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.

Rogers v. Monsanto Company

Case Number

23CV00945

Case Type

Civil Law & Motion

Hearing Date / Time

Wed, 05/29/2024 - 10:00

Nature of Proceedings

Pro Hac Vice Applications (2); Motion for Protective Order

Tentative Ruling

For Plaintiff: Gregory Rueb, Behram V Parekh, David Wool.

For Defendant: John K. Sherk, Alicia J. Donahue, Kara M. Flageollet, Jennifer E. Hackman, Jason M. Zager, Joshua Cools.

Issue

Two pro hac vice applications and a motion for protective order set for hearing.

RULING

The pro hac vice motions are GRANTED. There are orders submitted that the Court intends to sign related to the pro hac vice motions. The motion for protective order should go to the special master for resolution.

Please be alert; the case will go out on time as scheduled for Pretrial conference 7/31/24 at 11:30; first jury panel comes over at 9 am on 8/1/24 and 2nd panel at 1:30 pm; jury selection begins 8/1; 8/2; 8/5; 8/6; 8/8; 8/9; 8/12; 8/13; 8/15; 8/16; 8/19; 8/20; 8/22/ 8/23; 8/26; 8/27; 8/29; 8/30; 9/2 [holiday]; 9/3; 9/5; 9/6 =21 days [about 5 weeks]

Analysis

The parties have stipulated on 5/13 to appointment of a special master for discovery [Hon. Daniel Buckley (ret.)], so the motion for protective order should go to the special master for resolution.

That would leave only the pro hac vice applications. These are for admission on Plaintiff’s behalf, for attorneys Brian Glasser and David Selby, both of whom were retained based upon their knowledge of Roundup litigation. Both are attorneys with Bailey & Glasser, LLP, and Mr. Glasser resides in Washington DC, while Mr. Selby resides in Alabama. Within the last two years, both have appeared pro hac vice in California in Meyer v. Monsanto Company (Sonoma County case). Both have paid the required fee and have properly served the applications. It appears appropriate to grant both applications.

NOTICE: We may not have a Court reporter for your case. But before you hire one, please check further with me; sometimes we will have one available. If counsel decide they want a Court reporter, it will be your obligation to retain one for the trial. There can only be one official record of Court proceedings, and only a reporter appointed by the Court may report a Court proceeding.  Only one reporter will be allowed to report a Court proceeding at any given time.  If the parties cannot agree on a reporter, the Court will make the selection after you submit the name and address of the Court reporter each counsel has engaged. Counsel will notify the Court 10 days in advance of the trial date if you are going to provide a Court reporter. You may request that the electronic recording system that is already installed in the Courtroom be used. Information about that may be obtained from the Court’s website.

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?