Search

Attributes

This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 05/25/2019 at 13:11:03 (UTC).

IVONNE ANA MARIA MEDINA GONZALES VS MAYRA MARTINEZ DORAME ET

Case Summary

On 10/07/2016 IVONNE ANA MARIA MEDINA GONZALES filed a Property - Other Property Fraud lawsuit against MAYRA MARTINEZ DORAME ET. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****6619

  • Filing Date:

    10/07/2016

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Property - Other Property Fraud

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner

GONZALES IVONNE ANA MARIA MEDINA

Defendants and Respondents

DOES 1 THROUGH 100

DORAME MAYRA MARTINEZ

SMITH CHADWICK F.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

PHILLIP MYER APC

LEVINE JOHN WARREN

Defendant Attorney

BYBERG GREGORY B ESQ.

 

Court Documents

PLAINTIFF?S COMPLAINT FOR: 1. FRAUD; ETC

10/7/2016: PLAINTIFF?S COMPLAINT FOR: 1. FRAUD; ETC

SUMMONS

10/7/2016: SUMMONS

CLERK'S NOTICE OF VOIDING OF FILING

1/26/2017: CLERK'S NOTICE OF VOIDING OF FILING

Minute Order

4/17/2017: Minute Order

Minute Order

6/8/2017: Minute Order

Minute Order

9/14/2017: Minute Order

SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY

9/21/2017: SUBSTITUTION OF ATTORNEY

ANSWER OF CHADWICK F. SMITH TO COMPLAINT OF PLAINTIFF

10/24/2017: ANSWER OF CHADWICK F. SMITH TO COMPLAINT OF PLAINTIFF

Minute Order

2/13/2018: Minute Order

Minute Order

5/14/2018: Minute Order

Motion to Compel

10/9/2018: Motion to Compel

Motion to Compel

10/9/2018: Motion to Compel

Notice

2/19/2019: Notice

Minute Order

2/25/2019: Minute Order

Minute Order

3/14/2019: Minute Order

Minute Order

3/25/2019: Minute Order

Notice of Related Case

4/26/2019: Notice of Related Case

Request for Judicial Notice

4/29/2019: Request for Judicial Notice

43 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 05/01/2019
  • Notice of Ruling; Filed by Ivonne Ana Maria Medina Gonzales (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/30/2019
  • at 10:00 AM in Department 24; Jury Trial - Not Held - Continued - Party's Motion

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/30/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 24; Hearing on Ex Parte Application ( to Continue Trial or Stay) - Held - Motion Granted

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/30/2019
  • Ex Parte Application (Ex Parte Application to Continue Trial or Stay); Filed by Ivonne Ana Maria Medina Gonzales (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/30/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Jury Trial; Hearing on Ex Parte Application to Continue Tria...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/29/2019
  • Request for Judicial Notice; Filed by Mayra Martinez Dorame (Defendant); Chadwick F. Smith (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/26/2019
  • Notice of Related Case; Filed by Ivonne Ana Maria Medina Gonzales (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/18/2019
  • at 09:30 AM in Department 24; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Continued - Court's Motion

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/12/2019
  • at 09:30 AM in Department 24; Final Status Conference - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/12/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Final Status Conference)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
105 More Docket Entries
  • 01/03/2017
  • Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/29/2016
  • Request to Waive Court Fees; Filed by Mayra Martinez Dorame (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/29/2016
  • Answer; Filed by Mayra Martinez Dorame (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/29/2016
  • PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/21/2016
  • Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by Ivonne Ana Maria Medina Gonzales (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/21/2016
  • PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/07/2016
  • PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/07/2016
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/07/2016
  • Complaint; Filed by Ivonne Ana Maria Medina Gonzales (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/07/2016
  • PLAINTIFF S COMPLAINT FOR: 1. FRAUD; ETC

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC636619    Hearing Date: October 20, 2020    Dept: 24

Plaintiff Ivonne Ana Maria Medina Gonzales's motion is conditionally GRANTED, provided she presents proper proof of service as discussed below.

Plaintiff Ivonne Ana Maria Medina Gonzales (“Plaintiff”) against Defendants Mayra Martinez Dorame (“Dorame”) and Chadwick F. Smith (“Smith” or “Decedent”) on October 7, 2016. The Complaint states five causes of action for fraud, theft, conversion, breach of fiduciary duty, and dissolution/accounting.

On April 29, 2020, Plaintiff filed a motion to substitute a personal representative for Smith. No opposition was submitted.

Legal Standard

 

An action or proceeding does not abate by the disability of a party. The court, on motion, shall allow the action or proceeding to be continued by or against the party's representative. (CCP, § 375.) Probate Code section 9370 states in full:

(a) An action or proceeding pending against the decedent at the time of death may not be continued against the decedent's personal representative unless all of the following conditions are satisfied:

(1) A claim is first filed as provided in this part.

(2) The claim is rejected in whole or in part.

(3) Within three months after the notice of rejection is given, the plaintiff applies to the court in which the action or proceeding is pending for an order to substitute the personal representative in the action or proceeding. This paragraph applies only if the notice of rejection contains a statement that the plaintiff has three months within which to apply for an order for substitution.

(b) No recovery shall be allowed in the action against property in the decedent's estate unless proof is made of compliance with this section.

Request for Judicial Notice

The request is GRANTED. (Evid. Code, § 452(d).)

Procedural Requirements

Smith died on or about January 7, 2019. (Levine Decl., ¶ 4.) On August 7, 2019, Joseph E. Sweeny, III (“Sweeny”) was appointed as the personal representative of the Estate of Chadwick F. Smith (the “Estate”) with full authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administration of Estates Act. (Levine Decl., ¶ 5; RJN Ex. 1.) Plaintiff filed a Creditor’s Claim on January 23, 2020 and filed a corrected proof of service on January 24, 2020. (Levine Decl., ¶ 7.) The Estate served a Notice of Rejection of the Claim on January 31, 2020. (RJN Exs. 2-4; Levine Decl., ¶¶ 7-8.) Plaintiff filed this motion within 3 months of the rejection. Thus, Plaintiff has complied with procedural requirements of this motion.

Notice

However, Plaintiff has not filed an amended proof of service as to this motion. The Court notes that the notice did not provide a hearing date (due to the COVID-19 pandemic and associated court shutdown). On May 19, 2020, the Court ordered Plaintiff to give notice of the provided hearing date, September 4, 2020. Plaintiff failed to provide a proof of service for this hearing date. Thus, the Court is uncertain if Defendants ever received proper notice. Plaintiff should submit proof of service at the hearing and file it with the Court. If Plaintiff does not provide this, then the hearing on the motion would be continued to allow for notice. If Plaintiff does provide proof of service, then her motion would be granted.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.

Case Number: BC636619    Hearing Date: September 04, 2020    Dept: 24

Plaintiff Ivonne Ana Maria Medina Gonzales's motion is conditionally GRANTED, provided she presents proper proof of service as discussed below.

Plaintiff Ivonne Ana Maria Medina Gonzales (“Plaintiff”) against Defendants Mayra Martinez Dorame (“Dorame”) and Chadwick F. Smith (“Smith” or “Decedent”) on October 7, 2016. The Complaint states five causes of action for fraud, theft, conversion, breach of fiduciary duty, and dissolution/accounting.

On April 29, 2020, Plaintiff filed a motion to substitute a personal representative for Smith. No opposition was submitted.

Legal Standard

 

An action or proceeding does not abate by the disability of a party. The court, on motion, shall allow the action or proceeding to be continued by or against the party's representative. (CCP, § 375.) Probate Code section 9370 states in full:

(a) An action or proceeding pending against the decedent at the time of death may not be continued against the decedent's personal representative unless all of the following conditions are satisfied:

(1) A claim is first filed as provided in this part.

(2) The claim is rejected in whole or in part.

(3) Within three months after the notice of rejection is given, the plaintiff applies to the court in which the action or proceeding is pending for an order to substitute the personal representative in the action or proceeding. This paragraph applies only if the notice of rejection contains a statement that the plaintiff has three months within which to apply for an order for substitution.

(b) No recovery shall be allowed in the action against property in the decedent's estate unless proof is made of compliance with this section.

Request for Judicial Notice

The request is GRANTED. (Evid. Code, § 452(d).)

Procedural Requirements

Smith died on or about January 7, 2019. (Levine Decl., ¶ 4.) On August 7, 2019, Joseph E. Sweeny, III (“Sweeny”) was appointed as the personal representative of the Estate of Chadwick F. Smith (the “Estate”) with full authority to administer the estate under the Independent Administration of Estates Act. (Levine Decl., ¶ 5; RJN Ex. 1.) Plaintiff filed a Creditor’s Claim on January 23, 2020 and filed a corrected proof of service on January 24, 2020. (Levine Decl., ¶ 7.) The Estate served a Notice of Rejection of the Claim on January 31, 2020. (RJN Exs. 2-4; Levine Decl., ¶¶ 7-8.) Plaintiff filed this motion within 3 months of the rejection. Thus, Plaintiff has complied with procedural requirements of this motion.

Notice

However, Plaintiff has not filed an amended proof of service as to this motion. The Court notes that the notice did not provide a hearing date (due to the COVID-19 pandemic and associated court shutdown). On May 19, 2020, the Court ordered Plaintiff to give notice of the provided hearing date, September 4, 2020. Plaintiff failed to provide a proof of service for this hearing date. Thus, the Court is uncertain if Defendants ever received proper notice. Plaintiff should submit proof of service at the hearing and file it with the Court. If Plaintiff does not provide this, then the hearing on the motion would be continued to allow for notice. If Plaintiff does provide proof of service, then her motion would be granted.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.