Your case is unique, but you are not alone.

About 41,000 new cases are filed in U.S. courts every weekday. Behind each one is a person trying to understand what happens next. Here’s what the public record can tell you about this matter — and about the people deciding it.

  • Know your judge

    Every judge has a pattern — what they grant, what they deny, how they handle the kinds of motions your case will see.

  • Know your attorney

    See an attorney’s actual track record — case types, courts, and how they’ve performed in front of this judge before.

  • Know your court

    Every courthouse has its own rhythm — filing-to-resolution times, common dispositions, how often cases like yours settle.

Is this judge more likely to rule for the plaintiff or the defendant in cases of this type?

How has your attorney actually performed in front of this judge?

AICasePredict surfaces patterns from public court records. We don’t predict outcomes and we don’t recommend changing your attorney — that’s a conversation for you and them. We just show you what the record already says.

Full Analytics Report

  • Complete case narrative
  • Judge details and rulings
  • Case disposition and outcome
  • All docket entries
  • Related cases and filings
$20
One-time purchase
Photo of Fresno County

Court

Fresno County

California

View Court Profile

Case Information

Filed 2024-01-02
Status Judgment
Type 47 Small Claims $5,001 $10,000
Docket 149 entries
Disposition notice of entry of judgment

Parties

Plaintiff Singh, Narinder|View Document 1/2/24 's Claim Hrg 2/29/24|View Document 1/2/24 's Claim Hrg 2/29/24
Defendant Uber Technologies Inc.
Photo of Hon. Skiles Jon M

Judge

Hon. Skiles Jon M

Fresno County (CA)

California

View Judge Profile

Docket Entries

  31. Comment Party: Karina Munoz, Paralegal at Uber Technologies, Inc. Type of Appearance Requested: CourtCall
  32. Chambers Work - Notice of Remote Appearance
  33. Original Type Chambers Work - Notice of Remote Appearance
  34. Judicial Officer Brickey, Daniel
  35. Hearing Time 5:30 PM
  36. Result Chambers Work - Order Submitted for Consideration
  37. Order Regarding Remote Appearance Granted
  38. View Document Order Regarding Remote Appearance Granted
  39. Judicial Officer Brickey, Daniel
  40. Comment Party: Uber Technologies Inc. Type of Appearance Requested: CourtCall
  41. Notice of Order on Remote Appearance
  42. Comment Mailed to: 1725 Third Street San Francisco, CA 94158 Emailed to: [email protected]
  43. Request Filed
  44. View Document Request Filed
  45. Comment for an Interpreter
  46. Notice of Exhibits Submitted to Court Prior to Trial
  47. Comment Hearing Date: Time: 1:30 PM Department: 97E
  48. Court Trial
  49. Original Type Court Trial
  50. Judicial Officer Judge, Pro Tempore
  51. Hearing Time 1:30 PM
  52. Result Heard
  53. Plaintiff: Singh, Narinder
  54. Minute Order Attachment
  55. View Document -Minute Order Attachment
  56. Comment With Clerks Certificate of Mailing
  57. Appeared in Person
  58. Remote Appearance Via Courtcall
  59. Proof of Service
  60. View Document Proof of Service
  61. Plaintiff's Claim and Order SC
  62. Unserved
  63. Comment Fee: $75.00, DEFECTIVE - Unserved - The description of the document is correct, however, on page 2 of 2, after number 8, the server did not date or sign. Please correct and resubmit.
  64. Proof of Service
  65. View Document Proof of Service
  66. Plaintiff's Claim and Order SC
  67. Served
  68. Comment Fees: $75.00
  69. Subpoenaed record returned to the Exhibits Office
  70. Comment subpoenaed documents returned
  71. Court Trial
  72. Judicial Officer Whalen, Robert
  73. Hearing Time 5:30 PM
  74. Cancel Reason Clerical Error
  75. Chambers Work- Pre
  76. Original Type Chambers Work- Pre
  77. Judicial Officer Whalen, Robert
  78. Hearing Time 5:30 PM
  79. Result Chambers Work - Order Submitted for Consideration
  80. Request Filed
  81. View Document Request Filed
  82. Comment Request for Court Order and Answer
  83. Order Received for Signature
  84. View Document Order Received for Signature
  85. Comment Forwarded to Dept: 404 Order for: Request for Court Order and Answer
  86. Chambers Work- Pre
  87. Original Type Chambers Work- Pre
  88. Judicial Officer Whalen, Robert
  89. Hearing Time 5:30 PM
  90. Result Chambers Work - Order Submitted for Consideration
  91. Chambers Work- Pre
  92. Original Type Chambers Work- Pre
  93. Judicial Officer Whalen, Robert
  94. Hearing Time 5:30 PM
  95. Result Chambers Work - Order Submitted for Consideration
  96. Order Denied
  97. View Document Order Denied
  98. Judicial Officer Whalen, Robert
  99. Comment Order on Request for Court Order
  100. Clerk's Certificate of Mailing
  101. Comment I certify that I am not a party to this cause and a true copy of the (Order on Request for Court Order) was placed in a sealed envelope and placed for collection and mailing on the date and at the place shown below following our ordinary business practice. I am readily familiar with this court's practice for collection and processing correspondence for mailing. On the same day that correspondence is placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course of business with the United States Postal Service with postage fully prepaid. Place of Mailing: Fresno, California on () . Parties served: (Narinder Singh, Uber Technologies Inc)
  102. Chambers Work - Notice of Remote Appearance
  103. Original Type Chambers Work - Notice of Remote Appearance
  104. Judicial Officer Brickey, Daniel
  105. Hearing Time 5:30 PM
  106. Result Chambers Work - Order Submitted for Consideration
  107. Notice of Remote Appearance.
  108. View Document Notice of Remote Appearance
  109. Comment Party: Karina Munoz, Paralegal at Uber Technologies, Inc. Type of Appearance Requested: CourtCall
  110. Authorization to Appear on Behalf of
  111. View Document Authorization to Appear
  112. Comment Name: Karina Munoz, Paralegal at Uber Technologies, Inc.
  113. Order Regarding Remote Appearance Granted
  114. View Document Order Regarding Remote Appearance Granted
  115. Judicial Officer Brickey, Daniel
  116. Comment Party: Karina Munoz, Paralegal at Uber Technologies Inc. Type of Appearance Requested: CourtCall
  117. Notice of Order on Remote Appearance
  118. Comment Emailed to: [email protected]
  119. Notice of Hearing
  120. View Document Notice of Hearing 6/20/24
  121. Comment Hearing moved from 97E to 402
  122. Court Trial
  123. Original Type Court Trial
  124. Judicial Officer Whalen, Robert
  125. Hearing Time 1:30 PM
  126. Result Heard
  127. Plaintiff: Singh, Narinder
  128. Defendant: Uber Technologies Inc.
  129. Appeared in Person
  130. Remote Appearance Via Courtcall
  131. Minute Order Attachment
  132. View Document 6-20-24 Minute Order Attachment
  133. Notice of Entry of Judgment Mailed to All Parties
  134. Notice to Dispose Exhibits Sent
  135. View Document Notice to Dispose Exhibits Sent
  136. Comment Recipient: Narinder Singh, Uber Techonologies, Inc
  137. Notice to Dispose Exhibits Received
  138. View Document Notice to Dispose Exhibits Received
  139. Comment Party: Narinder Singh - Document did not have a option marked but party did sign it.
  140. Chambers Work-Exhibits
  141. Original Type Chambers Work-Exhibits
  142. Judicial Officer Skiles, Jon M
  143. Hearing Time 5:30 PM
  144. Result Heard
  145. Order to Dispose Exhibits Signed and Filed
  146. View Document Order Received for Signature
  147. Comment Judge: J. Skiles
  148. Clerk's Certificate of Mailing
  149. View Document Clerk's Certificate of Mailing

See the patterns behind this case

The free view above tells you who’s in the room. The detailed reports below show how the room tends to behave — using the same public records lawyers quietly rely on before every hearing.

  • Judge Report

    How this judge has ruled in cases like yours — case mix, motion outcomes, and historical docket. Judges set the floor of what’s possible in your courtroom.

  • Attorney vs Judge Report

    Everything in the Judge Report, plus how your attorney has actually performed in front of this judge. Attorneys move you off the floor — or don’t.

One-time payment, no subscription. Reports describe past public court activity — they don’t predict outcomes and they aren’t legal advice.

Get Free Case Details

Enter your email to receive case information including parties, docket entries, and status updates.

By submitting you agree to our Privacy Policy.

Need this case removed? Enter your email above — the confirmation email includes a case removal link.

Legal Analytics Has Been Featured In

Featured in Forbes, Bloomberg, The New Yorker, Above The Law, American Bar Association, and more