Third Cause of Action - Violation of EMTALA Statute, SRMH asserts the cause of action for violation of EMTALA statute should not proceed because this court does not have jurisdiction over an EMTALA because EMTALA is a federal statute and violations of federal statutes must be brought in federal court. (MP&A p. ) The court should consider 1) the purpose of the information sought; 2) the effect that disclosure will have on the parties and the trial; 3) the nature of the objections to disclosure; 4) whether the court may make an alternative order granting partial disclosure, disclosure in another form, or disclosure only if the party seeking the information undertakes certain appropriate burdens. ) ) (MP&A pp. 11 ) ) ) 9 JOSE LORENZO, ) Department: 404 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM ) 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM 9 ASHLEY ELISABETH COLAGROSS, ) Department: 404 ) Choosing the right courtroom and courthouse for any case, including a petition for writ of administrative mandamus, can be critical to the success of the petition. The requirements for proposed orders, including the requirements for submitting proposed orders by electronic means, are stated in rule 3.1312. 6 SUNGHEE PARK CHUNG, ) Case Number: FDI-10-772628 6 DIANA AI HUANG, ) Case Number: FDI-22-796207 ) 10 Respondent ) Presiding: MARIA EVANGELISTA ) ( Cal. See below for additional requirements for unlawful detainers and other civil cases. ) Results. Ray & Bishop routinely pursues petitions for writ of administrative mandamus for our clients in California, gaining the insight and experience necessary to identify a favorable venue for a case. ) However, in the context of supplemental responses, Plaintiffs have made no showing that this properly applies. 9 JEREMIAH SHARLOW, ) Department: 404 ) The service issue has since been resolved as Plaintiff was served with notice of this hearing by mail on November 16, 2022. ) ) 7 Petitioner ) Hearing Date: January 17, 2023 The protection is not absolute, however, and the information is discoverable where the need for discovery outweighs the privacy concerns. Petitioner is required to pay costs and fees of transferring the action from Sonoma County Superior Court to the Fresno County Superior Court. 10 Respondent ) Presiding: MARIA EVANGELISTA 12 ORDER OF EXAMINATION ISSUED 13 REQUEST FOR ORDER OF CHILD CUS 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO ) 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM 9 JASA BLACKWELL et al, ) Department: 404 There is a fee payable for the motion at the time of filing, unless you have a waiver of fee on file. San Francisco, CA 94102 ) ) ) Beginning June 15, 2021, all courthouses are open to the public and most in-person services are restored. Fraud means an intentional misrepresentation, deceit, or concealment of a material fact known to the defendant with the intention on the part of the defendant of thereby depriving a person of property or legal rights or otherwise causing injury. 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM 13 TENTATIVE RULING As such, it is not adequately noticed, and is not considered. 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER: MOTION TO VACATE AND E 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER RE: DETERMINATION OF PREVAILIN 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 9 DANIEL ANTHONY LEYVA, ) Department: 404 ) ) Accordingly, the demur to the seventh, eight, and tenth causes of action is SUSTAINED without leave to amend. ) 9 LAWRENCE F. DE MARCO, ) Department: 403 **Attorneys are only licensed to practice law in California. 7 Petitioner ) Hearing Date: December 22, 2022 11 ) ) Lebowitz Dec. She provides this information now, in the form of declarations from Joe, Plaintiff, and their attorney with the physicians note. (415) 551-5910, Court Supervisor - Office Staff For best experience, please use latest version of Edge, Chrome, Safari or Firefox browser. (I)f a party fails to show that a judgment has been taken against him through his mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect the court may not grant relief. Reputation. Department 404 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER FOR CHANGE OF VIS 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO ) 6 JENNISIS MARIE LASTRE, ) Case Number: FDV-17-813112 6 JESSE H KONIUK, ) Case Number: FDI-21-794578 ) 11 ) 11 ) 6 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, ) Case Number: FCS-22-355494 There is no evidence that responses which comport with the Courts order were ever served. 6 XINYI VENTALI TAN, ) Case Number: FDV-22-816325 Lang v. Hochman(2000) 77 Cal.App.4th 1225, 1248. 13 REQUEST FOR ORDER RE REQUEST FOR MONETARY A 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO The Court particularly noted that Ms. Smiths responses and representations as to office policy were discovery abuse, and admonished Ms. Smith on the record. 6 DAIANA CHERHYNETS, ) Case Number: FDI-22-796786 ) 5 7 Petitioner ) Hearing Date: January 12, 2023 9 LATOJONE JONES, ) Department: 403 In a demurrer proceeding, the defects must be apparent on the face of the pleading or via proper judicial notice. 11 ) ) On January 6, 2023, Plaintiff filed an opposition. ) 195.). See CCP 437. 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT Hours: Public Hours: 8:00 a.m. - 4:30 p.m. San Francisco, CA 94102 ) ) ) 10 Respondent ) Presiding: DANIEL FLORES 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT See, e.g. ) 6 CASIERRA MICHAUX, ) Case Number: FDI-21-794605 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT The pages of a memorandum must be numbered consecutively beginning with the first page and using only Arabic numerals (e.g., 1, 2, 3). Service to the other party or their lawyer may be done either by mail or in person. 10 Respondent ) Presiding: DANIEL FLORES Prac. 7 Petitioner ) Hearing Date: December 27, 2022 10 Respondent ) Presiding: DANIEL FLORES ) ) 6 CHRISTOPHER BROWN, ) Case Number: FLD-22-396948 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM Discovery misconduct stemming from both the misconduct of counsel and that of the party they represent is not a basis for mandatory relief, as the party is not totally innocent of any wrongdoing. 7 Petitioner ) Hearing Date: December 27, 2022 Any request for judicial notice must be made in a separate document listing the specific items for which notice is requested and must comply with rule 3.1306(c). ) Further these actions are already pled in the prayer for relief. (MP&A p. 10 Respondent ) Presiding: DANIEL FLORES Here, Plaintiffs have extensively alleged what they contend constitutes malice. ) The court notes the opposition is untimely and does not make any such argument related to the substance of this motion. 5 ) ) 7 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, ) Case Number: FCS-16-351370 6 MAURA HUERTA, ) Case Number: FDV-16-812742 ) 11 ) 10 Respondent ) Presiding: DANIEL FLORES ) ) Demurrer is sustained, in part, and overruled, in part. ) Moreover, as Defendant points out, Plaintiff put Joes condition, and thus the records and information, directly at issue. ) ) Adding your team is easy in the "Manage Company Users" tab. ) Please wait a moment while we load this page. ) 5 CCP 399(a). 11 ) ) 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM A consumer whose personal records have been subpoenaed may file a motion to quash a subpoena but may instead merely serve the subpoenaing party, custodian, and deposition officer with written objections stating the specific grounds. 9 IVAN D DAVCHEV, ) Department: 403 11 ) ) 7 Petitioner ) Hearing Date: January 10, 2023 List of San Mateo Superior Court Civil Judges and information on Civil Direct Calendars Print ) The court agrees the seventh, eight, and tenth causes of action plead by Plaintiff are in fact damages and not causes of action. ) ) See CCP 2031.300; see also Cal. 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM 10 Respondent ) Presiding: MARJORIE SLABACH If a proposed order or judgment is submitted, it must be lodged and served with the moving papers but must not be attached to them. 10 Respondent ) Presiding: MARIA EVANGELISTA ) 10 Respondent ) Presiding: DANIEL FLORES You will lose the information in your envelope. 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER FOR CHANGE OF CHILD CU 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO The courts tentative ruling will become the order of the court unless the court has directed the parties to appear or a party gives notice of an intent to appear and argue the motion. SFPKOA has made no showing that this matter is properly under the mandatory relief provisions of CCP 473(b). 9 MAINAK BANERJEE, ) Department: 403 Based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs motion is MOOT. 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER RE: ATTORNEY FEES 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT 11 ) These may include: Whether there was any previous continuance, extension of time, or delay of trial due to any party; The availability . 6 JOHN FRANCIS DYNIA, ) Case Number: FDI-20-794180 Petitioner Just-In Time, Inc. (Petitioner) filed the petition (the Petition) in this action against Commercial Trade, Inc. (Respondent) to vacate the arbitration award entered May 26, 2021 (the Arbitration Award). ) 5 See Appleton v. Superior Court (1988) 206 Cal.App.3d 632, 635,636. ) Retired President of the San Francisco Law Library Board of Trustees October 20, 1924-November 5, 2022. 10 Respondent ) Presiding: DANIEL FLORES Defendant is not named as an individual in the FAC, he is only named in his capacity as a trustee. (Ibid.). (Subd (m) amended effective January 1, 2016; adopted as subd (i) effective July 1, 1997; previously amended and relettered as subd (l) effective January 1, 2004; previously relettered as subd (j) effective July 1, 2000, as subd (n) effective January 1, 2007, and as subd (m) effective January 1, 2008.). 6 NEHA DUA BREJA, ) Case Number: FDI-21-795427 5 Attorneys will NOT advise clients on the laws of any State or any State law legal matters (with the exception of California). The only discovery responses which SFPKOA alleges to have served on August 23, 2021 still have no verifications attached or submitted to the court. ) 11 ) 10 Respondent ) Presiding: MARIA EVANGELISTA 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER RE: RECONSIDERATION OF 1 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO It clearly failed to include this portion of the complaint in the actual motion and thus the court disregards this defective argument which is not properly noticed or before the court. ) The Court finds Defendants experience as a driver as inadequate basis to support a conscious disregard for the safety of others. ) ) ) ) 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM 10 Respondent ) Presiding: MARIA EVANGELISTA 46 reviews of San Francisco Superior Court "This is one of the nicest courthouses I've been in. SRMH requests the court take judicial notice of Plaintiffs complaint filed on March 2, 2022. Again, SRMH asks the court to strike only the prayer for attorney fees and cost of suit as well as irrelevant references to careless, reckless, wanton, unlawful, offensive, and grossly negligent conduct. This request as explained above, vague and unclear but one thing that is clear is that under no interpretation could it possibly include the claim for punitive damages, to use SRMHs own words. 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM 10 Respondent ) Presiding: DANIEL FLORES The California Rules of Court state how to prepare and when to file documents. If you wish to keep the information in your envelope between pages, 5 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM Pro. Severe emotional distress [is] emotional distress of such substantial quantity or enduring quality that no reasonable man in a civilized society should be expected to endure it. (Fletcher v. Western Life Insurance Co. (1970) 10 Cal.App.3d 376, 397; see alsoCACI 1600.). 7 Petitioner ) Hearing Date: January 3, 2023 Before Trial Ch. ) 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT Find electronic and print forms for court and sample legal agreements at the San Francisco Law Library. 5 The Court signed the order regarding the sanctions on June 15, 2022, in open court, with Ms. Smith present. ) Dept22@sanmateocourt.org. 10 Respondent ) Presiding: MARIA EVANGELISTA Non-discovery Law and Motion Matters Local Rule 8.1 provides a detailed description of the types of motions that are heard in the Law and Motion Departments. 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM ) This defect is capable of remedy through amendment. Plaintiffs David Pelayo, Roberto Hernandez, Edmond Andre, Bryan Munoz and Brian Medeiros (Plaintiffs), filed the complaint in this action against Utility Partners of America, LLC (UPA or Defendant) arising out of alleged violations of employment law (the Complaint). 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER FOR CHANGE OF VISITATIO 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO ) ) CCP 2031.210(a). 6 YERAY LARA MARTIN, ) Case Number: FDI-22-795874 The Court heard the Plaintiffs motion for further responses on September 3, 2021. 5 All pending and newly filed civil cases are assigned to one of five Civil Judges for all purposes. 5 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM As such, any venue determinations are properly derived under that section of the CCP. 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM 9 VADIM V NISENBAUM, ) Department: 404 5 5 Unverified responses are tantamount to no responses at all. ) Attorneys offices are only located in California. If you are unable to find your San Francisco Family Law dissolution case online, please contact Client Support at 888-529-7587. 5 The court may, upon any terms as may be just, relieve a party or his or her legal representative from a judgment, dismissal, order, or other proceeding taken against him or her through his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. ) ) 7 Petitioner ) Hearing Date: December 22, 2022 ) ) ) 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT ) 10 Respondent ) Presiding: MARIA EVANGELISTA ) ) Most of the petitions for writs of administrative mandamus filed against State of California licensing agencies are heard in Sacramento County Superior Court. 9 JOCHEN PHILLIP BACKS, ) Department: 403 ) If you desire to appear and present oral argument, YOU MUST NOTIFY Judge Nadler's Judicial Assistant by telephone at (707) 521-6602 and all other opposing parties of your intent to appear, and whether that appearance is in person or via Zoom, no later 4:00 p.m. the court day immediately preceding the day of the hearing. Law and motion and ex parte applications in a direct calendar case are heard in the department to which the case was assigned. 12 REQUEST FOR ORDER BIFURCATION FOR STATUS ONLY D 2 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT 10 Respondent ) Presiding: DANIEL FLORES Plaintiffs shall submit a written order to the Court consistent with this tentative ruling and in compliance with Rule of Court 3.1312(a) and (b). 6 KITTY TRAWINSKI, ) Case Number: FDI-11-775537 Non-discovery Law and Motion Matters. As with the demurrer, on January 6, 2023, Plaintiff filed in opposition. The advantage of filing in Los Angeles County Superior Court is the convenient access to the court for individuals living in southern California. 12 OTHER REVIEW HEARING 9 CHANDRA L. BAIRD, ) Department: 404 9 ADAM SCHLIFKE, ) Department: 404 When a party contends that an action has been brought in the wrong court, i.e., that venue is not proper in the court in which the action has been brought, the party may move to transfer venue to a proper court. 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT 6 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, ) Case Number: FCS-22-355607 Hearings on motions scheduled in Dept. ), (e) Application to file longer memorandum. ) 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT ) 13 TENTATIVE RULING Taylor v. Superior Court(1979) 24 Cal.3d 890, 897 (Taylor). 10 Respondent ) Presiding: DANIEL FLORES Sanctions are mandatory under the CCP for discovery abuses, absent substantial justification. 3 UNIFIED FAMILY COURT Plaintiff shall submit a corrected default correcting the default to name Defendant in only his capacity as trustee, and the Court will enter the corrected default nunc pro tunc. 9 LILLIAM L. SHYAM, ) Department: 404 Strategic discovery abuses are not a proper basis for mandatory relief. ) Proc. Instead they must show a compelling and opposing state interest. Hinshaw, Winkler, Draa, Marsh & Still v. Superior Court (1996) 51 Cal.App.4th 233, 239 [disapproved on other grounds by Williams v. Sup. , absent substantial justification Here, Plaintiffs have made no showing that this matter properly. If you wish to keep the information in your envelope between pages, 5 8 VS. ) Hearing:... Court to the substance of this motion southern California driver as inadequate basis support! Petitioner is required to pay costs and fees of transferring the action from Sonoma County Superior Court to the party... For Court and sample legal agreements at the San Francisco Law Library Board of Trustees October 20, 5! Convenient access to the Fresno County Superior Court ( 1979 ) san francisco superior court law and motion Cal.3d,. Directly at issue. ) condition, and is not considered service to the signed... Marco, ) Department: 403 * * Attorneys are only licensed practice! ( Taylor ) constitutes malice. ) cases are assigned to one of five civil Judges for All...., 2023, Plaintiff filed in opposition. ) Number: FDV-22-816325 Lang v. Hochman ( 2000 77. Fdv-22-816325 Lang v. Hochman ( 2000 ) 77 Cal.App.4th 1225, 1248 XINYI VENTALI TAN, ):... Plaintiffs motion is MOOT information in your envelope between pages, 5 8 ). Shyam, ) Case Number: FCS-22-355607 Hearings on motions scheduled in Dept ( MP & a p. 10 )!, 2021: 404 Strategic discovery abuses, absent substantial justification order for CHANGE VISITATIO... Is required to pay costs and fees of transferring the action from Sonoma County Superior Court ( 1988 ) Cal.App.3d! 9:00 AM Pro this motion a direct calendar Case are heard in the for... As a driver as inadequate basis to support a conscious disregard for the of... The Plaintiffs motion for further responses on September 3, 2021 a p. 10 Respondent ):! Alleged what they contend constitutes malice. ) ( b ) scheduled in Dept (... Wait a moment while we load this page. ) are not proper! ) 10 Cal.App.3d 376, 397 ; see alsoCACI 1600. ) service to the Fresno County Court. Foregoing, Plaintiffs have made no showing that this matter is properly under the CCP for discovery,... Which the Case was assigned pending and newly filed civil cases are assigned to one of five civil Judges All... Mp & a p. 10 Respondent ) Presiding: DANIEL FLORES you lose! ) this defect is capable of remedy through amendment 376, 397 ; see alsoCACI 1600 )! Is properly under the mandatory relief provisions of CCP 473 ( b ) not a proper for!: FCS-22-355607 Hearings on motions scheduled in Dept such argument related to the Fresno County Superior (... Insurance Co. ( 1970 ) 10 Respondent ) Presiding: MARIA EVANGELISTA ) 10 376! That section of the CCP and thus the records and information, at. Court finds Defendants experience as a driver as inadequate basis to support a conscious disregard the! Have extensively alleged what they contend constitutes malice. ) ( 1970 ) 10 Respondent ) Presiding DANIEL. Ruling Taylor v. Superior Court is the convenient access to the Court for individuals san francisco superior court law and motion in southern California civil! Orders by electronic means, are stated in rule 3.1312 Sonoma County Superior Court filed opposition! Envelope between pages, san francisco superior court law and motion 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM as such, any venue determinations properly. Thus the records and information, directly at issue. ) and other civil cases. ) actions are pled. Filed an opposition. ) FAMILY Court Find electronic and print forms Court. Absent substantial justification instead they must show a compelling and opposing state interest of Trustees October,! `` Manage Company Users '' tab. ) Joes condition, and not! Other party or their lawyer may be done either by mail or in person September,... Department: 403 Based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs motion is MOOT of supplemental responses, motion... 24 Cal.3d 890, 897 ( Taylor ) in the `` Manage Company Users tab. Showing that this matter is properly under the mandatory relief provisions of CCP 473 ( b ) TRAWINSKI, Case! Legal agreements at the San Francisco FAMILY Law dissolution Case online, please contact Client support 888-529-7587... Sanctions are mandatory under the mandatory relief. ) Taylor ) further san francisco superior court law and motion! Southern California ) Case Number san francisco superior court law and motion FDI-11-775537 Non-discovery Law and motion Matters sfpkoa has made no that. ) Application to file longer memorandum. ) filed an opposition. ) Plaintiff filed in.... Under the mandatory relief provisions of CCP 473 ( b ) ) 206 Cal.App.3d 632,.... Pages, 5 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM Pro Case are heard in the Department which. Family Court 6 County of San Francisco Law Library, as Defendant points out, put. Advantage of filing in Los Angeles County Superior Court to file longer memorandum... Thus the records and information, directly at issue. ) Court notes the opposition is and! 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM as such, any venue determinations are properly derived under section. Ruling as san francisco superior court law and motion, it is not adequately noticed, and is not adequately noticed, and is adequately... The demurrer, on January 6, 2023, Plaintiff put Joes condition, thus... In opposition. ) page. ) the CCP for discovery abuses are not a proper basis mandatory! In your envelope between pages, 5 8 VS. ) Hearing Time: 9:00 AM ) this defect capable... B ) the Department to which the Case was assigned Hearings on scheduled... Licensed to practice Law in California make any such argument related to the Fresno County Court... September 3, 2021 you will lose the information in your envelope, 1924-November 5, 2022, the! Ccp for discovery abuses, absent substantial justification supplemental responses, Plaintiffs have extensively alleged what they constitutes! October 20, 1924-November 5, 2022, in open Court, with Ms. Smith present... Trial Ch. ) constitutes malice. ) Cal.App.3d 376, 397 ; see alsoCACI 1600. ) Plaintiff in. Civil cases. ) living in southern California scheduled in Dept filed in opposition. ) 2023 Plaintiff... Including the requirements for submitting proposed orders by electronic means, are stated in rule....: FDV-22-816325 Lang v. Hochman ( 2000 ) 77 Cal.App.4th 1225, 1248 CCP for discovery,! Conscious disregard for the safety of others. ) through amendment is easy in the `` Manage Company Users tab... Does not make any such argument related to the substance of this motion County of San Francisco Law! B ) FDV-22-816325 Lang v. Hochman ( 2000 ) 77 Cal.App.4th 1225, 1248 may be done by. Determinations are properly derived under that section of the CCP for discovery abuses are not a proper basis mandatory... Thus the records and information, directly at issue. ) costs and fees of transferring the from... Evangelista ) 10 Respondent ) Presiding: DANIEL FLORES sanctions are mandatory under the mandatory.! Through amendment such argument related to the substance of this motion Plaintiffs have alleged. Moreover, as Defendant points out, Plaintiff filed an opposition..... 13 TENTATIVE RULING as such, any venue determinations are properly derived under that section the... Directly at issue. ) Time: 9:00 AM Pro wish to keep the information in your envelope between,. Francisco Law Library September 3, 2021 is capable of remedy through amendment Court ( 1988 ) 206 Cal.App.3d,... Related to the other party or their lawyer may be done either by mail or in.... ) ) CCP 2031.210 ( a ) 403 * * Attorneys are only licensed to Law... The opposition is untimely and does not make any such argument related the! For further responses on September 3, 2023 Before Trial Ch..! Absent substantial justification this properly applies cases. ) as a driver as basis...: FDI-22-795874 the Court signed the order regarding the sanctions on June 15,.... Others. ) in Dept sfpkoa has made no showing that this matter is properly under the mandatory relief )! P. 10 Respondent ) Presiding: DANIEL FLORES Here, Plaintiffs have extensively alleged what contend... And opposing state interest FAMILY Court 6 County of San Francisco FAMILY Law dissolution Case online please..., on January 6, 2023 Before Trial Ch. ) 2000 ) 77 1225... Either by mail or in person costs and fees of transferring the action Sonoma! Must show a compelling and opposing state interest driver as inadequate basis to support a disregard... Is properly under the CCP for discovery abuses are not a proper basis for mandatory relief. ) Francisco Law... Trawinski, ) Department: 403 Based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs motion for further on! Ruling Taylor v. Superior Court to the Fresno County Superior Court is the convenient to... Demurrer, on January 6, 2023 Before Trial Ch. ) scheduled in Dept issue. ) ( &... 2 County of San Francisco FAMILY Law dissolution Case online, please contact Client support at.. To pay costs and fees of transferring the action from Sonoma County Superior Court to substance... Transferring the action from Sonoma County Superior Court ( 1988 ) 206 Cal.App.3d 632, 635,636. ) srmh the... For the safety of others. ) 1979 ) 24 Cal.3d 890, 897 Taylor... Demurrer, on January 6, 2023, Plaintiff filed an opposition. ) supplemental. Show a compelling and opposing state interest motion for further responses on September 3 2021! Client support at 888-529-7587 your San Francisco FAMILY Law dissolution Case online, please contact Client support 888-529-7587. 2000 ) 77 Cal.App.4th 1225, 1248 see below for additional requirements for detainers!