Search

Attributes

This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 08/20/2019 at 09:10:51 (UTC).

JOHN HERRERA VS 99 CENTS ONLY STORES, LLC A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

Case Summary

On 08/04/2017 JOHN HERRERA filed a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury lawsuit against 99 CENTS ONLY STORES, LLC A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is YOLANDA OROZCO. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******1665

  • Filing Date:

    08/04/2017

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

YOLANDA OROZCO

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

HERRERA JOHN

Defendant

99 CENTS ONLY STORES LLC A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorneys

FAAL ALI

NAIMI OMID OLIVER

Defendant Attorney

WAINFELD GABRIEL HORACE

 

Court Documents

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

7/22/2019: Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion - Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion

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

7/22/2019: Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion - Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion

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

7/23/2019: Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion - Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion

Proof of Service by Mail - Proof of Service by Mail Amended

8/13/2019: Proof of Service by Mail - Proof of Service by Mail Amended

Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

12/13/2018: Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

Ex Parte Application (name extension) - Ex Parte Application Plaintiff's Ex Parte Application for an order to be Relieved as Counsel and to Continue Trial, or in the alternative for an orde

12/14/2018: Ex Parte Application (name extension) - Ex Parte Application Plaintiff's Ex Parte Application for an order to be Relieved as Counsel and to Continue Trial, or in the alternative for an orde

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Ex Parte Application Plaintiff's Ex Parte Applicat...)

12/18/2018: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Ex Parte Application Plaintiff's Ex Parte Applicat...)

Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

12/28/2018: Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

Proof of Service by Mail - Proof of Service by Mail

2/5/2019: Proof of Service by Mail - Proof of Service by Mail

Declaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil - Declaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil

2/5/2019: Declaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil - Declaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil

Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel - Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel

2/5/2019: Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel - Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel

Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel - Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel

3/26/2019: Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel - Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel)

4/24/2019: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel)

Order Granting Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil - Order Granting Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil

4/24/2019: Order Granting Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil - Order Granting Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil

Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

5/2/2019: Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

Civil Case Cover Sheet

8/4/2017: Civil Case Cover Sheet

Summons - on Complaint

8/4/2017: Summons - on Complaint

Complaint

8/4/2017: Complaint

11 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 08/07/2020
  • Hearingat 08:30 AM in Department 94 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Order to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/07/2019
  • Hearingat 08:30 AM in Department 94 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Non-Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/07/2019
  • Hearingat 08:30 AM in Department 94 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Hearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery")

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/07/2019
  • Hearingat 08:30 AM in Department 94 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Hearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery")

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/07/2019
  • Hearingat 08:30 AM in Department 94 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Hearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery")

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/13/2019
  • DocketProof of Service by Mail Amended; Filed by: 99 Cents Only Stores, LLC a California Limited Liability Company (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/26/2019
  • DocketHearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery") scheduled for 10/07/2019 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/24/2019
  • DocketHearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery") scheduled for 10/07/2019 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/24/2019
  • DocketHearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery") scheduled for 10/07/2019 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/23/2019
  • DocketMotion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion; Filed by: 99 Cents Only Stores, LLC a California Limited Liability Company (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
29 More Docket Entries
  • 12/14/2018
  • DocketEx Parte Application Plaintiff's Ex Parte Application for an order to be Relieved as Counsel and to Continue Trial, or in the alternative for an orde; Filed by: John Herrera (Plaintiff); As to: John Herrera (Plaintiff); 99 Cents Only Stores, LLC a California Limited Liability Company (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/13/2018
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by: John Herrera (Plaintiff); As to: 99 Cents Only Stores, LLC a California Limited Liability Company (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/20/2018
  • DocketCase reassigned to Stanley Mosk Courthouse in Department 77

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/04/2017
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: John Herrera (Plaintiff); As to: 99 Cents Only Stores, LLC a California Limited Liability Company (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/04/2017
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: John Herrera (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/04/2017
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/04/2017
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/04/2017
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. Yolanda Orozco in Department 77 Stanley Mosk Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/04/2017
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 02/01/2019 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 77

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/04/2017
  • DocketOSC - Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 08/07/2020 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 77

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 17STLC01665    Hearing Date: August 05, 2020    Dept: 25

HEARING DATE: Wed., August 5, 2020 JUDGE /DEPT: Blancarte/25

CASE NAME: Herrera v. 99 Cents Only Stores, LLC COMPL. FILED: 08-04-17

CASE NUMBER: 17STLC01665 DISC. C/O: 11-08-20

NOTICE: OK MOTION C/O: 11-23-20

TRIAL DATE: 12-08-20

PROCEEDINGS: MOTION TO DISMISS PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT

MOVING PARTY: Defendant 99 Cents Only Stores, LLC

RESP. PARTY: None

MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS

(CCP § 2025.450 )

TENTATIVE RULING:

Defendant 99 Cents Only Stores, LLC’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint is GRANTED.

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 August 3, 2020 [ ] Late [X] None

REPLY: None filed as of August 3, 2020 [ ] Late [X] None

ANALYSIS:

  1. Background

On August 4, 2017, Plaintiff John Herrera (“Plaintiff”) filed an action for premises liability and negligence against Defendant 99 Cents Only Stores, LLC (“Defendant”). On January 8, 2019, Defendant filed an Answer.

On April 24, 2019, the Court granted Plaintiff’s counsel Motion to be Relieved as Counsel. (4/24/19 Minute Order.) As Plaintiff has not yet filed a Substitution of Attorney, he is currently proceeding as self-represented in this matter.

On July 22, 2019, Defendant filed a Motion for Order Compelling Plaintiff to Respond to Form Interrogatories, Motion for Order Compelling Plaintiff to Respond to Special Interrogatories, and Motion for Order Compelling Plaintiff to Respond to Request for Production of Documents. The Court granted Defendant’s discovery motions on October 7, 2019, and Plaintiff was ordered to serve verified responses to the requests within 20 days and pay $760.00 in sanctions (the “Discovery Order”). (10/7/19 Minute Order.)

On November 20, 2019, Defendant filed the instant Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint (the “Motion”). To date, no opposition has been filed.

  1. Legal Standard

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), 2025.450, subd. (h); R.S. Creative, Inc. v. Creative Cotton, Ltd. (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 486, 495.) An evidence sanction prohibits a party hat misused the discovery process from introducing evidence on certain designated matters into evidence. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.030, subd. (c).) 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).)

  1. Discussion

Defendant seeks a terminating sanction dismissing the Complaint due to Plaintiff’s failure to respond to the discovery requests as ordered by the Court on October 7, 2019. (Mot., p. 1.)

Defendant’s counsel states that he mailed the Notice of Ruling of the Discovery Order to 1800 North Green Valley Pkwy, Apt. 1312, Henderson, NV, 89074 (the “Green Valley Address”). (Mot., Wainfeld Decl., ¶ 3.) This is the same address the Notice of Ruling for the Motion to be Relieved as Counsel was mailed to on May 2, 2019. (Id., Exh. A.) However, the Notice of Ruling was returned to Defendant’s counsel’s office as “undeliverable as addressed” and “unable to forward.” (Id. at ¶¶ 4-5, Exh. C.) Because of this, and because Plaintiff has not served any responses to Defendant’s discovery requests per the Court’s order, Defendant argues that Plaintiff’s Complaint should be dismissed. (Mot., 3, Wainfeld Decl., ¶ 6.)

The Court finds that terminating sanctions are warranted here. Plaintiff has not appeared in this action since his counsel was relieved in April 2019 and did not oppose Defendant’s motions to compel discovery filed in July 2019. Defendant’s counsel attempted to serve a copy of the Court’s ruling but was unable to as it appears that Plaintiff no longer resides at the Green Valley Address. Notably, Plaintiff did not file a notice of change of address with the Court. Indeed, it appears that Plaintiff is no longer interested in prosecuting this action. Although terminating sanctions are a harsh penalty, the evidence above demonstrates that Plaintiff’s compliance with the Court’s orders cannot be achieved through lesser means.

Thus, Defendant’s Motion is GRANTED.

  1. Conclusion & Order

For the foregoing reasons, Defendant 99 Cents Only Stores, LLC’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint is GRANTED.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where 99 CENTS ONLY STORES is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer NAIMI OMID O.

Latest cases represented by Lawyer FAAL ALI