dropped.