This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 11/10/2021 at 01:24:07 (UTC).

OMAR CEESAY VS NOEL IVAND VALCARCEL

Case Summary

On 12/30/2019 OMAR CEESAY filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against NOEL IVAND VALCARCEL. 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:

    *******1809

  • Filing Date:

    12/30/2019

  • 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

CEESAY OMAR

Defendant

VALCARCEL NOEL IVAND

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorneys

MARCHIONDO PHILIP LORIN ESQ.

MARCHIONDO PHILLIP L.

Defendant Attorneys

BARTHOLOMEW DIANE LOUISE ESQ.

BARTHOLOMEW DEE

 

Court Documents

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

12/30/2019: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

12/30/2019: First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

Summons - Summons on Complaint

12/30/2019: Summons - Summons on Complaint

Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

12/30/2019: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

Complaint - Complaint

12/30/2019: Complaint - Complaint

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

5/11/2020: Notice of Posting of Jury Fees - Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

Answer - Answer

5/11/2020: Answer - Answer

Demand for Jury Trial - Demand for Jury Trial

5/11/2020: Demand for Jury Trial - Demand for Jury Trial

Stipulation and Order (name extension) - Stipulation and Order Proposed Order and Stipulation to Continue Trial

6/10/2021: Stipulation and Order (name extension) - Stipulation and Order Proposed Order and Stipulation to Continue Trial

Motion for Leave (name extension) - Motion for Leave Notice of Motion and Motion for Order Granting Leave to File a First Amended Complaint

6/8/2021: Motion for Leave (name extension) - Motion for Leave Notice of Motion and Motion for Order Granting Leave to File a First Amended Complaint

Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information - Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information

11/3/2020: Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information - Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information

Reply (name extension) - Reply TO DEFENDANTS OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO FILE A FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

9/27/2021: Reply (name extension) - Reply TO DEFENDANTS OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO FILE A FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

Opposition (name extension) - Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Amend Complaint

9/16/2021: Opposition (name extension) - Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Amend Complaint

Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Hearing on Motion for Leave to File Plaintiff's First Amended...) of 10/04/2021

10/4/2021: Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Hearing on Motion for Leave to File Plaintiff's First Amended...) of 10/04/2021

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion for Leave to File Plaintiff's First Amended...)

10/4/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion for Leave to File Plaintiff's First Amended...)

Motion for Leave (name extension) - Motion for Leave Motion for Order Granting Leave to File a First Amended Complaint

10/12/2021: Motion for Leave (name extension) - Motion for Leave Motion for Order Granting Leave to File a First Amended Complaint

4 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 01/03/2023
  • Hearing01/03/2023 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
  • 05/09/2022
  • Hearing05/09/2022 at 08:30 AM in Department 26 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Non-Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/18/2022
  • Hearing01/18/2022 at 10:00 AM in Department 26 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Hearing on Motion for Leave (name extension)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/13/2021
  • DocketHearing on Motion for Leave Motion for Leave to File a First Amended Complaint scheduled for 01/18/2022 at 10:00 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/12/2021
  • DocketMotion for Leave Motion for Order Granting Leave to File a First Amended Complaint; Filed by: Omar Ceesay (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/04/2021
  • DocketUpdated -- Motion for Order Granting Leave to File a First Amended Complaint: Filed By: Omar Ceesay (Plaintiff); Result: Denied; Result Date: 10/04/2021

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/04/2021
  • DocketMinute Order (Hearing on Motion for Leave to File Plaintiff's First Amended...)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/04/2021
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for (Hearing on Motion for Leave to File Plaintiff's First Amended...) of 10/04/2021; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/04/2021
  • DocketHearing on Motion for Leave to File Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint scheduled for 10/04/2021 at 10:00 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26 updated: Result Date to 10/04/2021; Result Type to Held - Motion Denied

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/30/2021
  • DocketUpdated -- Motion for Order Granting Leave to File a First Amended Complaint: Name Extension: blank; Exact Name: Motion for Order Granting Leave to File a First Amended Complaint; As To Parties: Noel Ivand Valcarcel (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
13 More Docket Entries
  • 05/11/2020
  • DocketDemand for Jury Trial; Filed by: Noel Ivand Valcarcel (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/11/2020
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by: Noel Ivand Valcarcel (Defendant); As to: Omar Ceesay (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/31/2019
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 06/28/2021 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/31/2019
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 01/03/2023 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/31/2019
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. Serena R. Murillo in Department 94 Stanley Mosk Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/30/2019
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: Omar Ceesay (Plaintiff); As to: Phillip L. Marchiondo (Attorney); Noel Ivand Valcarcel (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/30/2019
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Omar Ceesay (Plaintiff); As to: Phillip L. Marchiondo (Attorney)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/30/2019
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Omar Ceesay (Plaintiff); As to: Phillip L. Marchiondo (Attorney)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/30/2019
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/30/2019
  • DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

b'

Case Number: 19STLC11809 Hearing Date: October 4, 2021 Dept: 26

Ceesay v. Valcarcel, et al. 19STLC11809

LEAVE\r\nTO AMEND PLEADING

\r\n\r\n

(CCP §§ 473(a), 576; CRC Rule 3.1324)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

TENTATIVE RULING:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Plaintiff Omar Ceesay’s Motion\r\nfor Leave to File a First Amended Complaint is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

\r\n\r\n

ANALYSIS:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Plaintiff Omar\r\nCeesay (“Plaintiff”) filed the instant action for motor vehicle negligence\r\nagainst Defendant Noel Ivand Valcarcel (“Defendant”) on December 30,\r\n2019. The Complaint seeks only personal injury damages on Plaintiff’s behalf.\r\n(Compl., ¶11.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

The trial date in this matter was continued from June 28,\r\n2021 to May 9, 2021 pursuant to the parties’ stipulation. (Stip and Order,\r\nfiled 06/10/21.) On June 8, 2021, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion for Leave\r\nto Amend Complaint (“the Motion”). Defendant filed an opposition on September\r\n16, 2021 and Plaintiff replied on September 27, 2021.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Discussion

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Leave to amend is permitted under Code of\r\nCivil Procedure section 473, subdivision (a) and section 576. Also, a motion\r\nfor leave to amend a pleading must also comply with the procedural requirements\r\nof California Rules of\r\nCourt, Rule 3.1324, which requires a supporting declaration to set forth\r\nexplicitly what allegations are to be added and where, and explicitly stating\r\nwhat new evidence was discovered warranting the amendment and why the amendment\r\nwas not made earlier. The motion must also include (1) a copy of the proposed\r\nand numbered amendment, (2) specifications by reference to pages and lines the\r\nallegations that would be deleted and added, and (3) a declaration specifying\r\nthe effect, necessity and propriety of the amendments, date of discovery and\r\nreasons for delay. (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1324, subds. (a), (b).)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Plaintiff’s motion sufficiently complies with Rule\r\n3.1324 with respect to the contents of the motion and inclusion of a supporting\r\ndeclaration. (Motion, Marchiondi Decl.) Plaintiff’s counsel explains that he\r\nonly recently learned Plaintiff paid for property damage to the vehicle and for\r\na rental vehicle out-of-pocket. (Motion, Marchiondo Decl., ¶4.) Those damages\r\nwere not included in the original Complaint because Plaintiff’s counsel\r\nbelieved they had been paid for by insurance, but discovered that Plaintiff did\r\nnot have insurance for those damages. (Ibid.) Plaintiff moves for leave\r\nto add claims for property damages and loss of property use damages. (Motion,\r\nMarchiondo Decl., ¶4.) The Motion is further supported by a copy of the\r\nproposed First Amended Complaint. (Id. at Exh. 1.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Defendant opposes the Motion on\r\nthe grounds that Plaintiff has unjustifiably delayed in seeking the amendment\r\nand Defendant would be severely prejudiced. The policy favoring amendment and\r\nresolving all matters in the same dispute is “so strong that it is a rare case\r\nin which denial of leave to amend can be justified. . . .” (Magpali v.\r\nFarmers Group (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 471, 487.) However, “[a] different\r\nresult is indicated ‘where inexcusable delay and probable prejudice to the\r\nopposing party’ is shown. [Citation].” (Ibid.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Defendant contends in opposition,\r\nbut without supporting evidence, that it obtained an expert to download EDR\r\ndata from the vehicle during discovery and could have had the damage to the\r\nvehicle evaluated at that time. (Opp., p. 4:7-12.) Plaintiff’s rebuttal that\r\nall the documentation of the property damage has been provided does not mean\r\nDefendant is not entitled to his own investigation. Defendant claims it will\r\nhave to bring the expert back and conduct an additional deposition to\r\ninvestigate the property damage claim. (Ibid.) While Defendant will have\r\ntime to investigate the new damages claims as needed because the trial date has\r\nbeen moved to May 2022, there will be an increased cost to the additional\r\ndiscovery. The Court additionally finds that Plaintiff has inexcusably delayed\r\nin seeking to amend the Complaint. No explanation is provided for why the lack\r\nof insurance coverage for property damage and loss of use of property was not\r\ndiscovered by Plaintiff’s counsel until the eve of the first trial date and\r\nafter completion of discovery by the parties.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Conclusion

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Based on Plaintiff’s inexcusable\r\ndelay and the prejudice to Defendant, Plaintiff Omar Ceesay’s Motion for Leave\r\nto File a First Amended Complaint is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

\r\n\r\n

'
related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases represented by Lawyer MARCHIONDO PHILLIP L.