Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles
Abba Bail Bonds, Inc. ) Case No. BC620878
Plaintiff, )
v. )_______________________________
) [Tentative] Ruling
Gotham Bail Bonds LLC et al. )
Defendants. )
AND RELATED CROSS-ACTIONS )
_______________________________)________________________________
Hearing Date: June 21, 2021
Department 49, Judge Stuart M. Rice
Moving Party: Defendant Gotham Bail Bonds, Inc. Responding Party: Plaintiff Abba Bail Bonds, Inc. Ruling: Motion granted. Gotham Bail Bonds, Inc. is dismissed from the action with prejudice pursuant to Code Civ. Proc. § 583.250.
Defendant Gotham Bail Bonds, Inc. (“Defendant”) moves for mandatory dismissal of the complaint as to it pursuant to Code Civ. Proc. § 583.250 or, in the alternative, to quash service of the summons and complaint on it. Plaintiff Abba Bail Bonds, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) opposes.
Factual Background
This case was filed on May 6, 2016. On August 4, 2017, Plaintiff filed a proof of service with the
Hearing Date
June 21, 2021
Type
Other Commercial/Business Tort (not fraud/ breach of contract) (General Jurisdiction)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Superior Court of California
County of Los Angeles
Abba Bail Bonds, Inc. ) Case No. BC620878
Plaintiff, )
v. )_______________________________
) [Tentative] Ruling
Gotham Bail Bonds LLC et al. )
Defendants. )
AND RELATED CROSS-ACTIONS )
_______________________________)________________________________
Hearing Date: June 21, 2021
Department 49, Judge Stuart M. Rice
Moving Party: Defendant Gotham Bail Bonds, Inc. Responding Party: Plaintiff Abba Bail Bonds, Inc. Ruling: Motion granted. Gotham Bail Bonds, Inc. is dismissed from the action with prejudice pursuant to Code Civ. Proc. § 583.250.
Defendant Gotham Bail Bonds, Inc. (“Defendant”) moves for mandatory dismissal of the complaint as to it pursuant to Code Civ. Proc. § 583.250 or, in the alternative, to quash service of the summons and complaint on it. Plaintiff Abba Bail Bonds, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) opposes.
Factual Background
This case was filed on May 6, 2016. On August 4, 2017, Plaintiff filed a proof of service with the