This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 10/25/2018 at 16:19:56 (UTC).

WESCO INSURANCE COMPANY VS EOL BUILDERS, ET AL.

Case Summary

On 05/31/2018 WESCO INSURANCE COMPANY filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against EOL BUILDERS. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is GEORGINA T. RIZK. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******7829

  • Filing Date:

    05/31/2018

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

GEORGINA T. RIZK

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Cross Defendant

WESCO INSURANCE COMPANY

Defendants and Cross Defendants

WALKER MALIK

EOL BUILDERS

JOHNSON VELISA

LAVIE FRANK AKA FRANK ELI LAVIE

DYSON SAMSON EDWARD

WESCO INSURANCE COMPANY

CHAMBERLAIN ANGUS

Defendant and Cross Plaintiff

JOHNSON VELISA

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Cross Defendant and Plaintiff Attorneys

SOSA CARLOS EDUARDO

PAGAN JOHN MICHAEL

MALACHOWSKI MITCHELL B

Defendant and Cross Plaintiff Attorneys

FELDMAN SHIMON BENJAMIN

STERNFELD DAVID I

 

Court Documents

Memorandum of Points & Authorities

10/5/2018: Memorandum of Points & Authorities

Notice of Rejection - Pleadings

10/9/2018: Notice of Rejection - Pleadings

Request for Dismissal

8/24/2018: Request for Dismissal

Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

8/24/2018: Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

Proof of Service by Mail

8/21/2018: Proof of Service by Mail

Cross-Complaint

8/21/2018: Cross-Complaint

Answer

8/21/2018: Answer

Answer

7/25/2018: Answer

Proof of Personal Service

6/27/2018: Proof of Personal Service

Proof of Personal Service

6/20/2018: Proof of Personal Service

Complaint

5/31/2018: Complaint

Civil Case Cover Sheet

5/31/2018: Civil Case Cover Sheet

Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

5/31/2018: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

17 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 09/07/2018
  • General Denial; Filed by: Wesco Insurance Company (Cross-Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/30/2018
  • Request for Dismissal; Filed by: Wesco Insurance Company (Plaintiff); As to: Frank Lavie (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/30/2018
  • On the Complaint filed by Wesco Insurance Company on 05/31/2018, Request for dismissal Without Prejudice entered as to Frank Lavie

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/24/2018
  • Request for Dismissal; Filed by: Wesco Insurance Company (Plaintiff); As to: Samson Edward Dyson (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/24/2018
  • On the Complaint filed by Wesco Insurance Company on 05/31/2018, Request for dismissal Without Prejudice entered as to Samson Edward Dyson

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/24/2018
  • Request for Entry of Default / Judgment; Filed by: Wesco Insurance Company (Plaintiff); As to: Malik Walker (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/24/2018
  • Default entered as to Malik Walker; On the Complaint filed by Wesco Insurance Company on 05/31/2018

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/21/2018
  • Answer; Filed by: Velisa Johnson (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/21/2018
  • Cross-Complaint; Filed by: Velisa Johnson (Cross-Complainant); As to: EOL Builders (Cross-Defendant); Angus Chamberlain (Cross-Defendant); Samson Edward Dyson (Cross-Defendant) et al.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/21/2018
  • Proof of service by first-class mail - civil; Filed by: Velisa Johnson (Defendant); As to: Wesco Insurance Company (Plaintiff); After Substituted Service of Summons & Complaint ?: No

    Read MoreRead Less
3 More Docket Entries
  • 06/27/2018
  • Affidavit of Reasonable Diligence; Filed by: Wesco Insurance Company (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/27/2018
  • Proof of Personal Service; Filed by: Wesco Insurance Company (Plaintiff); As to: EOL Builders (Defendant); Service Date: 06/12/18; Service Cost: 65.00; Service Cost Waived: No

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/20/2018
  • Proof of Personal Service; Filed by: Wesco Insurance Company (Plaintiff); As to: Samson Edward Dyson (Defendant); Service Date: 06/09/2018; Service Cost: 65.00; Service Cost Waived: No

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/31/2018
  • Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/31/2018
  • Summons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/31/2018
  • Civil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Wesco Insurance Company (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/31/2018
  • Complaint; Filed by: Wesco Insurance Company (Plaintiff); As to: EOL Builders (Defendant); Frank Lavie (Defendant); Velisa Johnson (Defendant) et al.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/31/2018
  • Case assigned to Hon. Georgina T. Rizk in Department 94 Stanley Mosk Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/31/2018
  • Non-Jury Trial scheduled for 12/02/2019 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/31/2018
  • Order to Show Cause - Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 06/03/2021 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

b'

Case Number: 18STLC07829 Hearing Date: July 23, 2021 Dept: 53

\r\n\r\n

Superior Court of California

\r\n\r\n

County of Los Angeles – Central District

\r\n\r\n

Department\r\n53

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n\r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n
\r\n

wesco insurance company\r\n \r\n ,

\r\n

\r\n

\r\n \r\n Plaintiff,

\r\n

\r\n

\r\n

vs.

\r\n

\r\n

\r\n

eol builders\r\n \r\n , et al.,

\r\n

\r\n

\r\n \r\n Defendants.

\r\n
\r\n

Case\r\n No.:

\r\n
\r\n

18STLC07829

\r\n
\r\n

\r\n
\r\n

\r\n
\r\n

Hearing\r\n Date:

\r\n
\r\n

July\r\n 23, 2021

\r\n
\r\n

\r\n
\r\n

\r\n
\r\n

Time:

\r\n
\r\n

\r\n \r\n \r\n 10:00 a.m.

\r\n
\r\n

\r\n
\r\n

\r\n
\r\n

\r\n

[Tentative]\r\n Order RE:

\r\n

\r\n

motion for terminating sanction of dismissal\r\n for failure to comply with court order

\r\n
\r\n

AND RELATED CROSS-ACTION

\r\n
\r\n

\r\n
\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

MOVING PARTIES: Cross-Defendants EOL Builders, Frank Lavie, and Angus\r\nChamberlain

\r\n\r\n

RESPONDING PARTY: Cross-Complainant Velisa Johnson

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Motion for Terminating Sanction of\r\nDismissal for Failure to Comply with Court Order

\r\n\r\n

The court considered the moving, opposition, and reply papers filed in\r\nconnection with this motion.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Background

\r\n\r\n

Plaintiff WESCO Insurance Company filed this action on May 31, 2018,\r\nagainst defendants EOL Builders (“EOL”), Frank Lavie (“Lavie”), Velisa Johnson\r\n(“Johnson”), Malik Walker, and Samson Edward Dyson. On August 21, 2018, Johnson filed a\r\ncross-complaint against WESCO Insurance Company, EOL, Lavie, Malik Walker, Sampson\r\nDyson, and Angus Chamberlain (“Chamberlain”), asserting causes of action for\r\ndeclaratory relief, breach of contract, negligence, negligent infliction of\r\nemotional distress, and negligent misrepresentation.

\r\n\r\n

On August 24, 2020, the court issued an order granting cross-defendants\r\nEOL, Lavie, and Chamberlain’s (1) motion to compel answers to Form\r\nInterrogatories, Set One, and Special Interrogatories, Set One, (2) motion to\r\ncompel responses to Request for Production of Documents, Set One, and (3) motion\r\nto have Request for Admissions, Set One, deemed admitted. Pursuant to that order, the court ordered\r\ncross-complainant Johnson to serve on cross-defendants EOL, Lavie, and\r\nChamberlain (1) answers to their form interrogatories and special\r\ninterrogatories, and (2) a response to their request for production of\r\ndocuments and responsive documents within 20 days of the date of service of the\r\norder. The court also ordered the truth\r\nof the matters specified in cross-defendants EOL, Lavie, and Chamberlain’s request\r\nfor admissions deemed admitted.

\r\n\r\n

On August 25, 2020, cross-complainant Johnson filed a Request for\r\nDismissal of her cross-complaint, filed August 21, 2018, with prejudice. The dismissal was entered by the court on\r\nAugust 26, 2020.

\r\n\r\n

On October 14, 2020, cross-defendants EOL, Lavie, and Chamberlain\r\nfiled a motion “for an Order imposing the terminating sanction of dismissal of cross-complainant\r\nVELISA JOHNSON’s . . . cross-complaint for JOHNSON’s failure to comply with\r\nCourt Orders compelling JOHNSON to provide, without objection, answers to Form Interrogatories\r\nand Special Interrogatories as well as a response and actual production of\r\ndocuments requested by EOL BUILDERS and for her failure to pay monetary\r\nsanctions.” (Notice of Motion, filed\r\nOctober 14, 2020, pp. 1:24-2:2.)

\r\n\r\n

On October 16, 2020, the court issued a minute order denying\r\ncross-defendants EOL, Lavie, and Chamberlain’s ex parte application for an\r\norder to advance the date of hearing on their motion for terminating sanctions. In that order, the court pointed out: “But it appears that there is no need for\r\ncross-defendants’ motion for terminating sanction of dismissal of Johnson’s\r\ncross-complaint because, on August 25, 2020, Johnson filed a Request for\r\nDismissal of her cross-complaint with prejudice and the dismissal of Johnson’s\r\ncross-complaint was entered on August 26, 2020.” (Minute order, filed October 16, 2020, pp.\r\n1-2.)

\r\n\r\n

discussion

\r\n\r\n

Because\r\nJohnson’s cross-complaint was dismissed with prejudice on August 26, 2020, cross-defendants\r\nEOL, Lavie, and Chamberlain’s motion for an order imposing the terminating\r\nsanction of dismissal of Johnson’s cross-complainant (filed on October 14, 2020\r\n– i.e., seven weeks after the cross-complaint was dismissed) is moot. Curiously, none of the parties addresses this\r\nissue in their moving, opposition, or reply papers, except for cross-defendants\r\nEOL, Lavie, and Chamberlain’s reply which simply states: “On October 16, 2020, the court denied the ex\r\nparte Application based upon the court’s conclusion that the underlying Motion\r\nwas moot.” (Reply, filed July 14, 2021,\r\npp. 3:28-4:1.)

\r\n\r\n

For the reasons set forth above, the\r\ncourt denies cross-defendants EOL, Lavie, and Chamberlain’s motion for an order\r\nimposing the terminating sanction of dismissal of cross-complainant Velisa Johnson’s\r\ncross-complainant because it is moot.

\r\n\r\n

ORDER

\r\n\r\n

The court denies cross-defendants EOL Builders, Frank Lavie, and Angus\r\nChamberlain’s motion for an order imposing the terminating sanction of\r\ndismissal of cross-complainant Velisa Johnson’s cross-complainant.

\r\n\r\n

The court orders cross-complainant Velisa Johnson to give notice of\r\nthis order.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

IT\r\nIS SO ORDERED.

\r\n\r\n

DATED: July 23, 2021

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

_____________________________

\r\n\r\n

Robert\r\nB. Broadbelt III

\r\n\r\n

Judge\r\nof the Superior Court

\r\n\r\n'

Case Number: 18STLC07829    Hearing Date: August 24, 2020    Dept: 53

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles – Central District

Department 53

wesco insurance company ,

Plaintiff,

vs.

eol builders , et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.:

18STLC07829

Hearing Date:

August 24, 2020

Time:

10:00 a.m.

[Tentative] Order RE:

(1) motion to compel answers to interrogatories;

(2) motion to compel response to request for production of documents;

(3) motion to have requests for admissions deemed admitted

AND RELATED CROSS-ACTION

MOVING PARTIES: Defendants/cross-defendants EOL Builders, Angus Chamberlain, and Frank Lavie

RESPONDING PARTY: n/a

  1. Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories;

  2. Motion to Compel Response to Request for Production of Documents;

  3. Motion to Have Requests for Admissions Deemed Admitted

The court considered the moving papers in connection with each motion. No oppositions to the motions were filed.

Background

Plaintiff WESCO Insurance Company filed this action on May 31, 2018 against defendants EOL Builders (“EOL”), Frank Lavie aka Frank Eli Lavie (“Lavie”), Velisa Johnson, Malik Walker, and Samson Edward Dyson. On August 21, 2018, Velisa Johnson (“Cross-Complainant”) filed a cross-complaint against WESCO Insurance Company, Samson Dyson, Malik Walker, Angus Chamberlain (“Chamberlain”), EOL, and Lavie, asserting causes of action for declaratory relief, breach of contract, negligence, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and negligent misrepresentation.

On September 10, 2019, EOL, Lavie, and Chamberlain (collectively, “Cross-Defendants”) served Cross-Complainant with Cross-Defendants’ (1) Form Interrogatories, Set One, and Special Interrogatories, Set One, (2) Request for Production of Documents, Set One, and (3) Request for Admissions, Set One. (Haskins Decls., ¶ 2, Exs. A and B.) As of November 11, 2019, Cross-Complainant has not responded to any of Cross-Defendants’ discovery requests. (Haskins Decls., ¶ 4.)

Cross-Defendants now move for an order (1) compelling Cross-Complainant to respond to Cross-Defendants’ Form Interrogatories, Set One, and Special Interrogatories, Set One; (2) compelling Cross-Complainant to respond to Cross-Defendants’ Request for Production of Documents, Set One; and (3) that the truth of the matters specified in Cross-Defendants’ Request for Admissions, Set One, to Cross-Complainant are deemed admitted. Cross-Defendants also request an order imposing monetary sanctions in connection with each motion. No oppositions to the motions were filed.

discussion

If a party to whom interrogatories or an inspection demand are directed fails to serve a timely response, the propounding party may move for an order compelling responses without objections. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, subd. (b); 2031.300, subd. (b).) Where a motion seeks only a response to an inspection demand, no showing of “good cause” is required. (Compare Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300(b) with Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.310, subd. (b)(1).)

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.280, subdivision (b), if a party to whom requests for admissions are directed fails to serve a timely response, the requesting party may move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted, and for a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010). “Failure to timely respond to RFA does not result in automatic admissions. Rather, the propounder of the RFA must ‘move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted, as well as for a monetary sanction’ under § 2023.010 et seq.” (Weil & Brown, Civ. Proc. Before Trial, ¶ 8:1370, citing Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (b).) The court “shall” grant the motion to deem RFA admitted, “unless it finds that the party to whom the requests for admission have been directed has served, before the hearing on the motion, a proposed response to the requests for admission that is in substantial compliance with Section 2033.220.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (c).)

In light of Cross-Complainant’s failure to oppose Cross-Defendants’ motions, there is no evidence before the court that Cross-Complainant has served valid, verified responses to the subject discovery requests. The court therefore finds that Cross-Complainant has not acted with substantial justification in failing to timely respond to Cross-Defendants’ discovery requests, and there are no other circumstances that make imposition of sanctions unjust pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 2030.290, subdivision (c) and 2031.300, subdivision (c). It is “mandatory that the court impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2012.010) on the party or attorney, or both, whose failure to serve a timely response to requests for admission necessitated this motion.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (c).)

ORDER

For the reasons set forth above, the court grants cross-defendants EOL Builders, Frank Lavie, and Angus Chamberlain’s (1) motion to compel cross-complainant Velisa Johnson to serve responses to cross-defendants EOL Builders, Frank Lavie, and Angus Chamberlain’s Form Interrogatories, Set One, and Special Interrogatories, Set One, (2) motion to compel cross-complainant Velisa Johnson to serve responses to cross-defendants EOL Builders, Frank Lavie, and Angus Chamberlain’s Request for Production of Documents, Set One, and (3) motion to deem the truth of the matters specified in cross-defendants EOL Builders, Frank Lavie, and Angus Chamberlain’s Request for Admissions, Set One, to cross-complainant Velisa Johnson, admitted.

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.290, the court orders cross-complainant Velisa Johnson to serve on cross-defendants EOL Builders, Frank Lavie, and Angus Chamberlain full and complete verified answers, without objections, to cross-defendants EOL Builders, Frank Lavie, and Angus Chamberlain’s Form Interrogatories, Set One, and Special Interrogatories, Set One, that comply with Code of Civil Procedure sections 2030.220 and 2030.250, subdivisions (a) and (b), within 20 days of the date of service of this order.

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2031.300, the court orders cross-complainant Velisa Johnson (1) to serve on cross-defendants EOL Builders, Frank Lavie, and Angus Chamberlain a written response, without objections, to cross-defendants EOL Builders, Frank Lavie, and Angus Chamberlain’s Request for Production of Documents, Set One, that complies with Code of Civil Procedure sections 2031.210-2031.250, and (2) to produce to cross-defendants EOL Builders, Frank Lavie, and Angus Chamberlain all documents and things in cross-complainant Velisa Johnson’s possession, custody, or control which are responsive to cross-defendants EOL Builders, Frank Lavie, and Angus Chamberlain’s Request for Production of Documents, Set One, within 20 days of the date of service of this order.

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.280, subdivision (b), the court orders that the truth of the matters specified in cross-defendants EOL Builders, Frank Lavie, and Angus Chamberlain’s Request for Admissions, Set One, to cross-complainant Velisa Johnson, are deemed admitted.

Cross-defendants EOL Builders, Frank Lavie, and Angus Chamberlain request monetary sanctions in the total amount of $1,665 ($555 for each motion) against cross-complainant Velisa Johnson. The court finds that a total of $840 (4 hours x $165 per hour for attorney’s fees + $60 filing fee x 3 motions) is a reasonable amount of sanctions to impose against cross-complainant Velisa Johnson on the three motions. The court therefore orders that cross-complainant Velisa Johnson shall pay monetary sanctions in the amount of $840 to cross-defendants EOL Builders, Frank Lavie, and Angus Chamberlain, within 30 days of the date of service of this order. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, subd. (c); 2031.300, subd. (c); 2033.280, subd. (c).)

The court orders cross-defendants EOL Builders, Frank Lavie, and Angus Chamberlain to give notice of this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: August 24, 2020

_____________________________

Robert B. Broadbelt III

Judge of the Superior Court

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where WESCO INSURANCE COMPANY A DELAWARE CORPORATION is a litigant