This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 06/17/2019 at 12:53:45 (UTC).

JACQUELINE ROSALES ET AL VS. EVAN ANDREW DIRECTO

Case Summary

On 10/24/2016 JACQUELINE ROSALES filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against EVAN ANDREW DIRECTO. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Torrance Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is LAURA C. ELLISON. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****8327

  • Filing Date:

    10/24/2016

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Torrance Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

LAURA C. ELLISON

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs, Petitioners and Guardian Ad Litems

ROSALES MARCO

ROSALES JACQUELINE

ROSALES MARCOS

Defendants and Respondents

DIRECTO EVAN ANDREW

DOES 1 THROUGH 50

Minors

ROSALES ANTONELLA

ANTONELLA ROSALES

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff, Petitioner and Minor Attorneys

SCHECHTER BRUCE LEE ESQ.

SCHECHTER BRUCE LEE

Defendant Attorneys

LAW FIRM OF MCCLAUGHERTY & ASSOCIATES

VIDA SCOTT JAY

DEENA C. FARAH

MCCLAUGHERTY JAY S. ESQ.

ESQ. MCCLAUGHERTY JAY S.

MCCLAUGHERTY JAY STEPHEN ESQ.

 

Court Documents

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR AN ORDER TO COMPEL INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATIONS OF PLAINTIFFS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES DECLARATION OF BRIAN S COHEN PROPOSED ORDER

2/9/2018: NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR AN ORDER TO COMPEL INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EXAMINATIONS OF PLAINTIFFS MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES DECLARATION OF BRIAN S COHEN PROPOSED ORDER

DEFENDANT S OPPOSITION TO EX PARTE ON PLAINTIFF S

3/16/2018: DEFENDANT S OPPOSITION TO EX PARTE ON PLAINTIFF S

[PROPOSED ORDER] AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FSC [AND RELATED MOTION/DISCO VERY DATES] PERSONAL INJURY COURTS ONLY (CENTRAL DISTRICT)

4/2/2018: [PROPOSED ORDER] AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FSC [AND RELATED MOTION/DISCO VERY DATES] PERSONAL INJURY COURTS ONLY (CENTRAL DISTRICT)

Other -

4/6/2018: Other -

Notice

6/13/2018: Notice

DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE NO. FOUR TO TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE OF ANTONELLA ROSALES' INJURIES AS IRRELEVANT; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF; DECLARATION OF JAY S. MCCLAUGHERTY.

7/10/2018: DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE NO. FOUR TO TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE OF ANTONELLA ROSALES' INJURIES AS IRRELEVANT; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF; DECLARATION OF JAY S. MCCLAUGHERTY.

DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE NO. FIVE TO TO EXCLUDE OPINIONS OF PLAINTIFFS' EXPERTS WHICH RELY ON LAYERED HEARSAY STATEMENTS IN VIOLATION OF PEOPLE V. SANCHEZ

7/19/2018: DEFENDANT'S MOTION IN LIMINE NO. FIVE TO TO EXCLUDE OPINIONS OF PLAINTIFFS' EXPERTS WHICH RELY ON LAYERED HEARSAY STATEMENTS IN VIOLATION OF PEOPLE V. SANCHEZ

Reply

7/20/2018: Reply

PLAINTIFFS' MATRIX OF VIDEO DESIGNATIONS OF DEFENDANT EYAN ANDREW DIRECTO; OBJECTIONS; COUNTER-DESIGNATIONS; AND REPLIES (C.C.P. 2025.340 (M))

7/23/2018: PLAINTIFFS' MATRIX OF VIDEO DESIGNATIONS OF DEFENDANT EYAN ANDREW DIRECTO; OBJECTIONS; COUNTER-DESIGNATIONS; AND REPLIES (C.C.P. 2025.340 (M))

PLAINTIFFS' MATRIX OF VIDEO DESIGNATIONS OF DAVID KRAUSS (VOLUME 1); OBJECTIONS; COUNTER- DESIGNATIONS; AND REPLIES (CC.P. 2025.340 (M))

7/23/2018: PLAINTIFFS' MATRIX OF VIDEO DESIGNATIONS OF DAVID KRAUSS (VOLUME 1); OBJECTIONS; COUNTER- DESIGNATIONS; AND REPLIES (CC.P. 2025.340 (M))

PLAINTIFFS' MATRIX OF VIDEO DESIGNATIONS OF GEORGE CHOW, M.D. (VOLUME 2); OBJECTIONS; COUNTER-DESIGNATIONS; AND REPLIES (C.C.P. 2025.340 (M))

7/23/2018: PLAINTIFFS' MATRIX OF VIDEO DESIGNATIONS OF GEORGE CHOW, M.D. (VOLUME 2); OBJECTIONS; COUNTER-DESIGNATIONS; AND REPLIES (C.C.P. 2025.340 (M))

JOINT MATRIX OF VIDEO DESIGNATIONS OF ANTHONY KRETZMER, ETC

7/25/2018: JOINT MATRIX OF VIDEO DESIGNATIONS OF ANTHONY KRETZMER, ETC

Minute Order

8/23/2018: Minute Order

Minute Order

8/28/2018: Minute Order

Minute Order

9/6/2018: Minute Order

Objection

9/13/2018: Objection

Other -

9/14/2018: Other -

Minute Order

11/19/2018: Minute Order

209 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 12/06/2018
  • Statement of the Case ([Phase one Trial]); Filed by EVAN ANDREW DIRECTO (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/19/2018
  • at 08:30 AM in Department A; Hearing on Motion for New Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/19/2018
  • at 08:30 AM in Department A; Hearing on Motion for New Trial - Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Party

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/19/2018
  • at 08:30 AM in Department A; Hearing on Motion to Strike (and Tax Costs Contained in Defendant's Memorandum of Costs) - Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Party

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/19/2018
  • Minute Order ((1) Hearing on Plaintiffs' Motion for New Trial; 2) Hearing on...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/09/2018
  • Notice of Settlement; Filed by JACQUELINE ROSALES (Plaintiff); MARCOS ROSALES (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/05/2018
  • Notice (of Plaintiffs taking Motions set on 11-19-18 off calendar); Filed by JACQUELINE ROSALES (Plaintiff); MARCOS ROSALES (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/31/2018
  • Association of Attorney; Filed by MCCLAUGHERTY JAY S. ESQ. (Attorney)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/30/2018
  • at 08:30 AM in Department A; Hearing on Motion for New Trial - Not Held - Continued - Stipulation

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/30/2018
  • Stipulation and Order (to Continue Hearing on Plaintiff's Motion for New Trial from October 30, 2018 to November 19, 2018. -Order signed); Filed by JACQUELINE ROSALES (Plaintiff); MARCOS ROSALES (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
499 More Docket Entries
  • 12/16/2016
  • PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/02/2016
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/02/2016
  • Summons; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/02/2016
  • Summons; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/31/2016
  • Ord Apptng Guardian Ad Litem; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/24/2016
  • Application ; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/24/2016
  • Complaint; Filed by JACQUELINE ROSALES (Plaintiff); MARCOS ROSALES (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/24/2016
  • PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1. NEGLIGENCE; ETC

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/24/2016
  • Complaint Filed

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/24/2016
  • APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC638327    Hearing Date: January 30, 2020    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

JACQUELINE ROSALES, ET AL.,

Plaintiff(s),

vs.

EVAN ANDREW DIRECTO, ET AL.,

Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO: BC638327

[TENTATIVE] ORDER CONDITIONALLY GRANTING PETITION TO APPROVE MINOR’S COMPROMISE

Dept. 31

1:30 p.m.

January 30, 2020

Plaintiffs, Jacqueline, Marco, and Antonella Rosales filed this action against Defendant, Evan Andrew Directo for damages arising out of automobile accident. The case went to trial, and Plaintiffs moved for a new trial after the jury verdict was entered. Prior to the hearing on the motion for new trial, the parties agreed to settle the case.

Antonella is a minor and is appearing in the action through her father and GAL, Marco. Antonella, by and through her GAL and attorney of record, has agreed to settle all claims in the case. Directo would pay $11,000 in settlement of her claims, and Jacqueline’s underinsured motorists’ policy would pay $12,500. If the settlement is approved, Petitioner will use $1800 to pay outstanding medical expenses, $5875 for attorneys’ fees, and $1020.62 for costs of suit; the net balance of $14,804.38 will be placed in a blocked account.

The Court has reviewed the settlement and finds that it is fair and reasonable. Counsel failed to file the required declaration in support of fees, which is required to be included as Attachment 14a to the petition. However, because the fees are in the amount of 25% of the gross settlement, the Court is inclined to find them fair and reasonable; this is especially true because the case went to trial and was settled after trial.

Pursuant to CRC 7.952, unless excused for good cause, Plaintiff and Petitioner must appear and testify to the satisfaction of the Court before the Court can approve the settlement. Plaintiff is thirteen years old, and therefore the Court will require her to personally appear and testify, along with Petitioner, prior to granting the petition. If the Court is satisfied with Plaintiff’s and Petitioner’s testimony at the time of the hearing, the Court will grant the petition.

Petitioner is ordered to give notice.

Dated this 30th day of January, 2020

Hon. Jon Takasugi

Judge of the Superior Court