Skip to main content
Skip to main content.

PUBLIC NOTICE Reduced Hours of Operation – Clerk’s Offices

From December 22, 2025 – January 2, 2026, The Superior Court of California, County of Santa Barbara, will reduce phone hours and the public access operating hours of the Clerk’s Offices. For more information, click here.

Notice:

The court is aware of fraudulent messages and scams being sent to the public. For more information please click here.

Estrellas Land Holding LLC vs Valley Heart Ranch LLC et al

Case Number

22CV02689

Case Type

Civil Law & Motion

Hearing Date / Time

Fri, 09/19/2025 - 10:00

Nature of Proceedings

Motion to Compel

Tentative Ruling

On May 20, 2025, plaintiff Estrellas Land Holding, LLC, filed a motion (plaintiff’s motion) for an order requiring the County of Santa Barbara (the County), who is not a party to this action, to produce documents requested in various deposition subpoenas served by plaintiff. In that motion, plaintiff contends that the County responded to plaintiff’s deposition subpoenas by producing records and later asserting that portions of the records produced were privileged. On May 21, 2025, the County filed, on an ex parte basis, a motion for a protective order requiring all parties to this litigation to, among other things, return any copies of privileged materials to the County. On May 22, 2025, the court granted that motion and on May 27, entered a protective order requiring the parties to, among other things, return any copies of privileged materials to the County.

Court records further reflect that on August 11, 2025, a stipulation executed by the parties’ counsel was filed in this case, in which the parties assert that they have entered into a settlement agreement which will result in the complete dismissal of this action as to all parties and claims. (See Aug. 11, 2025, Stip. At p. 2.) On that same date, the court entered an order on the parties’ stipulation dissolving the preliminary injunction issued on August 17, 2023. (See Aug. 11, 2025, Order.)

For all reasons discussed above, it appears to the court that plaintiff’s motion which is presently set for hearing on September 19, is mooted by the granting of the County’s motion described above and the entry of the protective order on May 27, 2025, and by the parties’ ostensible settlement of this action. Therefore, unless the parties appear at the hearing and explain why plaintiff’s motion is not moot, the court will order that motion off-calendar.

Was this helpful?

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.