On 07/17/2019 DAFED CORTES filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against OSCAR PANTIGA. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is JAMES E. BLANCARTE. The case status is Disposed - Dismissed.
*******6656
07/17/2019
Disposed - Dismissed
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Spring Street Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
JAMES E. BLANCARTE
CORTES DAFED
PANTIGA OSCAR
VARGASLEIVA WENDY
GLADKOV SERGEI
ALBAN ARNOLD J
ESMAILIAN ARPINE J
2/25/2020: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery"))
6/9/2020: Motion for Terminating Sanctions - Motion for Terminating Sanctions
6/9/2020: Minute Order - Minute Order (Court Order)
6/9/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Court Order) of 06/09/2020
7/1/2020: Notice of Posting of Jury Fees - Notice of Posting of Jury Fees
9/3/2020: Notice (name extension) - Notice OF HEARING DATE
9/21/2020: Order (name extension) - Order [PROPOSED] ORDER
9/21/2020: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion for Terminating Sanctions)
9/22/2020: Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling
1/22/2020: Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion - Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion
10/23/2019: Minute Order - Minute Order (Court Order: Notice of Related Case)
10/23/2019: Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Court Order: Notice of Related Case) of 10/23/2019
10/9/2019: Answer - Answer
10/10/2019: Notice of Related Case - Notice of Related Case
7/17/2019: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet
7/17/2019: Summons - Summons on Complaint
7/17/2019: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case
7/17/2019: First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order
DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by: Oscar Demetrio Trujillo Pantiga Erroneously Sued As Oscar Pantiga (Defendant); Wendy Vargasleiva (Defendant)
DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 01/13/2021 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 32 Not Held - Vacated by Court on 09/22/2020
DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 07/20/2022 at 10:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 32 Not Held - Vacated by Court on 09/22/2020
DocketUpdated -- Motion for Terminating Sanctions: Filed By: Wendy Vargasleiva (Defendant),Oscar Demetrio Trujillo Pantiga Erroneously Sued As Oscar Pantiga (Defendant); Result: Granted; Result Date: 09/21/2020
DocketOn the Complaint filed by Dafed Cortes on 07/17/2019, entered Order for Dismissal with prejudice as to the entire action
DocketUpdated -- Order [PROPOSED] ORDER: Result Date: 09/21/2020; As To Parties changed from Dafed Cortes (Plaintiff) to Dafed Cortes (Plaintiff)
DocketMinute Order (Hearing on Motion for Terminating Sanctions)
DocketHearing on Motion for Terminating Sanctions scheduled for 09/21/2020 at 01:30 PM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 32 updated: Result Date to 09/21/2020; Result Type to Held - Motion Granted
DocketNotice OF HEARING DATE; Filed by: Oscar Demetrio Trujillo Pantiga Erroneously Sued As Oscar Pantiga (Defendant); Wendy Vargasleiva (Defendant)
DocketNotice of Posting of Jury Fees; Filed by: Oscar Demetrio Trujillo Pantiga Erroneously Sued As Oscar Pantiga (Defendant); Wendy Vargasleiva (Defendant)
DocketNotice of Related Case; Filed by: Oscar Demetrio Trujillo Pantiga Erroneously Sued As Oscar Pantiga (Defendant); Wendy Vargasleiva (Defendant)
DocketAnswer; Filed by: Oscar Demetrio Trujillo Pantiga Erroneously Sued As Oscar Pantiga (Defendant); Wendy Vargasleiva (Defendant); As to: Dafed Cortes (Plaintiff)
DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 01/13/2021 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94
DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 07/20/2022 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94
DocketCase assigned to Hon. James E. Blancarte in Department 94 Stanley Mosk Courthouse
DocketComplaint; Filed by: Dafed Cortes (Plaintiff); As to: Oscar Pantiga (Defendant); Wendy Vargasleiva (Defendant)
DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Dafed Cortes (Plaintiff); As to: Oscar Pantiga (Defendant); Wendy Vargasleiva (Defendant)
DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Dafed Cortes (Plaintiff); As to: Oscar Pantiga (Defendant); Wendy Vargasleiva (Defendant)
DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk
DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk
Case Number: 19STLC06656 Hearing Date: September 21, 2020 Dept: 32
dafed cortes, Plaintiff, v.
oscar pantiga, et al.,
Defendants. |
Case No.: 19STLC06656
Hearing Date: September 21, 2020
[TENTATIVE] order RE: motion for terminating sanctions
|
Defendants Oscar Demetrio Trujillo Pantiga and Wendy Varsasleiva (“Defendants”) move to dismiss the complaint of Plaintiff Dafed Cortes (“Plaintiff”) as a terminating sanction. The Court has discretion to impose terminating sanction when a party willfully disobeys a discovery order. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2023.010, subd. (g), 2030.290, subd. (c).) The court may impose a terminating sanction by striking a party’s pleading. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.030, subd. (d)(1).)
In its order of February 25, 2020, the Court ordered Plaintiff to serve verified responses to form interrogatories that Defendants served on Plaintiff within 30 days of notice of the order. Defendants served Plaintiff with notice of the ruling by mail on February 26, 2020. Plaintiff thus had until April 1, 2020 to serve responses in compliance with this Court’s order. As of the filing date of this motion, Plaintiff has not served responses to the discovery. Plaintiff has not opposed the motion, and there is nothing in the record to suggest that Plaintiff has complied with these discovery obligations. The Court finds that Plaintiff has acted willfully and that no lesser sanction would facilitate Plaintiff’s compliance with these discovery obligations. Therefore, the motion for terminating sanctions is granted. The Court finds that monetary sanctions would be futile.
CONCLUSION AND ORDER
Defendants’ motion for terminating sanctions is granted. This case is dismissed with prejudice. Defendants shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.
DATED: September 21, 2020 ___________________________
Stephen I. Goorvitch
Judge of the Superior Court
Case Number: 19STLC06656 Hearing Date: February 25, 2020 Dept: 32
dafed cortes, Plaintiff, v.
oscar pantiga, et al.,
Defendants. |
Case No.: 19STLC06656, related to 19STCV21265
Hearing Date: February 25, 2020
[TENTATIVE] order RE: motion to compel discovery responses
|
Defendants Oscar Demetrio Trujillo Pantiga and Wendy Vargasleiva (“Defendants”) move to compel responses from Plaintiff Dafed Cortes (“Plaintiff”) to Form Interrogatories, set one (“FROG”). Defendants served the FROG on Plaintiff by mail on October 7, 2019. Plaintiff’s responses were thus due no later than November 12, 2019. As of the filing date of the motion, Defendants have not received responses from Plaintiff. Plaintiff has not opposed the motion, and there is nothing in the record suggesting that Plaintiff has complied with these discovery obligations. Accordingly, the motion to compel responses to the FROG is granted per Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.290. Plaintiff is ordered to serve responses to Defendants’ FROG, without objections, within 30 days of service of this order.
Defendants seek sanctions in connection with the motion. The Court concludes that Plaintiff’s failure to respond to the discovery is an abuse of the discovery process. The Court awards sanctions against Plaintiff in the amount of $510, which Defendants request as their expenses in bringing this motion. The Court finds this amount to be fair and reasonable under the circumstances.
CONCLUSION AND ORDER
Defendants’ motion to compel responses to the FROG is granted per Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.290. Plaintiff is ordered to serve verified responses, without objections, within 30 days of notice of this order. Plaintiff is ordered to pay monetary sanctions in the amount of $510 to Defendants, by and through counsel, within 30 days of notice of this order. Defendants are ordered to provide notice of this order and file proof of service of such.
DATED: February 25, 2020 ___________________________
Stephen I. Goorvitch
Judge of the Superior Court