Skip to main content.

Fraud Alert: Scam Text Messages Claiming DMV Penalties -

We have been made aware of fraudulent text messages being sent to individuals claiming to be from the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) or the court system. These messages often state that the recipient owes penalties or fees related to traffic violations or DMV infractions and may include a link or phone number to resolve the matter. 

Take these steps to reduce the chances of falling victim to a text message scam:

  • Never respond to unsolicited or suspicious texts — If you receive a message asking for personal or financial information, do not reply.
  • Verify the source — If you are unsure, always contact the DMV through official channels.
  • Call the DMV if you have concerns — The DMV customer service team is available to help you at 800-777-0133.

Please see DMV warning about fraudulent texts: https://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/news-and-media/dmv-warns-of-fraudulent-te…

Jury Scam alert -

The Santa Barbara Superior Court has received complaints about individuals trying to scam members of the public by pretending to be court officers or officials. The Jury Services office of the Santa Barbara Superior Court does not call citizens to request payments for failing to appear for jury duty. California law does not permit citizens to pay a fine in lieu of jury duty. If you receive such a call simply hang up and, if the scammer persists, call your local law enforcement agency. Learn more about the recent scam warning.

Notice to Jurors:

Prospective jurors summoned for jury service can expect to receive their jury summons in postcard form. Please check your mail for a postcard with important instructions to fulfil your jury service. Visit the Jury Services page for more information.

Alexandro Filippini vs Ray Mahboob et al

Case Number

22CV03015

Case Type

Civil Law & Motion

Hearing Date / Time

Fri, 11/01/2024 - 10:00

Nature of Proceedings

CMC; Motion for Leave

Tentative Ruling

Plaintiff is seeking leave to file a first amended complaint, adding causes of action and naming as direct defendants parties who are already in this action as cross-defendants. His motion contends that a change in the law and information obtained in discovery have caused him to determine that amendment of his complaint is necessary.

Oppositions have been filed by the cross-defendants who plaintiff seeks to add as direct defendants, asserting various arguments why the court should not permit plaintiff to file his amended complaint. However, given the extraordinary liberty with which trial courts are required to treat requests to file amended pleadings (see, e.g., Howard v. County of San Diego (2010) 184 Cal.app.4th 1422, 1428; and Douglas v. Superior Court (1989) 215 Cal.App.3d 155, 158), and the authority provided for amendment of pleadings set forth in Code of Civil Procedure sections 473 and 576, among other authorities, the Court has determined that it is appropriate to grant leave to allow plaintiff to file his First Amended Complaint.

Plaintiff is directed to separately file his First Amended Complaint forthwith. To the extent that any party named as a defendant in the First Amended Complaint believes that it is deficiently pleaded, that party is free to pursue any appropriate pleading challenge after the First Amended Complaint has been filed.

Was this helpful?

Yes No
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Was this helpful?