Search

Attributes

This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 06/09/2021 at 01:15:16 (UTC).

JIRAIR MAROUTI VS LAUREN ASHLEY MILLER

Case Summary

On 12/06/2019 JIRAIR MAROUTI filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against LAUREN ASHLEY MILLER. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is SERENA R. MURILLO. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******1162

  • Filing Date:

    12/06/2019

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Spring Street Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

SERENA R. MURILLO

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

MAROUTI JIRAIR

Defendant

MILLER LAUREN ASHLEY

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorneys

OHANESSIAN NORAYR

GHAVIMI AIDIN D.

Defendant Attorney

BAHARVAR GABRIELLA

 

Court Documents

Demand for Jury Trial - Demand for Jury Trial

6/9/2020: Demand for Jury Trial - Demand for Jury Trial

Notice of Posting of Jury Fees - Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

6/9/2020: Notice of Posting of Jury Fees - Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

Answer - Answer

6/9/2020: Answer - Answer

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

6/10/2020: Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

Substitution of Attorney - Substitution of Attorney

6/29/2020: Substitution of Attorney - Substitution of Attorney

Motion to Reclassify - Motion to Reclassify

9/28/2020: Motion to Reclassify - Motion to Reclassify

Opposition (name extension) - Opposition Defendant's Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion For Order

3/29/2021: Opposition (name extension) - Opposition Defendant's Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion For Order

Ex Parte Application (name extension) - Ex Parte Application to advance hearing date and shorten time, in the alternative, continue current trial date of Plaintiff's Motion to Reclassify (WITH PROPOSE

4/14/2021: Ex Parte Application (name extension) - Ex Parte Application to advance hearing date and shorten time, in the alternative, continue current trial date of Plaintiff's Motion to Reclassify (WITH PROPOSE

Declaration (name extension) - Declaration of Paymon John Vafa ISO Ex Parte Application and Motion to Reclassify

4/14/2021: Declaration (name extension) - Declaration of Paymon John Vafa ISO Ex Parte Application and Motion to Reclassify

Declaration (name extension) - Declaration of Paymon John Vafa ISO Plaintiff's Motion to Reclassify (and related ex parte application)

4/15/2021: Declaration (name extension) - Declaration of Paymon John Vafa ISO Plaintiff's Motion to Reclassify (and related ex parte application)

Request for Judicial Notice - Request for Judicial Notice

4/15/2021: Request for Judicial Notice - Request for Judicial Notice

Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

4/15/2021: Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

Opposition (name extension) - Opposition to Ex Parte Application

4/16/2021: Opposition (name extension) - Opposition to Ex Parte Application

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Ex Parte Application to advance hearing date and s...)

4/16/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Ex Parte Application to advance hearing date and s...)

Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Hearing on Ex Parte Application to advance hearing date and s...) of 04/16/2021

4/16/2021: Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Hearing on Ex Parte Application to advance hearing date and s...) of 04/16/2021

Complaint - Complaint

12/6/2019: Complaint - Complaint

First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

12/6/2019: First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

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

12/6/2019: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

14 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 12/09/2022
  • Hearing12/09/2022 at 08:30 AM in Department 26 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Order to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/19/2022
  • Hearing01/19/2022 at 08:30 AM in Department 26 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Non-Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/01/2021
  • Hearing09/01/2021 at 10:00 AM in Department 26 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Hearing on Motion to Reclassify (Walker Motion)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/19/2021
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 01/19/2022 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/19/2021
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by: JIRAIR MAROUTI (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/19/2021
  • DocketOn the Court's own motion, Non-Jury Trial scheduled for 06/04/2021 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26 Not Held - Advanced and Continued - by Court was rescheduled to 01/19/2022 08:30 AM

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/16/2021
  • DocketOpposition to Ex Parte Application; Filed by: LAUREN ASHLEY MILLER (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/16/2021
  • DocketEx Parte Application Ruling; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/16/2021
  • DocketMinute Order (Hearing on Ex Parte Application to advance hearing date and s...)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/16/2021
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for (Hearing on Ex Parte Application to advance hearing date and s...) of 04/16/2021; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
21 More Docket Entries
  • 06/09/2020
  • DocketDemand for Jury Trial; Filed by: LAUREN ASHLEY MILLER (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/09/2020
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by: LAUREN ASHLEY MILLER (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/06/2019
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 12/09/2022 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/06/2019
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 06/04/2021 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/06/2019
  • DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/06/2019
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/06/2019
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: JIRAIR MAROUTI (Plaintiff); As to: LAUREN ASHLEY MILLER (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/06/2019
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: JIRAIR MAROUTI (Plaintiff); As to: LAUREN ASHLEY MILLER (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/06/2019
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: JIRAIR MAROUTI (Plaintiff); As to: LAUREN ASHLEY MILLER (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/06/2019
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. Serena R. Murillo in Department 94 Stanley Mosk Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 19STLC11162    Hearing Date: April 14, 2021    Dept: 26

Marouti v. Miller, et al.MOTION TO RECLASSIFY

(CCP § 403.040)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Jirair Marouti’s Motion to Reclassify Action is DENIED.

ANALYSIS:

On December 6, 2019, Plaintiff Jirair Marouti (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendant Lauren Ashley Miller (“Defendant”) for motor vehicle negligence. Service was accomplished on Defendant in June 2020, at which time an Answer was filed. Plaintiff filed a substitution of attorney on June 29, 2020.

On September 28, 2020, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Reclassify Action. Defendant filed an opposition on March 29, 2021 and Plaintiff replied on April 1, 2021. 

Legal Standard

Code of Civil Procedure section 403.040 allows a plaintiff to file a motion for reclassification of an action within the time allowed for that party to amend the initial pleading. (CCP § 403.040(a).) If the motion is made after the time for the plaintiff to amend the pleading, the motion may only be granted if (1) the case is incorrectly classified; and (2) the plaintiff shows good cause for not seeking reclassification earlier. (CCP § 403.040(b).) In Walker v. Superior Court (1991) 53 Cal.3d 257, 262, the California Supreme Court held that a matter may be reclassified from unlimited to limited only if it appears to a legal certainty that the plaintiff's damages will necessarily be less than $25,000. (Walker v. Superior Court (1991) 53 Cal.3d 257.)

In Ytuarte v. Superior Court (2005) 129 Cal.App.4th 266, 278, the Court of Appeals examined the principles it set forth in Walker and held that “the court should reject the plaintiff's effort to reclassify the action as unlimited only when the lack of jurisdiction as an “unlimited” case is certain and clear.” (Id. at 279.) Plaintiff’s burden is to present evidence to demonstrate a possibility that the damages will exceed $25,000.00 and the trial court must review the record to determine “whether a judgment in excess of $25,000.00 is obtainable.” (Ibid.)

Discussion

The initial time to amend the pleadings having passed, Plaintiff must show good cause for the timing of the Motion to Reclassify and that the amount in controversy exceeds the jurisdiction of this Court. Plaintiff relies on the declaration of counsel, who states that upon substituting into the case in June 2020, he realized Plaintiff’s medical expenses exceed $35,000.00. (Motion, Ghavim Decl., ¶¶6-7.) Defendant points out that Plaintiff’s medical expenses at the time this action was filed were only $9,030.00 based on chiropractic treatment, imaging and an orthopedic surgeon consultation from January 17, 2018 to May 25, 2018. This is corroborated by Plaintiff’s own exhibits. (Id. at Exh. A.) It was not until June 2020 that Plaintiff incurred additional medical expenses of more than $20,000.00. (Ibid.)

Plaintiff has not shown that these additional medical expenses have any relation to the injuries suffered in the subject motor vehicle accident, which occurred on January 11, 2018. (Compl., ¶MV-1.) No declaration is provided by Plaintiff linking her injuries with the care received two-and-a-half years after the accident or explaining the signigicant gap in treatment. Without more evidence, the lack of any apparent treatment for more than two years fails to support the possibility that Plaintiff’s damages from the motor vehicle accident at issue will exceed the jurisdictional limit of this Court. Contrary to Plaintiff’s argument on reply, allegations of the amount in controversy alone do not demonstrate that reclassification is appropriate.

Conclusion

Plaintiff Jirair Marouti’s Motion to Reclassify Action is DENIED.

Defendant to give notice.

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases represented by Lawyer GHAVIMI AIDIN D.