This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 11/23/2021 at 02:34:58 (UTC).

MARK ALVAREZ VS MISHELLE ALVAREZ

Case Summary

On 05/11/2020 MARK ALVAREZ filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against MISHELLE ALVAREZ. 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:

    *******4007

  • Filing Date:

    05/11/2020

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

SERENA R. MURILLO

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

ALVAREZ MARK

Defendant

ALVAREZ MISHELLE

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorneys

YEAGER KENNETH CHARLES ESQ.

YEAGER KENNETH

Defendant Attorney

MEYERS ANDREW SPENCER ESQ.

 

Court Documents

Answer - Answer

11/9/2020: Answer - Answer

Ex Parte Application (name extension) - Ex Parte Application FOR TRIAL CONTINUNCE

9/8/2021: Ex Parte Application (name extension) - Ex Parte Application FOR TRIAL CONTINUNCE

Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

9/9/2021: Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Ex Parte Application FOR TRIAL CONTINUNCE)

9/9/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Ex Parte Application FOR TRIAL CONTINUNCE)

Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Hearing on Ex Parte Application FOR TRIAL CONTINUNCE) of 09/09/2021

9/9/2021: Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Hearing on Ex Parte Application FOR TRIAL CONTINUNCE) of 09/09/2021

Order (name extension) - Court's Ruling Re: Defendant's Ex Parte Application to Continue Trial

9/9/2021: Order (name extension) - Court's Ruling Re: Defendant's Ex Parte Application to Continue Trial

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

9/13/2021: 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

9/13/2021: 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

9/13/2021: Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion - Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion

Opposition (name extension) - Opposition to Defendants Motion to Compel Demand for Production of Documents

10/5/2021: Opposition (name extension) - Opposition to Defendants Motion to Compel Demand for Production of Documents

Opposition (name extension) - Opposition to Defendants Motion to Compel Form Interrogatories

10/5/2021: Opposition (name extension) - Opposition to Defendants Motion to Compel Form Interrogatories

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion for Order That the Truth of the Matters Spe...)

10/6/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion for Order That the Truth of the Matters Spe...)

Minute Order - Minute Order (- Hearing on Motion to Compel Plaintiff's Responses to Defend...)

10/12/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (- Hearing on Motion to Compel Plaintiff's Responses to Defend...)

Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (- Hearing on Motion to Compel Plaintiff's Responses to Defend...) of 10/12/2021

10/12/2021: Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (- Hearing on Motion to Compel Plaintiff's Responses to Defend...) of 10/12/2021

Motion for Reconsideration - Motion for Reconsideration

10/13/2021: Motion for Reconsideration - Motion for Reconsideration

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

5/11/2020: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

5/11/2020: First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

Summons - Summons on Complaint

5/11/2020: Summons - Summons on Complaint

8 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 03/08/2022
  • Hearing03/08/2022 at 08:30 AM in Department 26 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Non-Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/19/2022
  • Hearing01/19/2022 at 10:00 AM in Department 26 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Hearing on Motion for Reconsideration

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/16/2021
  • DocketUpdated -- Motion for Reconsideration of Granting Defendant's Motion to Deem Request for Admissions, Set One, Admitted Alternatively, Motion for Relief From Order Under CCP 2033.300: Name Extension: of Granting Defendant's Motion to Deem Request for Admissions, Set One, Admitted Alternatively, Motion for Relief From Order Under CCP 2033.300; As To Parties: removed

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/14/2021
  • DocketHearing on Motion for Reconsideration scheduled for 01/19/2022 at 10:00 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/13/2021
  • DocketMotion for Reconsideration; Filed by: Mark Alvarez (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/12/2021
  • DocketUpdated -- Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion - Compelling Plaintiff's Responses to Defendant's Form Interrogatories, Set One; Request for Reasonable Attorney's Fees and Costs: Filed By: Mishelle Alvarez (Defendant); Result: Denied; Result Date: 10/12/2021

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/12/2021
  • DocketUpdated -- Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion - Compelling Plaintiff's Responses to Defendant's Request for Production of Documents, Set One; Request for Reasonable Attorney's Fees and Costs: Filed By: Mishelle Alvarez (Defendant); Result: Granted; Result Date: 10/12/2021

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/12/2021
  • DocketMinute Order (- Hearing on Motion to Compel Plaintiff's Responses to Defend...)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/12/2021
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for (- Hearing on Motion to Compel Plaintiff's Responses to Defend...) of 10/12/2021; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/12/2021
  • DocketHearing on Motion to Compel Plaintiff's Responses to Defendant's Form Interrogatories, Set One; Request for Reasonable Attorney's Fees and Costs scheduled for 10/12/2021 at 10:00 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26 updated: Result Date to 10/12/2021; Result Type to Held - Motion Denied

    Read MoreRead Less
31 More Docket Entries
  • 09/08/2021
  • DocketHearing on Ex Parte Application FOR TRIAL CONTINUNCE scheduled for 09/09/2021 at 01:30 PM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/09/2020
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by: Mishelle Alvarez (Defendant); As to: Mark Alvarez (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/11/2020
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: Mark Alvarez (Plaintiff); As to: Mishelle Alvarez (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/11/2020
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Mark Alvarez (Plaintiff); As to: Mishelle Alvarez (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/11/2020
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Mark Alvarez (Plaintiff); As to: Mishelle Alvarez (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/11/2020
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/11/2020
  • DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/11/2020
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 11/08/2021 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/11/2020
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 05/15/2023 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/11/2020
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. Serena R. Murillo in Department 26 Spring Street Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

b'

Case Number: 20STLC04007 Hearing Date: October 12, 2021 Dept: 26

PROCEEDINGS: (1) MOTION TO\r\nCOMPEL RESPONSES TO FORM INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS; AND

\r\n\r\n

(2) MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO DEMAND FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS\r\nAND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

MOVING\r\nPARTY: Defendant Mishelle Alvarez

\r\n\r\n

RESP.\r\nPARTY: None

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

MOTION TO\r\nCOMPEL RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES AND DEMAND FOR PRODUCTION; REQUEST FOR\r\nSANCTIONS

\r\n\r\n

(CCP §§ 2030.290, 2031.300)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

TENTATIVE RULING:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Defendant Mishelle Alvarez’s (1) Motion To Compel Responses\r\nTo Form Interrogatories and Request for Sanctions is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; and\r\n(2) Motion To Compel Responses To Demand For Production Of Documents and\r\nRequest for Sanctions is GRANTED. PLAINTIFF MARK ALVAREZ IS TO SERVE VERIFIED\r\nRESPONSES WITHOUT OBJECTION TO THE REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION WITHIN 20 DAYS’\r\nSERVICE OF THIS ORDER. PLAINTIFF IS ORDERED TO PAY SANCTIONS TO $220.00 TO\r\nDEFENSE COUNSEL WITHIN 20 DAYS’ SERVICE OF THIS ORDER.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

SERVICE OF MOTION:

\r\n\r\n

[X] Proof of Service Timely\r\nFiled (CRC 3.1300) OK

\r\n\r\n

[X] Correct Address (CCP\r\n1013, 1013a) OK

\r\n\r\n

[X] 16/21 Day Lapse (CCP 12c\r\nand 1005 (b)) OK

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

SUMMARY OF COMPLAINT: Action for motor vehicle\r\nnegligence.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

REQUEST FOR RELIEF: Compel Plaintiff to provide\r\nverified responses to form interrogatories and requests for production of\r\ndocuments, without objections. Award Defendant sanctions of $1,500.00 per\r\nmotion.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

OPPOSITION: None filed as of October 6, 2021.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

REPLY: None filed as of October 6, 2021.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

ANALYSIS:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Defendant Mishelle Alvarez (“Defendant”) propounded Form\r\nInterrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents on Plaintiff Mark\r\nAlvarez (“Plaintiff”) on November 9, 2020. (Motions,\r\nTesfai Decl., Exh. A.) Following Plaintiff’s failure to serve timely\r\nresponses, Defendant sent meet and confer letters and extended the time to\r\nrespond. (Id. at Exhs. B-D.) After Plaintiff still failed to serve\r\nverified responses, Defendant filed the instant (1) Motion To Compel Responses\r\nTo Form Interrogatories and Request for Sanctions; and (2) Motion To Compel\r\nResponses To Demand For Production Of Documents and Request for Sanctions on September\r\n13, 2021. No opposition has been filed to date.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Discussion

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Based on Plaintiff’s failure to serve initial responses, the\r\nMotion to Compel Responses to Request for Production of Documents is granted.\r\nThere is no requirement for a prior meet and confer effort before a motion to\r\ncompel initial responses. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300.) Further, the motion\r\ncan be brought any time after the responding party fails to provide the\r\nresponses. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, 2031.300.) Plaintiff’s failure to\r\ntimely respond also constitutes a misuse of the discovery process. (Code Civ.\r\nProc., § 2023.010, subd. (d).) Sanctions are appropriate under Code of Civil\r\nProcedure sections 2023.010 and 2023.030 and have been properly noticed.\r\nHowever, the amount sought is excessive under a lodestar calculation.\r\nTherefore, the request for sanctions in connection with this motion IS granted\r\nagainst Plaintiff in the amount of $220.00, based on one hour of attorney time\r\nbilled at $160.00 per hour and the $60.00 filing fee. (Motion, Tesfai Decl.,\r\n¶7.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

However, the Form Interrogatories Defendant served on\r\nPlaintiff on November 9, 2020 do not comply with Code of Civil Procedure\r\nsection 94, subdivision (a)(1), which precludes interrogatories with subparts\r\nin the Limited Jurisdiction Court. (Id. at Exh. A.) Additionally, only\r\n35 total written discovery requests can be propounded in the Limited\r\nJurisdiction Court. (Code Civ. Proc., § 94, subd. (a).) Form interrogatories\r\napproved by the Judicial Council for the Limited Jurisdiction Court are set\r\nforth at Judicial Council Form DISC-004. Based on the number of Requests for\r\nAdmission and Requests for Production already propounded on Plaintiff,\r\nDefendant can only propound 14 additional written discovery requests. The\r\nnumber of form interrogatories exceeds the 35-request limit. Therefore, the\r\nCourt will not compel responses to the form interrogatories, which were\r\npropounded in violation of the Code of Civil Procedure.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Conclusion

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Defendant Mishelle Alvarez’s (1) Motion To Compel Responses\r\nTo Form Interrogatories and Request for Sanctions is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE; and\r\n(2) Motion To Compel Responses To Demand For Production Of Documents and\r\nRequest for Sanctions is GRANTED. PLAINTIFF MARK ALVAREZ IS TO SERVE VERIFIED\r\nRESPONSES WITHOUT OBJECTION TO THE REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION WITHIN 20 DAYS’\r\nSERVICE OF THIS ORDER. PLAINTIFF IS ORDERED TO PAY SANCTIONS TO $220.00 TO\r\nDEFENSE COUNSEL WITHIN 20 DAYS’ SERVICE OF THIS ORDER.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Moving party to give notice.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

'b'

Case Number: 20STLC04007 Hearing Date: October 6, 2021 Dept: 26

PROCEEDINGS: MOTION TO DEEM\r\nMATTERS ADMITTED AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

\r\n\r\n

MOVING\r\nPARTY: Defendant Mishelle Alvarez

\r\n\r\n

RESPONDING\r\nPARTY: None

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

MOTION\r\nTO DEEM REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION ADMITTED AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

\r\n\r\n

(CCP\r\n§§ 2033.280, 2023.010)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

TENTATIVE RULING:\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Defendant Mishelle Alvarez’s Motion to Deem Requests for\r\nAdmission, Set One, Admitted and Request for Sanctions is GRANTED. PLAINTIFF\r\nMARK ALVAREZ IS ORDERED TO PAY SANCTIONS OF $220.00 TO DEFENSE COUNSEL WITHIN\r\n20 DAYS’ SERVICE OF THIS ORDER.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

SERVICE OF MOTION:

\r\n\r\n

[X]\r\nProof of Service Timely Filed (CRC 3.1300) OK

\r\n\r\n

[X]\r\nCorrect Address (CCP 1013, 1013a) OK

\r\n\r\n

[X]\r\n16/21 Day Lapse (CCP 12c and 1005 (b)) OK

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

SUMMARY OF COMPLAINT:\r\nAction for automobile subrogation.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

RELIEF REQUESTED: Deem Requests for Admission, Set One, served\r\non Plaintiff on November 9, 2020, admitted. Award Plaintiff $1,500.00 in\r\nsanctions.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

OPPOSITION: None filed as of October 1, 2021.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

REPLY: None\r\nfiled as of October 1, 2021.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

ANALYSIS:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

On November 9, 2020, Defendant Mishelle Alvarez\r\n(“Defendant”) served Requests for Admissions, Set One, on Plaintiff Mark\r\nAlvarez (“Plaintiff”). (Motion, Tesfai Decl.,\r\nExh. A.) Following Plaintiff’s failure to serve timely responses to the\r\nRequests for Admission, Defendant sent meet and confer letters and extended the\r\ntime to respond. (Id. at Exhs. B-D.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

After Plaintiff failed to serve verified responses,\r\nDefendant filed the instant Motion to Deem Requests for Admission, Set One,\r\nAdmitted and Request for Sanctions (“the Motion”) on September 13, 2021. (Id.\r\nat ¶5.) No opposition has been filed to date.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

There is no requirement for a prior meet and confer effort\r\nbefore a motion to deem requests for admission can be filed. (Code Civ. Proc.,\r\n§ 2033.280.) Further, the motion can be brought any time after the responding\r\nparty fails to provide the responses. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280.) Due to\r\nPlaintiff’s failure to timely serve responses and resultant waiver of\r\nobjections, Defendant is entitled to an order deeming the Requests for\r\nAdmission, Set One admitted. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280.) In fact, the Court\r\nis mandated to deem the admitted and award sanctions under the moving statute.\r\n(Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (c).)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Sanctions have been properly noticed, but the amount sought\r\nis excessive under a lodestar calculation. Sanctions are granted against\r\nPlaintiff in the amount of $220.00, based on one hour of attorney time billed\r\nat $160.00 per hour and the $60.00 filing fee. (Motion, Tesfai Decl., ¶7.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Conclusion

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Defendant Mishelle Alvarez’s Motion to Deem Requests for\r\nAdmission Admitted and Request for Sanctions is GRANTED. PLAINTIFF MARK ALVAREZ\r\nIS ORDERED TO PAY SANCTIONS OF $220.00 TO DEFENSE COUNSEL WITHIN 20 DAYS’\r\nSERVICE OF THIS ORDER.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Moving party to give notice.

'
related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases represented by Lawyer YEAGER KENNETH