Skip to main content
Supreme Court Case TrackerThe Court, in plain English

Emergency application

Andrea Nicole Weetly v. Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County

Denied
No. 25A132Stay applicationFiled by a private partyPresented to Justice KaganFrom Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District

What did the Court do?

The Court denied the request on August 1, 2025: the lower court's ruling stays in effect while the appeal continues.

Emergency rulings are temporary and do not decide the underlying case.

Filed Ruled 10 days after filing

What's being asked

Andrea Nicole Weetly asks the Supreme Court to temporarily pause a ruling by the California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District. The record does not say what that ruling concerns; the case caption names Los Angeles County Superior Court and others.

What the Court did

Justice Kagan refused Weetly's request for a temporary pause (denied the application). The order gives no reason and does not decide who wins the underlying dispute; the Court did not publish how the justices voted.

Vote not published · 9the order does not say how they voted
  1. Roberts
  2. Thomas
  3. Alito
  4. Sotomayor
  5. Kagan
  6. Gorsuch
  7. Kavanaugh
  8. Barrett
  9. Jackson
The order does not say how any justice voted, as is usual on the emergency docket.
Half of 302 rulings on applications decided without a response came 8 to 28 days after filing, and the median was 14 days; this one was ruled on 10 days after filing.

What it means

The California Court of Appeal ruling is not paused, but this emergency ruling does not decide who wins the underlying dispute. The record lists no related Supreme Court case and no argument date.

Sources

Facts on this page come from the Supreme Court docket, orders, and opinions for No. 25A132. The answers restate that record in plain words; explainer copy is written from the record and the filings only.

Checked October 4, 2026