Search

Attributes

This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 12/30/2020 at 03:21:22 (UTC).

ANGELICA FORSYTHE VS ARCTIC GLACIER INC, UNION ICE CO ET AL

Case Summary

On 11/21/2011 ANGELICA FORSYTHE filed a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury lawsuit against ARCTIC GLACIER INC, UNION ICE CO. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are FRANK J. JOHNSON, AMY D. HOGUE, ELIA WEINBACH, MICHELLE WILLIAMS COURT, HOLLY E. KENDIG, MARC D. GROSS and THOMAS D. LONG. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****5556

  • Filing Date:

    11/21/2011

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

FRANK J. JOHNSON

AMY D. HOGUE

ELIA WEINBACH

MICHELLE WILLIAMS COURT

HOLLY E. KENDIG

MARC D. GROSS

THOMAS D. LONG

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Appellant

FORSYTHE ANGELICA

Defendants, Respondents and Cross Defendants

ARCTIC GLACIER INC

DOES 1-30

RITE AID CORP

THRIFTY PAYLESS INC.

UNION ICE CO

RITE AID (X-COMP.) (COMPLT

Defendant and Respondent

ARCTIC GLACIER INC

Defendants, Cross Plaintiffs and Cross Defendants

THRIFTY PAYLESS INC.

UNION ICE CO

Cross Defendants and Cross Plaintiffs

MOES 1 TO 10

THRIFTY PAYLESS INC.

UNION ICE COMPANY (ROE 1)

UNION ICE COMPANY ROE 1

Other

THIRIFTY PALES DBA RITE AID

Not Classified By Court

COMPEAN MICHAEL D. ESQ.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorneys

KAY MARVIN

KAY MARVIN ESQ.

Defendant Attorneys

SCHUMANN KIM

LENKOV JEFFREY MYLES

REID DAVID PHILIP ESQ.

 

Court Documents

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S EX-PARTE APPLICATION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS,

3/20/2018: ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S EX-PARTE APPLICATION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS,

Minute Order -

4/24/2018: Minute Order -

DECLARATION OF MARVIN KAY RE: DEFENDANT'S EX-PARTE HEARING FOR MOTION TO DISMISS

5/31/2018: DECLARATION OF MARVIN KAY RE: DEFENDANT'S EX-PARTE HEARING FOR MOTION TO DISMISS

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT RITE AID'S MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANT UNION ICE'S CROSS-COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE PURSUANT TO CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SECTION 583

7/13/2018: MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT RITE AID'S MOTION TO DISMISS DEFENDANT UNION ICE'S CROSS-COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE PURSUANT TO CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SECTION 583

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS UNION ICE'S CROSS-COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE, PURSUANT TO CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SECTION 583.3 10

7/13/2018: ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS UNION ICE'S CROSS-COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE, PURSUANT TO CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SECTION 583.3 10

PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS; DECLARATION MARVIN KAY; POINTS AND AUTHORITY; REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

8/3/2018: PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS; DECLARATION MARVIN KAY; POINTS AND AUTHORITY; REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

Reply - Reply to Union Ice's Opposition to Rite Aid's Motion to Dismiss Union Ice's Cross-Complaint

8/14/2018: Reply - Reply to Union Ice's Opposition to Rite Aid's Motion to Dismiss Union Ice's Cross-Complaint

ORDER APPOINTING COURT APPROVED REPORTER AS OFFICIAL REPORTER PRO TEMPORE

8/28/2018: ORDER APPOINTING COURT APPROVED REPORTER AS OFFICIAL REPORTER PRO TEMPORE

Declaration - regarding Bankruptcy status

10/4/2018: Declaration - regarding Bankruptcy status

Appeal - Notice of Appeal/Cross Appeal Filed - Notice of Appeal/Cross Appeal Filed

10/12/2018: Appeal - Notice of Appeal/Cross Appeal Filed - Notice of Appeal/Cross Appeal Filed

Minute Order - Minute Order (Conference Re: Status of Defendant Union Ice, Company and Ar...)

10/25/2018: Minute Order - Minute Order (Conference Re: Status of Defendant Union Ice, Company and Ar...)

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (STATUS CONFERENCE RE: BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS AS TO DEFENDANTS...)

8/30/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (STATUS CONFERENCE RE: BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS AS TO DEFENDANTS...)

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE)

2/20/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE)

Motion for Leave - MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE 1ST AMENDED COMPLAINT

4/7/2020: Motion for Leave - MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE 1ST AMENDED COMPLAINT

Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

7/24/2020: Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER: RE RESCHEDULING HEARINGS PURSUANT TO EMERGENCY O...) OF 07/31/2020

7/31/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER: RE RESCHEDULING HEARINGS PURSUANT TO EMERGENCY O...) OF 07/31/2020

Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE

8/17/2020: Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE

Minute Order -

7/10/2013: Minute Order -

86 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 03/17/2021
  • Hearing03/17/2021 at 10:30 AM in Department 31 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Trial Setting Conference

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/03/2020
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 31, Thomas D. Long, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Reconsideration - Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Party

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/27/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 31, Thomas D. Long, Presiding; Jury Trial - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/17/2020
  • DocketNotice (Notice of Continuance of Trial Setting Conference); Filed by UNION ICE CO (Defendant); UNION ICE COMPANY (ROE 1) (Cross-Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/13/2020
  • Docketat 10:30 AM in Department 31, Thomas D. Long, Presiding; Trial Setting Conference - Not Held - Continued - Court's Motion

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/13/2020
  • Docketat 10:00 AM in Department 31, Thomas D. Long, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/13/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Trial Setting Conference)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/31/2020
  • Docketat 11:36 AM in Department 31, Thomas D. Long, Presiding; Court Order

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/31/2020
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for ((Court Order: Re Rescheduling Hearings Pursuant to Emergency O...) of 07/31/2020); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/31/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Court Order: Re Rescheduling Hearings Pursuant to Emergency O...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
315 More Docket Entries
  • 03/09/2012
  • DocketCross-Complaint; Filed by RITE AID CORP (DISM ON COMPLT) (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/09/2012
  • DocketComplaint-Cross-No Summons Iss; Filed by Attorney for Deft/X-Complainant

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/14/2012
  • DocketProof of Service of Summons and Complaint; Filed by ANGELICA FORSYTHE (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/14/2012
  • DocketProof of Service-Summons & Com; Filed by Attorney-Plaintiff

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/21/2011
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by ANGELICA FORSYTHE (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/21/2011
  • DocketNotice of Case Management Conference; Filed by null

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/21/2011
  • DocketComplaint

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/21/2011
  • DocketSummons-Issued; Filed by Attorney-Plaintiff

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/21/2011
  • DocketNotice-Case Management Conference

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/21/2011
  • DocketSummons-Issued; Filed by ANGELICA FORSYTHE (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: LC095556    Hearing Date: June 24, 2020    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

ANGELICA FORSYTHE,

Plaintiff(s),

vs.

ARCTIC GLACIER, INC., ET AL.,

Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO: LC095556

[TENTATIVE] ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND

Dept. 31

1:30 p.m.

June 24, 2020

  1. Procedural History

    Plaintiff, Angelica Forsythe filed this action against Defendants, Arctic Glacier, Inc., Union Ice Company, and Rite Aid Corporation on 1/21/11. Arctic and Union Ice filed a cross-complaint against Rite Aid, and Rite Aid filed a cross-complaint against Arctic and Union Ice.

    On 7/27/12, Arctic and Union Ice filed a Notice of Stay of Proceedings because they had commenced bankruptcy proceedings. On 6/06/13, Plaintiff filed a request for dismissal of Arctic.

    On 8/14/18, the Court granted Rite Aid’s motion to dismiss, finding the case against it was barred by the five-year mandatory dismissal statute. The Court found the time the co-defendants were in bankruptcy could not be used to calculate the time to bring the action to trial against Rite Aid, and none of Plaintiff’s claimed exceptions to the dismissal statute applied.

  2. Motion for Leave to Amend

    At this time, Plaintiff moves for leave to file an amended complaint. Plaintiff seeks an order that (a) the dismissal of Arctic Glacier be set aside and the case allowed to proceed against it, (b) the complaint against Rite Aid can be maintained, (c) the complaint can be amended to add allegations against Arctic Glacier Holdings, Inc. and Arctic Glacier, U.S.A., and (d) the complaint may be maintained against Union Ice Company.

  1. Dismissal of Union Ice

    Plaintiff’s first request is that her 6/06/13 dismissal of Arctic Glacier be set aside and she be permitted to prosecute her claims against Arctic Glacier. Arctic Glacier did not file opposition to this motion, but Union Ice did. Union Ice correctly notes, in opposition to the motion, that Plaintiff fails to cite any applicable authority in support of her motion to “amend” her complaint to state a claim against Arctic Glacier. This is really a motion to vacate the dismissal of Arctic Glacier, but the dismissal was entered over seven years ago. Plaintiff cites no applicable authority for the position that a dismissal can be vacated seven years after it is voluntarily filed.

    Notably, Plaintiff argues the dismissal should be set aside as void because Arctic Glacier was in bankruptcy when Plaintiff dismissed it, and the bankruptcy judge did not authorize or approve it. Plaintiff cites no authority for the position that a bankruptcy judge must approve a DISMISSAL of a civil action against a debtor in bankruptcy. The Court knows of no such authority. The motion to reinstate the case against Arctic Glacier is denied.

    b. Dismissal of Rite Aid

    As noted above, the Court granted Rite Aid’s motion to dismiss the case against it on 8/14/18. Plaintiff has not filed a motion for reconsideration of that order. Plaintiff, in this motion, argues the case against Rite Aid should be reinstated for reasons relating to the parties’ communications about removal of the case from the bankruptcy stay. The Court considered and rejected these same arguments in connection with the motion to dismiss. Plaintiff has cited no authority for the position that she can now amend to bring a defendant that was dismissed, on noticed motion, almost two years ago, back into the case. The motion to permit the action to proceed against Rite Aid is denied.

    c. New Defendants

    Plaintiff also seeks leave to add new defendants to the action, specifically Arctic Glacier Holdings and Arctic Glacier U.S.A., Inc. Plaintiff does not meaningfully address how these defendants can be added to the litigation nine years after she initiated it. She briefly discusses tolling of the statute of limitations when a defendant is in bankruptcy, but she does not show that either of these entities was ever in bankruptcy; on the contrary, the opposition papers shows that they were not. The motion for leave to add these entities is therefore also denied.

    D. Conclusion

    The motion for leave to amend is denied in its entirety. Plaintiff is ordered to give notice.

     

    Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at sscdept31@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org. If the parties do not submit on the tentative they should arrange to appear remotely. If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar. If a party submits on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative.

    Dated this 24th day of June, 2020

Hon. Thomas D. Long

Judge of the Superior Court

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where UI Holdings LLC is a litigant

Latest cases where COMPEAN MICHAEL D. ESQ. is a litigant

Latest cases where ARCTIC GLACIER U.S.A., INC.; DBA : ARCTIC GLACIER PREMIUM ICE is a litigant

Latest cases where THRIFTY PAYLESS INC. is a litigant