Motion Other CLMCal. Super. - 2nd Dist.April 29, 2014123 Judge SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, TENTATIVE RULINGS EVENT DATE: EVENT TIME: VENTURA DIVISION November 08, 2016 11/09/2016 08:20:00 AM DEPT.: 40 COUNTY OF VENTURA JUDICIAL OFFICER: Mark Borrell CASE NUM: CASE CATEGORY: EVENT TYPE: CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:Civil - Unlimited Other Real Property 56-2014-00452257-CU-OR-VTA BETOULIERE VS. MOTTI KURZWEIL Motion - Other (CLM) - for Order to Enforce Settlement Under CCP 664.6 CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion - Other, 10/11/2016 stolo Plaintiffs move for reconsideration of the court's order denying their motion under Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6. The instant motion is opposed. A motion for reconsideration must be predicated "upon new or different facts, circumstances, or law." (Code Civ.Proc., § 1008, subd. (a).) "A party seeking reconsideration also must provide a satisfactory explanation for the failure to produce the evidence at an earlier time." (New York Times Co. v. Superior Court (2005) 135 Cal.App.4th 206, 212; also see Yolo County Department of Child Support Services v. Myers (2016) 248 Cal.App.4th 42, 50.) Belatedly offered evidence, which was available at the time of the initial ruling, is not "new" evidence. (See Shiffer v. CBS Corporation (2015) 240 Cal.App.4th 246, 255.) Here, plaintiffs wish to belatedly have the court consider evidence of the location of the trees relative to the easement. But the trees have not moved. This evidence was available at the time of the hearing. It is not "new." The court denies reconsideration. The court will consider the issue of sanctions at the hearing on the motion. (See Code Civ.Proc., § 1008, subd. (d).) TENTATIVE RULINGS Page: 1
