This case was last updated from Fresno County Superior Courts on 07/12/2022 at 09:18:00 (UTC).

Yolanda Godinez vs. Darring R. Childers

Case Summary

On 10/24/2013 Yolanda Godinez filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against Darring R Childers. This case was filed in Fresno County Superior Courts, Fresno County BF Sisk Courthouse located in Fresno, California. The Judges overseeing this case are Black, Donald, Ikeda, Dale, Culver Kapetan, Kristi, Snauffer, Mark, Smith, Bruce and Hamilton, Jeffrey Y.. The case status is Disposed - Dismissed.
Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******3337

  • Filing Date:

    10/24/2013

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Dismissed

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • County, State:

    Fresno, California

Judge Details

Judges

Black, Donald

Ikeda, Dale

Culver Kapetan, Kristi

Snauffer, Mark

Smith, Bruce

Hamilton, Jeffrey Y.

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

Godinez, Yolanda

Defendants

Childers, Darring Richard

City of Fresno

Childers, Darrin Richard

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

Cenci, Richard G.

5740 N. Palm Ave Ste 111

Fresno, CA 93704

Defendant Attorney

Snyder, Chad T

 

Court Documents

Notice of Motion

Notice of Motion; Comment: and Motion for judgment on the pleadings

Declaration Filed

Declaration Filed; Comment: of Kurt C. Wendlenner in support of Motion to Compel Attendance at Deposition and Request for Monetary Sanctions

Answer Filed

Civil Document; Comment: to Plaintiff Yolanda Godinez's Second Amended Complaint

Judgment

Request for Dismissal filed; Judicial Officer: Black, Donald; Judgment Type: Request for Dismissal filed; Party Names: Godinez, Yolanda; Childers, Darrin Richard; City of Fresno; Black, Donald; Comment: With Prejudice

Reply filed

Reply filed; Comment: to plaintiff's opposition to motion for judgment on the pleadings.

Notice of Motion

Notice of Motion; Comment: and Motion to: compel discovery responses and request for sanctions.

Declaration Filed

Declaration Filed; Comment: of Kurt C. Wendlenner in support of city of Fresno's motion to compel discovery responses and request for sanctions.

Memorandum of Points and Authorities

Memorandum of Points and Authorities

Letter of Documents Returned Without Filing

Letter of Documents Returned Without Filing; Comment: Mandatory Settlement Conference Statement

Request for Dismissal

07/27/2016: Request for Dismissal

Letter of Documents Returned Without Filing

07/20/2016: Letter of Documents Returned Without Filing

Notice Filed

03/16/2016: Notice Filed

Civil Document

02/25/2016: Civil Document

Notice Filed

02/17/2016: Notice Filed

Amended Complaint - Claim Amount Unchanged (No Fee)

02/16/2016: Amended Complaint - Claim Amount Unchanged (No Fee)

Civil Document

01/12/2016: Civil Document

Civil Document

01/12/2016: Civil Document

Minute Order Attachment

01/05/2016: Minute Order Attachment

39 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 08/22/2016
  • DocketJury Trial; Judicial Officer: Hamilton, Jeffrey Y.; Hearing Time: 9:00 AM; Cancel Reason: Dismissed

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 08/19/2016
  • DocketTrial Readiness; Judicial Officer: Snauffer, Mark; Hearing Time: 9:30 AM; Cancel Reason: Dismissed

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 08/03/2016
  • DocketOSC - Fail to File ADR Report; Judicial Officer: Black, Donald; Hearing Time: 3:30 PM; Cancel Reason: Dismissed; Comment: Failure to fullfill ADR requirement and plaintiff's' failure to contact the ADR Dept. timely. jm/adr

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 07/27/2016
  • DispositionDisposition: Judgment; Judicial Officer: Black, Donald; Judgment Type: Request for Dismissal filed; Party; Names: Godinez, Yolanda; Childers, Darrin Richard; City of Fresno; Comment: With Prejudice

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 07/27/2016
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketRequest for Dismissal Received - Pending Review; Comment: Request for Dismissal filed

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 07/21/2016
  • DocketMandatory Settlement Conference; Hearing Time: 1:30 PM; Cancel Reason: Off Calendar

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 07/20/2016
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketLetter of Documents Returned Without Filing; Comment: Mandatory Settlement Conference Statement

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 03/16/2016
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketNotice Filed; Comment: of change of attorney

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 02/25/2016
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketAnswer Filed; Comment: to Plaintiff Yolanda Godinez's Second Amended Complaint

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 02/17/2016
  • View Court Documents
  • DocketNotice Filed; Comment: of change of attorney

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
63 More Docket Entries
  • 02/21/2014
  • DocketMinute order printed; Comment: Docket entry for the letter produced from CDAEVNT on 21-FEB-2014 by CCARACAS.

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/24/2013
  • FinancialFinancial info for Godinez, Yolanda: Counter Payment Receipt # 183335 Godinez, Yolanda $435.00

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/24/2013
  • FinancialFinancial info for Godinez, Yolanda: Transaction Assessment $435.00

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/24/2013
  • FinancialFinancial: Godinez, Yolanda; Total Financial Assessment $435.00; Total Payments and Credits $435.00

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/24/2013
  • DocketPayment; Comment: A Payment of -$435.00 was made on receipt CVCE183335.

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/24/2013
  • DocketNotice of Case Mgnt Conf; Comment: Docket entry for the letter produced from CSAEVNT on 24-OCT-2013 by GSAUCEDA.

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/24/2013
  • DocketSummons filed; Comment: Summons on Complaint filed. gs

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/24/2013
  • DocketCivil case cover sheet; Comment: Civil Case Cover Sheet gs

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/24/2013
  • DocketZ_Conversion; Comment: gs Event: Civil complaint filed

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/24/2013
  • DocketZ_Conversion; Comment: Event: New Civil Case Filed

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less

Complaint Information

SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(PlaintifPs Negligence or Fault)

6. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff’s Complaint and to

SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Third-Party Acts or Omissions)

7. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff’s Complaint and to each

purported cause of action contained therein, CITY and CHILDERS alleges the matter

complained of in the Plaintiff's Complaint and the causes of action therein, were solely cause| by

the actions or omissions of Plaintiff and/or third party, or parties, other than these answering

Defendants.

EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Assumption of Risk) 8. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff’s Complaint and to each

purported cause of action contained therein, CITY and CHILDERS allege Plaintiff knowingly,

consciously and willingly assumed the risk and obvious danger, if any there was, of events' and

matters specifically alleged in the Complaint and any damage or injury sustained by Plaintiffiand

therein were a proximate result of the risks so assumed.

NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Comparative Fault - Cal. Civ. Code § 1431.2)

9. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff’s Complaint and to ;Tach purported cause of action contained therein, CITY and CHILDERS allege any non—econcgmic damages sustained by Plaintiff in this action were due to the fault of someone other Ilhan

NINETEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Cal. Gov. Code § 815.4) each

and CHILDERS are entitled to the defense of any applicable immunities. | | 19. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff’s Complaint and to !

purported cause of action contained therein, CITY and CHILDERS allege Plaintiff is b pursuant to Government Code section 815.4 because the CITY would not have been liable for

| injury, if any there was, had the act or omission been that of an employee of the CITY inste’ d of

| an independent contractor. I

TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE l |

(Reasonable Diligence - Cal. Gov. Code § 815.6)

20. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff’s Complaint and to each

purported cause of action contained therein, CITY and CHILDERS allege they were undér no

mandatory duty imposed by an enactment designed to protect against the risk of the particular

kind of injury allegedly suffered by Plaintiff, and even if they had a duty, the Complaint is barred in that the CITY and CHILDERS exercised reasonable diligence to discharge that duty.

TWENTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Cal. Gov. Code § 818.8)

21. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff’s Complaint and toi each purported cause of action contained therein, CITY and CHILDERS allege at all times refe ted to

in her Complaint, the CITY and CHILDERS are not liable for an injury(ies) caused by

misrepresentation by an employee of the public entity, whether or not such misrepresentation be 1

negligent or intentional.

TWENTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Exercise of Discretionary Authority — Cal. Gov. Code §820.2) 22. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff’s Complaint and to each purported cause of action contained therein, CITY and CHILDERS allege any and all acts of CITY and CHILDERS and/or their employees, agents and employees, Which allegedly caii sed

the injury, were the result of the exercise of discretionary authority vested in them. Therefore,

TWENTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Cal. Gov. Code § 820.8)

23. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff’s Complaint and to gach purported cause of action contained therein, CITY and CHILDERS allege the Complaint is barred against CITY and CHILDERS pursuant to Government Code section 820.8 in that a public employee is not liable for an injury caused by the act or omission of another person.

TWENTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Cal. Gov. Code § 821.4)

24. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff’s Complaint and to each

Plaintiff for injury(ies) caused by their failure to make an inspection or by reason of making an

inadequate or negligent inspection pursuant to Government Code section 821.4.

TWENTY-FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Acts Reasonable - Cal. Gov. Code § 835.4)

25. As a separate and affirmative defense to Plaintiff’s Complaint and to each

purported cause of action contained therein, CITY and CHILDERS allege the acts of CITY

and/or CHILDERS (and/or CITY’s employees) were reasonable within the meaning of

| Government Code section 835.4 and CITY and CHILDERS are therefore immune from Iiability.

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases represented by Lawyer Snyder, Chad T