This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 09/26/2020 at 16:28:40 (UTC).

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY VS KELLEN BELISLE-LAMOUREUX

Case Summary

On 05/12/2020 STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against KELLEN BELISLE-LAMOUREUX. 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:

    *******4057

  • Filing Date:

    05/12/2020

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • Courthouse:

    Spring Street Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

JAMES E. BLANCARTE

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY

Defendant

BELISLE-LAMOUREUX KELLEN

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

PLEASANT JOSEPH M

 

Court Documents

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

9/9/2020: Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

5/12/2020: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

Declaration (name extension) - Declaration of Venue

5/12/2020: Declaration (name extension) - Declaration of Venue

Complaint - Complaint

5/12/2020: Complaint - Complaint

Summons - Summons on Complaint

5/12/2020: Summons - Summons on Complaint

First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

5/12/2020: First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

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

5/12/2020: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

 

Docket Entries

  • 05/16/2023
  • Hearing05/16/2023 at 08:30 AM in Department 25 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Order to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/09/2021
  • Hearing11/09/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department 25 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Non-Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/09/2020
  • DocketProof of Service by Substituted Service; Filed by: STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (Plaintiff); As to: KELLEN BELISLE-LAMOUREUX (Defendant); Proof of Mailing Date: 08/20/2020; Service Cost: 89.50; Service Cost Waived: No

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/12/2020
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (Plaintiff); As to: KELLEN BELISLE-LAMOUREUX (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/12/2020
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (Plaintiff); As to: KELLEN BELISLE-LAMOUREUX (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/12/2020
  • DocketDeclaration of Venue; Filed by: STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (Plaintiff); As to: KELLEN BELISLE-LAMOUREUX (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/12/2020
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY (Plaintiff); As to: KELLEN BELISLE-LAMOUREUX (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/12/2020
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/12/2020
  • DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/12/2020
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 11/09/2021 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/12/2020
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 05/16/2023 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/12/2020
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. James E. Blancarte in Department 25 Spring Street Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

b'

Case Number: 20STLC04057 Hearing Date: August 9, 2021 Dept: 25

PROCEEDINGS: MOTION\r\nTO DEEM REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION ADMITTED

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff\r\nState Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company

\r\n\r\n

RESP. PARTY: None

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

MOTION TO DEEM REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION ADMITTED; REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

\r\n\r\n

(CCP § 2033.280)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

TENTATIVE RULING:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile\r\nInsurance Company’s Motion to Deem Requests for Admission Admitted is GRANTED.\r\nPlaintiff’s request for sanctions is also GRANTED in the amount of $360.00 to\r\nbe paid to Plaintiff’s counsel within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

SERVICE: \r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

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

\r\n\r\n

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

\r\n\r\n

[X]\r\n16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) OK

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

OPPOSITION: None filed as of August 5,\r\n2021 [ ] Late [X]\r\nNone

\r\n\r\n

REPLY: None filed as\r\nof August 5, 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\r\n

On May 12, 2020, Plaintiff State Farm Mutual Automobile\r\nInsurance Company (“Plaintiff”) filed an action against Defendant Kellen\r\nBelisle-Lamoureux (“Defendant”) seeking damages of $15,399.98. Defendant filed\r\nan Answer on December 4, 2020.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Deem Requests for\r\nAdmission Admitted (the “Motion”) on June 2, 2021. No opposition was filed.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

II. \r\nLegal\r\nStandard & Discussion

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

A. Requests for\r\nAdmission

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

A party must respond to requests for admissions within 30\r\ndays after service of such requests. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.250, subd.\r\n(a).) “If a party to whom requests for\r\nadmission are directed fails to serve a timely response…(a) [that party] waives\r\nany objection to the requests, including one based on privilege or on the\r\nprotection for work product…” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (a).) “The\r\nrequesting party may move for an order that the genuineness of any documents\r\nand the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted, as\r\nwell as for a monetary sanction under Chapter 7.” (Id. at subd. (b).) A motion\r\ndealing with the failure to respond, rather than with inadequate responses,\r\ndoes not require the requesting party to meet and confer with the responding\r\nparty. (Deymer v. Costa Mesa Mobile Home\r\nEstates (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 393, 395, fn. 4 [disapproved on other grounds\r\nin Wilcox v. Birtwhistle (1999) 21\r\nCal.4th 973]. There is no time limit within which a motion to have matters\r\ndeemed admitted must be made. (Brigante\r\nv. Huang (1993) 20 Cal.App.4th 1569, 1585.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Here, Plaintiff served Defendant with Requests for\r\nAdmission, Set One, via email on December 15, 2020. (Mot., Delaney Decl., p. 1,\r\nExh. A.) Although not statutorily required, Plaintiff’s counsel sent\r\nDefendant’s counsel a letter regarding the overdue responses on April 6. (Id.\r\nat p. 2, Exh. B.) Defendant did not serve any responses. (Id.) Thus,\r\nPlaintiff is entitled to an order deeming the Requests for Admission, Set One,\r\nadmitted against Defendant. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

B. Sanctions

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.030, subdivision (a)\r\nprovides, in pertinent part, that the court may impose a monetary sanction on a\r\nparty engaging in the misuse of the discovery process to pay the reasonable\r\nexpenses, including attorney’s fees, incurred by anyone as a result of that\r\nconduct. A misuse of the discovery process includes failing to respond or to\r\nsubmit to an authorized method of discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.010,\r\nsubd. (d).) Furthermore, it is “mandatory that the Court impose a monetary\r\nsanction…on the party or attorney, or both, whose failure to serve a timely\r\nresponse to requests for admission necessitated this motion.” (Code Civ. Proc.,\r\n§ 2033.280, subd. (c).)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

The Court finds Defendant’s failure to respond to Plaintiff’s\r\ndiscovery request a misuse of the discovery process. In addition, the Court is\r\nrequired to impose a monetary sanction on Defendant for Defendant’s failure to\r\nrespond to the Requests for Admission under Code of Civil Procedure section\r\n2033.280, subdivision (c).

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Plaintiff requests sanctions of $460.00 based on two\r\nhours of attorney time billed at $200.00 per hour and one filing fee of $60.00.\r\n(Mot., Delaney Decl., p. 2.) However, the amount sought is excessive given the\r\nsimplicity of this Motion, the lack of opposition and reply, and Plaintiff’s\r\nsubmission on the moving papers without an appearance at the hearing. The Court\r\nfinds $360.00, based on 1.5 hours of attorney time and one filing fee, to be\r\nreasonable. Sanctions are to be paid to Plaintiff’s counsel within thirty (30)\r\ndays of notice of this order.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

III. \r\nConclusion\r\n& Order

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff\r\nState Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company’s Motion to Deem Requests for\r\nAdmission Admitted is GRANTED. Plaintiff’s request for sanctions is also\r\nGRANTED in the amount of $360.00 to be paid to Plaintiff’s counsel within\r\nthirty (30) days of notice of this order.

\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 where State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer HARLAN M. REESE & ASSOCIATES - JOSEPH M. PLEASANT