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.

21CV03573

Case Number

Davod Mokros vs Nancy Coglizer; Craig Case; Case Detective Agency

Case Type

Civil Law & Motion

Hearing Date / Time

Wed, 12/06/2023 - 10:00

Nature of Proceedings

Counsel for Plaintiff: Motion to Withdraw as Attorney; CMC

Tentative Ruling

Jordan D. Hankey for Plaintiff

John Eck for Defendant & Cross-Complainant, Nancy Coglizer

Joshua Lynn for Defendants & Cross-Defendants Craig Case and Case Detective Agency

Issues

Josh Lynn; counsel for Plaintiff; Motion to Withdraw as Attorney

Rulings

  1. Motion to Withdraw: The proposed order attorney Mr. Lynn submitted cannot be signed as is and must be resubmitted for signature after correction by the attorneys. They provide that the attorney is relieved as counsel of record effective 9/12/23—which is simply improper. The Court does not grant these motions retroactively. It should be resubmitted, with No. 5.a. checked (which provides that “[a]ttorney is relieved as counsel of record for client effective upon the filing of the proof of service of this signed order upon the client.”
  2. CMC: The CMC is continued to 6/5/24 at 8:30 am

Analysis

The Court’s Conclusions: re Motion to Withdraw

There are two motions to withdraw as attorney in 21CV03573; Josh Lynn seeks to be relieved as counsel for defendants Craig Case and Case Detective Agency, contending that “[t]he relationship of trust and confidence essential to the attorney-client relationship has ceased to exist and irreconcilable differences have arisen between client and attorney making it unreasonably difficult to carry out the employment effectively and communication is limited due to client being in the State of California’s custody.”

The proposed order attorney Mr. Lynn submitted cannot be signed “as is” and must be resubmitted for signature after correction by the attorneys. They provide that the attorney is relieved as counsel of record effective 9/12/23—which is simply improper. The Court does not grant these motions retroactively. It should be resubmitted, with No. 5.a. checked (which provides that “[a]ttorney is relieved as counsel of record for client effective upon the filing of the proof of service of this signed order upon the client.”

Case Management Conference

A CMC is set along with these motions—no trial date has yet been set.

Plaintiff’s CMCS filed 11/29: Plaintiff is the Trustee of the Constance McCormick Fearing Living Trust. At all relevant times, Mrs. Fearing has been over the age of 65. Plaintiff discovered the misappropriation of trust funds in the amount of $687,500. The total dollar amount of misappropriated funds will likely increase as discovery in conducted and the investigation continues. Plaintiff will also seek interest, attorneys’ fees and costs, as well as punitive damages. Estimates a 10 day jury trial. This Court's October 27, 2022, Order to Stay the case pending the Criminal Investigation and/or Proceedings is still in effect. Criminal Complaints have been filed against both Defendants.  All criminal charges filed against both Defendants survived Preliminary Hearing.  Defendant Coglizer's arraignment on the information and Petition for Mental Health Division will be heard on December 13, 2023.  Defendant Case's arraignment on information will occur on January 16, 2023.

Defendant Craig Case’s CMCS filed 11/17/23: The Court's 10/27/2022. Order to Stay the case pending a Criminal lnvestigation and Proceedings is still in effect.

Defendant Nancy Coglizer’s CMCS filed 11/22/23: Pending criminal charges and this Court's 10127/2022 Order Staying Case Pending Criminal Investigation and/or Proceedings will prevent this matter from being ready for trial within 12 months of the filing of the complaint.

The Court’s Conclusions: re CMC

The CMC should be continued.

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?