This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 11/14/2021 at 02:52:35 (UTC).

JOSE LUIS SANCHEZ, JR., ET AL. VS CESAR EDGARDO MARTINEZ

Case Summary

On 10/17/2019 JOSE LUIS SANCHEZ, JR filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against CESAR EDGARDO MARTINEZ. 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 Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******9604

  • Filing Date:

    10/17/2019

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

JAMES E. BLANCARTE

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs

SANCHEZ GONZALEZ JOSE LUIS

SANCHEZ JOSE LUIS JR.

Defendant

MARTINEZ CESAR EDGARDO

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

JIMENEZ DANIEL FERNANDO

Defendant Attorney

SPLOPUKO ALLEN M.

 

Court Documents

First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

10/17/2019: First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

Summons - Summons on Complaint

10/17/2019: Summons - Summons on Complaint

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

10/17/2019: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

Complaint - Complaint

10/17/2019: Complaint - Complaint

Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

10/17/2019: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

1/28/2020: Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

Minute Order - Minute Order (Non-Jury Trial)

4/15/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (Non-Jury Trial)

Answer - Answer

3/23/2021: Answer - Answer

Demand for Jury Trial - Demand for Jury Trial

3/23/2021: Demand for Jury Trial - Demand for Jury Trial

Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

5/6/2021: Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses - Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses

8/18/2021: Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses - Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses)

10/13/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses)

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

10/5/2021: Notice of Posting of Jury Fees - Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

Minute Order - Minute Order (Status Conference)

10/18/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (Status Conference)

2 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 02/09/2022
  • Hearing02/09/2022 at 08:30 AM in Department 25 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/18/2021
  • DocketJury Trial scheduled for 02/09/2022 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/18/2021
  • DocketMinute Order (Status Conference)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/18/2021
  • DocketStatus Conference scheduled for 10/18/2021 at 09:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 updated: Result Date to 10/18/2021; Result Type to Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/13/2021
  • DocketMinute Order (Hearing on Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/13/2021
  • DocketHearing on Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses scheduled for 10/13/2021 at 10:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 updated: Result Date to 10/13/2021; Result Type to Held - Motion Denied

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/05/2021
  • DocketNotice of Posting of Jury Fees; Filed by: Cesar Edgardo Martinez (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/19/2021
  • DocketHearing on Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses scheduled for 10/13/2021 at 10:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/18/2021
  • DocketMotion to Compel Further Discovery Responses; Filed by: Jose Luis Sanchez, Jr. (Plaintiff); As to: Cesar Edgardo Martinez (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/06/2021
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by: Cesar Edgardo Martinez (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
5 More Docket Entries
  • 03/23/2021
  • DocketDemand for Jury Trial; Filed by: Cesar Edgardo Martinez (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/28/2020
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by: Jose Luis Sanchez, Jr. (Plaintiff); As to: Cesar Edgardo Martinez (Defendant); Service Date: 01/26/2020; Service Cost: 50.00; Service Cost Waived: No

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/17/2019
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 04/15/2021 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/17/2019
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 10/20/2022 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/17/2019
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: Jose Luis Sanchez, Jr. (Plaintiff); Jose Luis Sanchez Gonzalez (Plaintiff); As to: Cesar Edgardo Martinez (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/17/2019
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Jose Luis Sanchez, Jr. (Plaintiff); Jose Luis Sanchez Gonzalez (Plaintiff); As to: Cesar Edgardo Martinez (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/17/2019
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Jose Luis Sanchez, Jr. (Plaintiff); Jose Luis Sanchez Gonzalez (Plaintiff); As to: Cesar Edgardo Martinez (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/17/2019
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/17/2019
  • DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/17/2019
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. James E. Blancarte in Department 94 Stanley Mosk Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

b'

Case Number: 19STLC09604 Hearing Date: October 13, 2021 Dept: 25

PROCEEDINGS: MOTION\r\nFOR ORDER COMPELLING FURTHER RESPONSES TO WRITTEN DISCOVERY AND FOR AN ORDER\r\nIMPOSING MONETARY SANCTIONS

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff\r\nJose Luis Sanchez, Jr.

\r\n\r\n

RESP. PARTY: None

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR\r\nPRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS; REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

\r\n\r\n

(CCP §§ 2030.300; 2031.310)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

TENTATIVE RULING:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Plaintiff Jose Luis Sanchez, Jr.’s\r\nMotion for Order Compelling Further Responses to Written Discovery and for an Order\r\nImposing Monetary Sanctions is DENIED.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

SERVICE: \r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

[ \r\n ] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule\r\n3.1300) NO

\r\n\r\n

[ \r\n ] Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) NO

\r\n\r\n

[ \r\n ] 16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c,\r\n1005(b)) NO

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

OPPOSITION: None filed as of October 8,\r\n2021 [ ] Late [X]\r\nNone

\r\n\r\n

REPLY: None filed as\r\nof October 8, 2021 [ ] Late [X] None

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

ANALYSIS:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

I. \r\nBackground\r\n& Discussion

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

On October 17, 2019, Plaintiffs Jose Luis Sanchez, Jr.\r\n(“Sanchez”) and Jose Luis Sanchez Gonzalez (“Gonzalez”) (collectively,\r\n“Plaintiffs”) filed an action against Defendant Cesar Edgardo Martinez\r\n(“Defendant”). Defendant filed an Answer on March 23, 2021.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

A non-jury trial was scheduled for April 15, 2021 at 8:30\r\na.m. (4/15/21 Minute Order.) Counsel for Defendant represented to the Court\r\nthat the parties were preparing for trial but had been discussing the\r\npossibility of settlement. (Id.) For this reason, the Court vacated the\r\nnon-jury trial hearing and set a status conference for October 18. (Id.)\r\nThe Court also ordered the parties to meet and confer within thirty days to\r\nattempt to reach a good faith settlement. (Id.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Plaintiff Sanchez filed the instant Motion for Order Compelling\r\nFurther Responses to Written Discovery and for Monetary Sanctions (the\r\n“Motion”) on August 18, 2021.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

As an initial matter, the Court notes that no proof of\r\nservice was filed demonstrating Defendant was given proper notice of this\r\nMotion and hearing. Failure to give notice of a motion is not only a\r\nviolation of statutory requirements but of due process. (Code Civ. Proc., §\r\n1005; Jones v. Otero (1984) 156\r\nCal.App.3d 754, 757.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

In addition, moving Plaintiff filed\r\na single motion for what should have been three separate motions. Combining discovery motions allows the\r\nmoving party to avoid paying the requisite filing fees. Filing fees are\r\njurisdictional and it is mandatory for court clerks to demand and receive them.\r\n(See Duran v. St. Luke’s Hospital\r\n(2003) 114 Cal.App.4th 457, 460.) Filing combined motions may also avoid the\r\ndaily limits set for the Department’s law and motion calendar.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Plaintiff argues the responses are\r\nincomplete, in part, because they consist solely of objections and are\r\nunverified. However, responses containing only objections need not be verified.\r\n(Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.250, subd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.250, subd.\r\n(a).) Thus, Plaintiff seeks further responses to the discovery.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Lastly, motions to compel further\r\ndiscovery responses must be accompanied by a separate statement or, if\r\npermitted by the Court an outline, with the text of each request, the response,\r\nand a statement of factual and legal reasons for compelling further responses. (Cal.\r\nRules of Court, Rule 3.1345, subd. (a)(3); Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.300, subd.\r\n(b)(2); Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.310, subd. (b)(3).) Plaintiff did not submit\r\nany of the required separate statements.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

For all of the reasons\r\ndiscussed above, this Motion is DENIED.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

II. \r\nConclusion\r\n& Order

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Plaintiff Jose Luis Sanchez, Jr.’s\r\nMotion for Order Compelling Further Responses to Written Discovery and for an\r\nOrder Imposing Monetary Sanctions is DENIED.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Moving party is ordered to give\r\nnotice.

'
related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases represented by Lawyer SPLOPUKO ALLEN M.