Search

Attributes

This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 02/05/2021 at 12:06:00 (UTC).

B T ET AL VS LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT ET AL

Case Summary

On 01/31/2014 B T filed a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury lawsuit against LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are ELIA WEINBACH and HOLLY E. KENDIG. The case status is Disposed - Dismissed.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****4894

  • Filing Date:

    01/31/2014

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Dismissed

  • 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

ELIA WEINBACH

HOLLY E. KENDIG

 

Party Details

Defendants and Respondents

DA SYLVEIRA RICHARD

DEASY JOHN

DOES 1 TO 20

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

Minor

B.T.

Guardian Ad Litem

TUCKER KIMBERLY

Not Classified By Court

BRIAN E. CLAYPOOL

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Defendant and Respondent Attorney

HUNT JAMES A. ASST. GENERAL COUNSEL

Minor Attorney

THE CLAYPOOL LAW FIRM

Other Attorneys

CLAYPOOL BRIAN EDWARD

 

Court Documents

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION OF THE CLAYPOOL LAW FIRM TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF; DECLARATION OF BRIAN E. CLAYPOOL IN SUPPORT? OF MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL

2/2/2018: NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION OF THE CLAYPOOL LAW FIRM TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF; DECLARATION OF BRIAN E. CLAYPOOL IN SUPPORT? OF MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL

PLAINTIFFS' EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION OF A PARTY; ETC

3/8/2018: PLAINTIFFS' EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION OF A PARTY; ETC

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (NON-APPEARANCE CASE REVIEW RE SETTING OF ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE ...) OF 07/26/2019

7/26/2019: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (NON-APPEARANCE CASE REVIEW RE SETTING OF ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE ...) OF 07/26/2019

Proof of Service by Mail

8/30/2019: Proof of Service by Mail

Declaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil

8/30/2019: Declaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil

Appeal - Notice of Default Issued - APPEAL - NOTICE OF DEFAULT ISSUED NOA 12/27/19 B303319

1/24/2020: Appeal - Notice of Default Issued - APPEAL - NOTICE OF DEFAULT ISSUED NOA 12/27/19 B303319

Appeal - Remittitur - Appeal Dismissed - APPEAL - REMITTITUR - APPEAL DISMISSED B303319

5/19/2020: Appeal - Remittitur - Appeal Dismissed - APPEAL - REMITTITUR - APPEAL DISMISSED B303319

COMPLAINT 1) NEGLIGENCE, NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION, NEGLIGENT HIRING AND/OR RETENTION, NEGLIGENT FAILURE TO WARN, TRAIN, OR EDUCATE

1/31/2014: COMPLAINT 1) NEGLIGENCE, NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION, NEGLIGENT HIRING AND/OR RETENTION, NEGLIGENT FAILURE TO WARN, TRAIN, OR EDUCATE

APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM?CIVIL

4/29/2014: APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM?CIVIL

Minute Order -

5/27/2016: Minute Order -

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO TRANSFER ACTION TO LIMITED JURISDICTION COURT

5/27/2016: ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO TRANSFER ACTION TO LIMITED JURISDICTION COURT

EX PARTE APPLICATION TO? CONTINUE TRIAL AND ALL RELATED DATES TWO (2) MONTHS, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE EX PARTE APPLICATION TO SHORTEN TIME TO HEAR LAUSD?S MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL AND ALL RELATED DATES;

9/19/2016: EX PARTE APPLICATION TO? CONTINUE TRIAL AND ALL RELATED DATES TWO (2) MONTHS, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE EX PARTE APPLICATION TO SHORTEN TIME TO HEAR LAUSD?S MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL AND ALL RELATED DATES;

Minute Order -

9/19/2016: Minute Order -

NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT

12/29/2016: NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT

Minute Order -

1/31/2017: Minute Order -

NOTICE OF UNAVAILABILITY OF COUNSEL

6/6/2017: NOTICE OF UNAVAILABILITY OF COUNSEL

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO REMOVE GUARDIAN AD LITEM AND FOR A COURT APPOINTED GUARDIAN; ETC.

7/27/2017: NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO REMOVE GUARDIAN AD LITEM AND FOR A COURT APPOINTED GUARDIAN; ETC.

DECLARATION OF BRIAN E. CLAYPOOL IN SUPPORT OF NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO REMOVE GUARDIAN AD LITEM

7/27/2017: DECLARATION OF BRIAN E. CLAYPOOL IN SUPPORT OF NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO REMOVE GUARDIAN AD LITEM

36 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 05/19/2020
  • DocketAppeal - Remittitur - Appeal Dismissed (B303319); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/24/2020
  • DocketAppellate Order Dismissing Appeal (NOA:12/27/19 B303319); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/21/2020
  • DocketAppeal - Notice of Non-Compliance (NOA 12/27/19 B303319); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/24/2020
  • DocketAppeal - Notice of Default Issued (NOA 12/27/19 B303319); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/31/2019
  • DocketNotice of Filing of Notice of Appeal (Unlimited Civil) (NOA:12/27/19); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/27/2019
  • DocketAppeal - Notice of Appeal/Cross Appeal Filed; Filed by B.T. (Appellant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/29/2019
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 3, Holly E. Kendig, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Reconsideration - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/29/2019
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Hearing on Motion for Reconsideration)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/30/2019
  • DocketDeclaration (O.F BRIAN E. CLAYPOOL); Filed by Kimberly Tucker (Legacy Party)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/30/2019
  • DocketMotion for Reconsideration; Filed by Kimberly Tucker (Legacy Party)

    Read MoreRead Less
87 More Docket Entries
  • 07/17/2015
  • DocketMinute Order

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/17/2015
  • DocketMinute order entered: 2015-07-17 00:00:00; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/05/2014
  • DocketSummons; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/05/2014
  • DocketSUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/05/2014
  • DocketSummons Issued; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/02/2014
  • DocketOrd Apptng Guardian Ad Litem; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/29/2014
  • DocketAPPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEMCIVIL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/29/2014
  • DocketApplication ; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/31/2014
  • DocketCOMPLAINT 1) NEGLIGENCE, NEGLIGENT SUPERVISION, NEGLIGENT HIRING AND/OR RETENTION, NEGLIGENT FAILURE TO WARN, TRAIN, OR EDUCATE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/31/2014
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by null

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC534894    Hearing Date: October 29, 2019    Dept: 3

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

B.T., ETC.,

Plaintiff(s),

vs.

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DIST., ET AL.,

Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO: BC534894

[TENTATIVE] ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION

Dept. 3

1:30 p.m.

October 29, 2019

The Court called this matter for an OSC re: dismissal on 9/12/19. Because no party appeared, and because the case had been pending for more than five years, the Court dismissed the action.

At this time, Plaintiff moves for reconsideration of the prior order. Plaintiff explains a variety of circumstances that led to the dismissal, and notes that her appearance attorney went to Stanley Mosk rather than Spring Street on 9/12/19, which contributed to the dismissal.

The motion is denied for two reasons. First, a motion for reconsideration cannot be made after a dismissal is entered. The court loses jurisdiction to rule on a pending motion for reconsideration after entry of judgment. APRI Ins. Co. v. Superior Court (1999) 76 Cal.App.4th 176, 181. An order of dismissal is a judgment (see CCP §581d), and therefore a motion for reconsideration does not lie after a dismissal. Id. at 181. Once a judgment has been entered, the proper challenge is a motion for new trial (CCP §657 ), which may be based on various grounds including errors of law. Ramon v. Aerospace Corp. (1996) 50 Cal.App.4th 1233, 1237-1238.

Second, Plaintiff failed to show any new facts or law that would actually give rise to a different outcome. While she provides new facts (the appearance attorney went to the wrong courthouse) to justify reconsideration (if it were jurisdictionally permitted), she does not provide any new facts to show dismissal is not mandatory under the five-year statute. Per CCP §583.310, dismissal is mandatory if a case has been pending for more than five years. This action was filed on 1/31/14. The court file does not reveal any reason the statute would have been tolled at any time between 1/31/14 and the present. Dismissal, therefore, was mandatory as of 1/31/19. The case was not actually dismissed until 9/12/19, almost eight months later.

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at sscdept3@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 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.

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where B.T. is a litigant

Latest cases where LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer CLAYPOOL BRIAN E.