Which Lawyers Win Before Your Judge?
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.
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.
Full Analytics Report
- Complete case narrative
- Judge details and rulings
- Case disposition and outcome
- All docket entries
- Related cases and filings
Case Information
Parties
Judge
Hon. Clark, Thomas S.|Brumfield, Lorna H.|Chapin, Sidney P.
Kern County (CA)
California
View Judge ProfileLawyers
Docket Entries
- Comment By Clerk as to Plaintiff, Claudia Padilla
- View Document Rejection/Correction Notice Comment Summons does not conform exact to Complaint. Please review Party information (including DOES information). Summons has incorrect court address, please use 1215 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, CA, 93301.
- View Document Notice of Assignment and OSC re CRC 3110 and CMC (N18C) Comment Re: 3.110 Hearing Date: 06/06/2025 Hearing Time: 8:30 AM Hearing Department/Division: 17
- View Document Rejection/Correction Notice Comment SUMMONS: Defendant party name does not conform to Complaint. Summons lists 'AND DOES 1 THROUGH 10, INCLUSIVE' but the Complaint only lists, 'DOES 1 THROUGH 10, INCLUSIVE'
- Unserved Served 03/03/202510:49 AM
- Comment Order on Court Fee Waiver (02/21/2025)
- View Document Rejection/Correction Notice Comment Name of party served does not conform to Complaint. Please revise and re-submit.
- View Document Rejection/Correction Notice Comment Attorney bar number is missing. Please revise and re-submit.
- Comment AS TO CASTLE & CROOKE, INC., BY SUB SERVICE
- View Document Rejection/Correction Notice Comment Caption does not conform exact to complaint. Review "does" verbiage. Please ensure caption conforms exact to operative complaint. Party listed in the upper left header, title beneath the case number and in the body does not conform to the party listed in the case. Party names are to be listed as they appear in the case. If parties are erroneously sued this should be stated.
- Comment DOE 1: CASTLE & COOKE COMMERCIAL-CA, INC.
- View Document Notice of Assignment and OSC re CRC 3110 and CMC (N18C) Judicial Officer Clark, Thomas S. Hearing Time 8:30 AM
- View Document Notice of Assignment and OSC re CRC 3110 and CMC (N18C) Judicial Officer Clark, Thomas S. Hearing Time 8:15 AM
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.
Full Analytics Report
- Complete case narrative
- Judge details and rulings
- Case disposition and outcome
- All docket entries
- Related cases and filings
Legal Analytics Has Been Featured In