This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 10/30/2020 at 08:49:07 (UTC).

INTERINSURANCE EXCHANGE OF THE AUTO CLUB VS SHAUN KAHARRI IVY, ET AL.

Case Summary

On 01/30/2019 INTERINSURANCE EXCHANGE OF THE AUTO CLUB filed a Personal Injury - Uninsured Motor Vehicle lawsuit against SHAUN KAHARRI IVY. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is JON R. TAKASUGI. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******1079

  • Filing Date:

    01/30/2019

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Uninsured Motor Vehicle

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Spring Street Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

JON R. TAKASUGI

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

INTERINSURANCE EXCHANGE OF THE AUTO CLUB

Defendants

JONES TYRELL ANTOINE

IVY SHAUN KAHARRI

Long Beach, CA 90810

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

MENDELSON LEE M

 

Court Documents

Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

10/27/2020: Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion for Terminating Sanctions)

9/28/2020: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion for Terminating Sanctions)

Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for [Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)]

10/30/2019: Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for [Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)]

Memorandum of Points & Authorities - Memorandum of Points & Authorities

1/27/2020: Memorandum of Points & Authorities - Memorandum of Points & Authorities

Declaration (name extension) - Declaration of Marc A Schwarz

1/27/2020: Declaration (name extension) - Declaration of Marc A Schwarz

Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion - Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion

1/27/2020: Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion - Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion

Memorandum of Points & Authorities - Memorandum of Points & Authorities

1/27/2020: Memorandum of Points & Authorities - Memorandum of Points & Authorities

Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion - Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion

1/27/2020: Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion - Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion

Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

3/10/2020: Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

Minute Order - Minute Order (Court Order Re: Hearing on MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTINS AN...)

7/23/2020: Minute Order - Minute Order (Court Order Re: Hearing on MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTINS AN...)

Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Court Order Re: Hearing on MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTINS AN...) of 07/23/2020

7/23/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Court Order Re: Hearing on MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTINS AN...) of 07/23/2020

Request for Entry of Default / Judgment - Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

7/16/2019: Request for Entry of Default / Judgment - Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court) - Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)

4/5/2019: Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court) - Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)

Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

2/28/2019: Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

Complaint - Complaint

1/30/2019: Complaint - Complaint

Summons - Summons on Complaint

1/30/2019: Summons - Summons on Complaint

Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

1/30/2019: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

1/30/2019: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

17 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 02/02/2022
  • Hearing02/02/2022 at 10:30 AM in Department 25 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Order to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/04/2021
  • Hearing03/04/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department 25 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Non-Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/27/2020
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by: Interinsurance Exchange of the Auto Club (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/28/2020
  • DocketUpdated -- Answer: Filed By: Shaun Kaharri Ivy (Defendant); Result: Stricken; Result Date: 09/28/2020; As To Parties: removed

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/28/2020
  • DocketUpdated -- Amended Answer: Filed By: Shaun Kaharri Ivy (Defendant); Result: Stricken; Result Date: 09/28/2020; As To Parties: removed

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/28/2020
  • DocketMinute Order (Hearing on Motion for Terminating Sanctions)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/28/2020
  • DocketHearing on Motion for Terminating Sanctions scheduled for 09/28/2020 at 10:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 updated: Result Date to 09/28/2020; Result Type to Held - Motion Granted

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/23/2020
  • DocketHearing on Motion for Terminating Sanctions scheduled for 09/28/2020 at 10:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/23/2020
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 03/04/2021 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/23/2020
  • DocketMinute Order (Court Order Re: Hearing on MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTINS AN...)

    Read MoreRead Less
30 More Docket Entries
  • 02/28/2019
  • DocketProof of Service by Substituted Service; Filed by: Interinsurance Exchange of the Auto Club (Plaintiff); As to: Tyrell Antoine Jones (Defendant); Proof of Mailing Date: 02/27/2019; Service Cost: 92.00; Service Cost Waived: No

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/25/2019
  • DocketDeclaration Declaration of Non-Service; Filed by: Interinsurance Exchange of the Auto Club (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/04/2019
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 07/29/2020 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/04/2019
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 02/02/2022 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/04/2019
  • DocketCase reassigned to Stanley Mosk Courthouse in Department 94 - Hon. James E. Blancarte; Reason: Inventory Transfer

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/04/2019
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. Jon R. Takasugi in Department 94 Stanley Mosk Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/30/2019
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: Interinsurance Exchange of the Auto Club (Plaintiff); As to: Shaun Kaharri Ivy (Defendant); Tyrell Antoine Jones (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/30/2019
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Interinsurance Exchange of the Auto Club (Plaintiff); As to: Shaun Kaharri Ivy (Defendant); Tyrell Antoine Jones (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/30/2019
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Interinsurance Exchange of the Auto Club (Plaintiff); As to: Shaun Kaharri Ivy (Defendant); Tyrell Antoine Jones (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/30/2019
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 19STLC01079    Hearing Date: September 28, 2020    Dept: 25

HEARING DATE: Mon., September 28, 2020 JUDGE /DEPT: Blancarte/25

CASE NAME: Interinsurance Exchange of the Automobile Club v. Ivy, et al.

CASE NUMBER: 19STLC01079 COMP. FILED: 01-30-19

NOTICE: OK DISC. C/O: 02-02-21

MOTION C/O: 02-17-21

TRIAL DATE: 03-04-21

PROCEEDINGS: MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS AND FOR AWARD OF MONETARY SANCTIONS

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Interinsurance Exchange of the Automobile Club

RESP. PARTY: None

MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS

(CCP § 2023.030)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Interinsurance Exchange of the Automobile Club’s Motion for Terminating Sanctions is GRANTED. However, Plaintiff’s request for monetary sanctions is DENIED.

SERVICE:

[X] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) OK

[X] Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) OK

[X] 16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) OK

OPPOSITION: None filed as of September 23, 2020 [ ] Late [X] None

REPLY: None filed as of September 23, 2020 [ ] Late [X] None

ANALYSIS:

  1. Background

On January 30, 2019, Plaintiff Interinsurance of Exchange of the Automobile Club (“Plaintiff”) filed an action for subrogation and indebtedness against Defendants Shaun Kaharri Ivy (“Ivy”) and Tyrell Antione Jones (“Jones”). On April 5, 2019, Defendant Ivy filed an Answer, in pro per. On July 16, 2019, default was entered as to Defendant Jones.

On January 27, 2020, Plaintiff filed a motion to deem Requests for Admission, Set One, admitted and motion to compel responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One, as to Defendant Ivy. Defendant Ivy did not respond. (3/5/20 Minute Order.) The Court granted Plaintiff’s unopposed discovery motions on March 5, 2020 and ordered Defendant Ivy to provide verified responses without objections to the Form Interrogatories and to pay sanctions of $573.50 within thirty (30) days of notice of the Court’s order. (Id.) Plaintiff filed a Notice of Ruling demonstrating it provided Defendant Ivy with notice of the Court’s March 5, 2020 Order that same day via regular mail. (3/10/20 Notice of Ruling.)

On June 15, 2020, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion for Terminating Sanctions and for Award of Monetary Sanctions (the “Motion”). The Court scheduled the Motion for hearing for September 28, 2020 and gave both parties notice. (7/23/20 Minute Order & Certificate of Mailing.)

To date, no opposition has been filed.

  1. Legal Standard & Discussion

Where a party willfully disobeys a discovery order, courts have discretion to impose terminating, issue, evidence or monetary sanctions. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2023.010, subd. (g); 2023.030, subds. (b)-(d).) Ultimate discovery sanctions are justified where there is a willful discovery order violation, a history of abuse, and evidence showing that less severe sanctions would not produce compliance with discovery rules. (Van Sickle v. Gilbert (2011) 196 Cal.App.4th 1495, 1516.) “[A] penalty as severe as dismissal or default is not authorized where noncompliance with discovery is caused by an inability to comply rather than willfulness or bad faith.” (Brown v. Sup. Ct. (1986) 180 Cal.App.3d 701, 707.) The court may impose a terminating sanction by one of the following orders:

(1) An order striking out the pleadings or parts of the pleadings of any party engaging in the misuse of the discovery process.

(2) An order staying further proceedings by that party until an order for discovery is obeyed.

(3) An order dismissing the action, or any part of the action, of that party.

(4) An order rendering a judgment by default against that party.

(Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.030, subd. (d).)

The Court finds that terminating sanctions are warranted here. Defendant Ivy failed to respond to Plaintiff’s discovery motions and did not appear at the March 5, 2020 hearing on the discovery motions. (3/5/20 Minute Order.) Following the Court’s order granting Plaintiff’s unopposed discovery motions, Plaintiff served notice of that order on March 5, 2020 via regular mail. (Mot., Schwarz Decl., ¶ 2; 3/10/20 Notice of Ruling.) Despite the Court’s order, Defendant Ivy has not provided any discovery responses. (Mot., Schwarz Decl., ¶ 3.) Given the notice of ruling provided, the Court finds Defendant Ivy’s failure to provide responses a willful failure to comply with the Court’s order. Notably, Defendant Ivy was properly served with this Motion, but has not opposed it.

Although terminating sanctions are a harsh penalty, the evidence above demonstrates that Defendant Ivy’s compliance with the Court’s orders cannot be achieved through lesser sanctions. However, the Court declines to award Plaintiff monetary sanctions as such an order would be futile.

  1. Conclusion & Order

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff Interinsurance Exchange of the Automobile Club’s Motion for Terminating Sanctions is GRANTED. However, Plaintiff’s request for monetary sanctions is DENIED.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.

Case Number: 19STLC01079    Hearing Date: March 05, 2020    Dept: 25

MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO FORM INTERROGATORIES; MOTION TO DEEM REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS ADMITTED; REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

(CCP §§ 2030.290; 2033.280)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Interinsurance Exchange of the Automobile Club’s (1) Motion to Compel Responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One, and (2) Motion to Deem Request for Admissions, Set One, Admitted are GRANTED. Defendant Ivy is ordered to serve responses without objections to Form Interrogatories within thirty (30) days of service of notice of this order.

Plaintiff’s requests for sanctions are also GRANTED in the reduced amount of $573.30 to be paid within thirty (30) days of service of notice of this order.

ANALYSIS:

  1. Background

On January 30, 2019, Plaintiff Interinsurance of Exchange of the Automobile Club (“Plaintiff”) filed an action for subrogation and indebtedness against Defendants Shaun Kaharri Ivy (“Ivy”) and Tyrell Antione Jones (“Jones”). On April 5, 2019, Defendant Ivy filed an Answer. On July 16, 2019, default was entered as to Defendant Jones.

On January 27, 2020, Plaintiff filed the instant (1) Motion for Order Compelling that the Truth of the Matters Specified in Plaintiff’s First Set of Request for Admissions be Deemed Admitted and Request for Sanctions (the “RFA Motion”) and (2) Motion for Order Compelling Answers to Plaintiff’s First Set of Form Interrogatories and Request for Sanctions (the “Interrogatories Motion”). To date, no opposition has been filed.

  1. Legal Standard & Discussion

  1. Form Interrogatories

A party must respond to interrogatories within 30 days after service. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.260, subd. (a).) If a party to whom interrogatories are directed does not provide timely responses, the requesting party may move for an order compelling responses to the discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (b).) The party also waives the right to make any objections, including one based on privilege or work-product protection. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (a).) There is no time limit for a motion to compel responses to interrogatories other than the cut-off on hearing discovery motions 15 days before trial. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2024.020, subd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., 2030.290.) No meet and confer efforts are required before filing a motion to compel responses to the discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290; Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 411.)

Here, Plaintiff served Defendant Ivy with Form Interrogatories, Set One, on July 15, 2009, by mail. (Interrogatories Mot., Schwarz Decl., ¶ 3, Exh. 1.) Although not required, on September 3, 2019, Plaintiff’s counsel sent Defendant Ivy a meet and confer letter regarding the lack of discovery responses. (Id. at ¶ 4, Exh. 2.) To date, Plaintiff has not received any responses. (Id. at ¶ 5.) Thus, Plaintiff is entitled to an order compelling Defendant Ivy to serve responses without objections to the Form Interrogatories. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290.)

  1. Requests for Admission

A party must respond to requests for admissions within 30 days after service of such requests. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.250, subd. (a).) “If a party to whom requests for admission are directed fails to serve a timely response…(a) [that party] waives any objection to the requests, including one based on privilege or on the protection for work product…” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (a).) “The requesting party may move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted, as well as for a monetary sanction under Chapter 7.” (Id. at subd. (b).) A motion dealing with the failure to respond, rather than with inadequate responses, does not require the requesting party to meet and confer with the responding party. (Deymer v. Costa Mesa Mobile Home Estates (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 393, 395, fn. 4 [disapproved on other grounds in Wilcox v. Birtwhistle (1999) 21 Cal.4th 973]. There is no time limit within which a motion to have matters deemed admitted must be made. (Brigante v. Huang (1993) 20 Cal.App.4th 1569, 1585.)

Here, Plaintiff served Defendant Ivy with Requests for Admission, Set One, on July 15, 2019 by mail. (RFA Mot., Schwarz Decl., ¶ 3, Exh. 1.) Although not required, on September 3, 2019, Plaintiff’s counsel sent Defendant Ivy a meet and confer letter regarding the lack of discovery responses. (Id. at ¶ 4, Exh. 2.) To date, Plaintiff has not received responses to the Requests for Admission. (Id. at ¶ 5.) Thus, Plaintiff is entitled to an order deeming the Requests for Admission, Set One, admitted against Defendant Ivy. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280.)

  1. Sanctions

Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.030, subdivision (a) provides, in pertinent part, that the court may impose a monetary sanction on a party engaging in the misuse of the discovery process to pay the reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, incurred by anyone as a result of that conduct. A misuse of the discovery process includes failing to respond or to submit to an authorized method of discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.010, subd. (d).) Furthermore, it is “mandatory that the Court impose a monetary sanction…on the party or attorney, or both, whose failure to serve a timely response to requests for admission necessitated this motion.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (c).)

The Court finds Defendant Ivy’s failure to respond to Plaintiff’s Form Interrogatories and Requests for Admission a misuse of the discovery process. In addition, the Court is required to impose a monetary sanction on Defendant Ivy for failing to respond to Requests for Admissions under Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.280, subdivision (c).

Plaintiff’s counsel requests a total of $3,723.30 in sanctions, which includes eight hours of attorney time billed at $450.00 per hour and two filing fees of $61.65. (Motions, Schwarz Decl., ¶ 5.) However, the amount sought is excessive given the simplicity of these nearly identical Motions and the lack of opposition and reply. Plaintiff’s requests for sanctions are GRANTED in the reduced amount of $573.30 based on one hour of attorney time and two filing fees of $61.65. Defendant Ivy is ordered to pay sanctions within (30) days of service of notice of this order.

  1. Conclusion & Order

Plaintiff Interinsurance Exchange of the Automobile Club’s (1) Motion to Compel Responses to Form Interrogatories, Set One, and (2) Motion to Deem Request for Admissions, Set One, Admitted are GRANTED. Defendant Ivy is ordered to serve responses without objections to Form Interrogatories within thirty (30) days of service of notice of this order.

Plaintiff’s requests for sanctions are also GRANTED in the reduced amount of $573.30 to be paid within thirty (30) days of service of notice of this order.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.