This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 10/18/2021 at 00:49:22 (UTC).

SANDRA CERVANTES, ET AL. VS JORGE RAMIREZ, ET AL.

Case Summary

On 02/19/2019 SANDRA CERVANTES filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against JORGE RAMIREZ. 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:

    *******1628

  • Filing Date:

    02/19/2019

  • 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 and Cross Defendants

AHMED OMAR

CERVANTES SANDRA

Cross Plaintiffs and Defendants

RAMIREZ JORGE

BAKER COMMODITIES INC.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Cross Defendant Attorney

PARK PAUL

Cross Plaintiff and Defendant Attorney

MICHAEL CHRISTINA

 

Court Documents

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

9/23/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel; Hearing on Motio...)

Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint) - Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

9/24/2021: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint) - Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

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

7/22/2021: Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information - Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information

Minute Order - Minute Order (Order to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service and ...)

6/30/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (Order to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service and ...)

Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

6/29/2021: Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

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

6/29/2021: Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Court Order) of 05/07/2021

5/7/2021: Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Court Order) of 05/07/2021

Minute Order - Minute Order (Court Order)

5/7/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (Court Order)

Opposition (name extension) - Opposition to Motion for an Order Compelling Plaintiff Omar Ahmed's Response to Form Interrogatories and Request for Monetary Sanctions; Memorandum of Points and Authorit

5/11/2021: Opposition (name extension) - Opposition to Motion for an Order Compelling Plaintiff Omar Ahmed's Response to Form Interrogatories and Request for Monetary Sanctions; Memorandum of Points and Authorit

Opposition (name extension) - Opposition to Motion for an Order Compelling Plaintiff Sandra Cervantes' Response to Demand for Production of Documents and Request for Monetary Sanctions; Memorandum of

5/11/2021: Opposition (name extension) - Opposition to Motion for an Order Compelling Plaintiff Sandra Cervantes' Response to Demand for Production of Documents and Request for Monetary Sanctions; Memorandum of

Opposition (name extension) - Opposition to Motion for an Order Compelling Plaintiff Sandra Cervantes' Response to Form Interrogatories and Request for Monetary Sanctions; Memorandum of Points and Aut

5/11/2021: Opposition (name extension) - Opposition to Motion for an Order Compelling Plaintiff Sandra Cervantes' Response to Form Interrogatories and Request for Monetary Sanctions; Memorandum of Points and Aut

Opposition (name extension) - Opposition to Motion for an Order Compelling Plaintiff Omar Ahmed's Response to Demand for Production of Documents and Request for Monetary Sanctions; Memorandum of Point

5/11/2021: Opposition (name extension) - Opposition to Motion for an Order Compelling Plaintiff Omar Ahmed's Response to Demand for Production of Documents and Request for Monetary Sanctions; Memorandum of Point

Notice (name extension) - Notice of Continuance of Motion to Compel

5/14/2021: Notice (name extension) - Notice of Continuance of Motion to Compel

Reply (name extension) - Reply to Plaintiff Sandra Cervantes' Opposition to Motion for an Order Compelling Response to Interrogatories and Request for Monetary Sanctions

5/17/2021: Reply (name extension) - Reply to Plaintiff Sandra Cervantes' Opposition to Motion for an Order Compelling Response to Interrogatories and Request for Monetary Sanctions

Reply (name extension) - Reply to Plaintiff Omar Ahmed's Opposition to Motion for an Order Compelling Response to Demand for Production and Request for Monetary Sanctions

5/17/2021: Reply (name extension) - Reply to Plaintiff Omar Ahmed's Opposition to Motion for an Order Compelling Response to Demand for Production and Request for Monetary Sanctions

Reply (name extension) - Reply to Plaintiff Omar Ahmed's Opposition to Motion for an Order Compelling Response to Interrogatories and Request for Monetary Sanctions

5/17/2021: Reply (name extension) - Reply to Plaintiff Omar Ahmed's Opposition to Motion for an Order Compelling Response to Interrogatories and Request for Monetary Sanctions

Reply (name extension) - Reply to Plaintiff Sandra Cervantes' Opposition to Motion for an Order Compelling Response to Demand for Production and Request for Monetary Sanctions

5/17/2021: Reply (name extension) - Reply to Plaintiff Sandra Cervantes' Opposition to Motion for an Order Compelling Response to Demand for Production and Request for Monetary Sanctions

Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint) - Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

5/25/2021: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint) - Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

29 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 02/22/2022
  • Hearing02/22/2022 at 08:30 AM in Department 25 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Non-Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/27/2021
  • Hearing10/27/2021 at 10:30 AM in Department 25 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/27/2021
  • Hearing10/27/2021 at 10:30 AM in Department 25 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/24/2021
  • DocketProof of Service (not Summons and Complaint); Filed by: Sandra Cervantes (Plaintiff); Omar Ahmed (Plaintiff); As to: Sandra Cervantes (Plaintiff); Omar Ahmed (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/23/2021
  • DocketHearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel scheduled for 10/27/2021 at 10:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/23/2021
  • DocketHearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel scheduled for 10/27/2021 at 10:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/23/2021
  • DocketMinute Order (Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel; Hearing on Motio...)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/23/2021
  • DocketOn the Court's own motion, Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel scheduled for 09/23/2021 at 10:00 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 Held - Continued was rescheduled to 10/27/2021 10:30 AM

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/23/2021
  • DocketOn the Court's own motion, Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel scheduled for 09/23/2021 at 10:00 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 Held - Continued was rescheduled to 10/27/2021 10:30 AM

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/22/2021
  • DocketNotice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information; Filed by: Christina Michael (Attorney)

    Read MoreRead Less
53 More Docket Entries
  • 08/13/2020
  • DocketOn the Court's own motion, Non-Jury Trial scheduled for 08/18/2020 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 Not Held - Advanced and Vacated on 08/13/2020

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/13/2020
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service and Entry of Default and Default Judgment/Dismissal scheduled for 06/30/2021 at 09:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/21/2019
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Sandra Cervantes (Plaintiff); As to: Jorge Ramirez (Defendant); Baker Commodities, Inc. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/19/2019
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: Sandra Cervantes (Plaintiff); Omar Ahmed (Plaintiff); As to: Jorge Ramirez (Defendant); Baker Commodities, Inc. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/19/2019
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Sandra Cervantes (Plaintiff); Omar Ahmed (Plaintiff); As to: Jorge Ramirez (Defendant); Baker Commodities, Inc. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/19/2019
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/19/2019
  • DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/19/2019
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 08/18/2020 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/19/2019
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 02/22/2022 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/19/2019
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. James E. Blancarte in Department 94 Stanley Mosk Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

b'

Case Number: 19STLC01628 Hearing Date: September 23, 2021 Dept: 25

PROCEEDINGS: MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS\r\nCOUNSEL (x2)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiffs’ Counsel Paul\r\nPark

\r\n\r\n

RESP. PARTY: None

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL

\r\n\r\n

(CCP § 284(2); CRC rule 3.162)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

TENTATIVE RULING:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Plaintiffs’ Counsel Paul Park’s Motions to be\r\nRelieved as Counsel are CONTINUED TO OCTOBER 27, 2021 at 10:30 a.m in\r\nDepartment 25 at the SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE. At least five (5) court days\r\nbefore the next scheduled hearing, Counsel must file a proof of service as\r\nrequested herein. Failure to do so will result in the Motions being placed off\r\ncalendar or denied.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

SERVICE:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

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

\r\n\r\n

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

\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\r\nfiled as of September 21, 2021 [ ] Late [X] None

\r\n\r\n

REPLY: None\r\nfiled as of September 21, 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\r\n

\r\n\r\n

On February 19, 2019, Plaintiffs Sandra Cervantes\r\n(“Cervantes”) and Omar Ahmed (“Ahmed”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed an\r\naction alleging motor vehicle negligence and general negligence against\r\nDefendants Jorge Ramirez (“Ramirez”) and Baker Commodities, Inc. (“Baker”)\r\n(collectively, “Defendants”). Defendants filed an Answer and a Cross-Complaint\r\nagainst Plaintiff Ahmed on October 7, 2020. Plaintiff Ahmed filed an Answer to\r\nthe Cross-Complaint on November 10, 2020.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Plaintiffs’ counsel Paul Park (“Counsel”) filed the\r\ninstant Motions to be Relieved as Counsel (the “Motions”), one for each Plaintiff,\r\non May 25, 2021. No oppositions were filed.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

II. \r\nLegal Standard

\r\n\r\n

The court may\r\norder that an attorney be changed or substituted at any time before or after\r\njudgment or final determination upon request by either client or attorney and\r\nafter notice from one to the other. (Code Civ. Proc. § 284, subd. (2).) “The\r\ndetermination whether to grant or deny a motion to withdraw as counsel lies\r\nwithin the sound discretion of the trial court.” (Manfredi & Levine v. Superior Court (1998) 66 Cal.App.4th 1128,\r\n1133.) An application to be relieved as counsel must be made on Judicial\r\nCounsel Forms MC-051 (Notice of Motion and Motion), MC-052 (Declaration), and\r\nMC-053 (Proposed Order). (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subds. (a), (c),\r\n(e).)

\r\n\r\n

In\r\naddition, California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362 subsection (d) requires that\r\nthe notice of motion and motion, declaration, and proposed order be served on\r\nthe client and all other parties who have appeared in the case by personal\r\nservice, electronic service, or mail. If the notice is served by mail, it must\r\nbe accompanied by a declaration stating facts showing that either:

\r\n\r\n

(A)\r\nThe service address is the current residence or business address of the client;\r\nor

\r\n\r\n

(B) The\r\nservice address is the last known residence or business address of the client\r\nand the attorney has been unable to locate a more current address after making\r\nreasonable efforts to do so within 30 days before the filing of the motion to\r\nbe relieved.

\r\n\r\n

(Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362, subd. (1)(A) &\r\n(2).)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

III. \r\nDiscussion

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Counsel seeks to be relieved from representing\r\nPlaintiffs due to a lack of communication. (MC-052, ¶¶ 2.) Specifically,\r\nCounsel explains that, despite numerous attempts to communicate with Plaintiffs\r\nvia email, telephone, and regular mail, Plaintiffs have remained unresponsive.\r\n(Id.) On February 2, 2021, Counsel sent Plaintiffs a letter via regular\r\nmail, certified mail, and email advising them that if no response was received,\r\nCounsel would file a motion to be relieved. (Id., Exhs. C, D.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Counsel states these Motions were served\r\nat Plaintiffs’ last known address, which Counsel was unable to confirm despite\r\ncalling Plaintiffs at their last known phone numbers. (Id. at ¶¶ 3.)\r\nAlthough Counsel filed a proof of service demonstrating the Motion was served\r\non Defendants’ counsel, there is no proof of service demonstrating the Motions\r\nwere served on Plaintiffs themselves as required by California Rules of Court,\r\nrule 3.1362, subdivision (d).

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Although the Court is inclined to\r\ngrant the Motions, it cannot do so until Plaintiffs have been properly served.\r\nThus, the hearing is CONTINUED.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

IV. \r\nConclusion & Order

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

For the\r\nforegoing reasons, Plaintiffs’ Counsel\r\nPaul Park’s Motions to be Relieved as Counsel are CONTINUED TO OCTOBER 27, 2021\r\nat 10:30 a.m in Department 25 at the SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE. At least five\r\n(5) court days before the next scheduled hearing, Counsel must file a proof of\r\nservice as requested herein. Failure to do so will result in the Motions being\r\nplaced off calendar or denied.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Plaintiffs’\r\nCounsel is ordered to give notice.

'

Case Number: 19STLC01628    Hearing Date: May 25, 2021    Dept: 25

HEARING DATE: Tue., May 25, 2021 JUDGE /DEPT: Chilton/25

CASE NAME: Cervantes, et al. v. Ramirez, et al. COMPL. FILED: 02-19-19

CASE NUMBER: 19STLC01628 DISC. C/O: NONE

NOTICE: OK DISC. MOT. C/O: NONE

TRIAL DATE: NOT SET

PROCEEDINGS: (1&2) MOTION FOR AN ORDER COMPELLING PLAINTIFF SANDRA CERVANTES’ RESPONSE TO DEMAND FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND FORM INTERROGATORIES, AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

(3&4) MOTION FOR AN ORDER COMPELLING PLAINTIFF OMAR AHMED RESPONSE TO FORM INTERROGATORIES AND DEMAND FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS.

MOVING PARTY: Defendants Jorge Ramirez and Baker Commodities, Inc.

RESP. PARTY: Plaintiffs Sandra Cervantes and Omar Ahmed

MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS; REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

(CCP §§ 2030.290; 2031.300)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Defendants Jorge Ramirez and Baker Commodities, Inc.’s discovery Motions are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

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: Filed on May 11, 2021 [ ] Late [ ] None

REPLY: Filed on May 17, 2021 [ ] Late [ ] None

ANALYSIS:

I. Background

On February 19, 2019, Plaintiffs Sandra Cervantes (“Cervantes”) and Omar Ahmed (“Ahmed”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed an action alleging motor vehicle negligence and general negligence against Defendants Jorge Ramirez (“Ramirez”) and Baker Commodities, Inc. (“Baker”) (collectively, “Defendants”). Defendants filed an Answer and a Cross-Complaint against Plaintiff Ahmed on October 7, 2020. Plaintiff Ahmed filed an Answer to the Cross-Complaint on November 10, 2020.

Defendants filed the instant (1) Motion for an Order Compelling Plaintiff Sandra Cervantes’ Response to Demand for Production of Documents and for Monetary Sanctions, (2) Motion for an Order Compelling Plaintiff Sandra Cervantes’ Response to Form Interrogatories and Request for Monetary Sanctions, (3) Motion for an Order Compelling Plaintiff Omar Ahmed’s Response to Form Interrogatories and Request for Sanctions, and (4) Motion for an Order Compelling Plaintiff Omar Ahmed’s Response to Demand for Production of Documents and Request for Sanctions (collectively, the “Motions”).

Plaintiffs filed an opposition on May 11 and Defendants filed a reply brief on May 17.

II. Legal Standard & Discussion

A. Request for Production & Interrogatories

A party must respond to interrogatories and requests for production of documents within 30 days after service. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.260, subd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.260, subd. (a).) If a party to whom interrogatories or requests for production of documents are directed does not provide timely responses, the requesting party may move for an order compelling responses to the discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (b); Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd. (c).) The party also waives the right to make any objections, including one based on privilege or work-product protection. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd. (a).) There is no time limit for a motion to compel responses to interrogatories or production of documents other than the cut-off on hearing discovery motions 15 days before trial. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2024.020, subd. (a), 2030.290; Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300.) No meet and confer efforts are required before filing a motion to compel responses to the discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290; Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300; Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 411.)

Here, Defendants served each Plaintiff with a Demand for Production of Documents, Set One, and Form Interrogatories, Set One, on October 7, 2020 via regular mail. (Motions, Michael Decls., ¶¶ 2, Exhs. A.) The Form Interrogatories propounded on each Plaintiff seek a response for 43 interrogatories. This exceeds the limit in limited jurisdiction cases. Code of Civil Procedure section 94 permits a propounding party to serve any combination of 35 interrogatories, demands to produce, and requests for admission in total. (Code Civ. Proc., § 94, subd. (a)(1)-(3).) (Emphasis added.)

As for requests for production, Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.030, states, in pertinent part:

“Each demand in a set shall be separately set forth, identified by number or letter, and shall do all of the following:

(1) Designate the documents, tangible things, land or other property, or electronically stored information to be inspected, copied, tested, or sampled either by specifically describing each individual item or by reasonably particularizing each category of item.

(Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.030, subd. (c).) (Emphasis added.)

Here, each Demand for Production includes only one demand as follows: “Any and all documents which support your responses to Form Interrogatories served with this Request for Production of Documents.” (Production Motions, Michael Decls., ¶¶ 2, Exhs. A.) This request does not specifically describe each individual item sought or reasonably particularize each category of item sought.

Thus, Defendants’ Motions are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

III. Conclusion & Order

For the foregoing reasons, Defendants Jorge Ramirez and Baker Commodities, Inc.’s discovery Motions are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

Moving parties are ordered to give notice.

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where BAKER COMMODITIES INC. is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer MICHAEL CHRISTINA