This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 06/07/2019 at 00:12:24 (UTC).

JENNIFER PACELLI VS NIC'S BEVERLY HILLS

Case Summary

On 03/16/2016 JENNIFER PACELLI filed a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury lawsuit against NIC'S BEVERLY HILLS. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is CHRISTOPHER K. LUI. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****3552

  • Filing Date:

    03/16/2016

  • 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 Judge

CHRISTOPHER K. LUI

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner

PACELLI JENNIEFER

Defendants and Respondents

DOES 1 THROUGH 10

NIC'S BEVERLY HILLS

HILLS NIC'S BEVERLY

TURPIN CHRISTOPHER

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

KEOSIAN | BERBERIAN LLP

KEOSIAN HAROUT GREG

Defendant and Respondent Attorneys

CORDAY BRANDON

CORDAY BRANDON M.

NGUYEN HOAN N.

 

Court Documents

PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS

1/22/2018: PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS

EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

3/28/2018: EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

DEFENDANT NIC'S BEVERLY HILLS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

4/11/2018: DEFENDANT NIC'S BEVERLY HILLS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

CROSS-DEFENDANT JENNIEFER PACELLI ANSWER TO CROSS-COMPLAINANTS COMPLAINT

7/10/2018: CROSS-DEFENDANT JENNIEFER PACELLI ANSWER TO CROSS-COMPLAINANTS COMPLAINT

Minute Order

8/8/2018: Minute Order

Motion in Limine

10/30/2018: Motion in Limine

Motion in Limine

10/30/2018: Motion in Limine

Order

11/14/2018: Order

Minute Order

11/14/2018: Minute Order

Notice

11/28/2018: Notice

Ex Parte Application

1/24/2019: Ex Parte Application

Minute Order

1/24/2019: Minute Order

Declaration

5/29/2019: Declaration

Unknown

4/25/2016: Unknown

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

4/25/2016: ANSWER TO COMPLAINT

NOTICE OF FIRM ADDRESS CHANGE

5/1/2017: NOTICE OF FIRM ADDRESS CHANGE

Minute Order

11/7/2017: Minute Order

SIOTICE OF RULTNG ON DEFENDANT'S EX ARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL

11/9/2017: SIOTICE OF RULTNG ON DEFENDANT'S EX ARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL

57 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 05/29/2019
  • Declaration (DECLARATION OF CHRISTOPHER ARZOOMANIAN IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT?S MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION AND PLAINTIFF?S REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,370.00); Filed by Jenniefer Pacelli (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/29/2019
  • Declaration (DECLARATION OF MELKON R. MELKONIAN IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT?S MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION AND PLAINTIFF?S REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,370.00); Filed by Jenniefer Pacelli (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/28/2019
  • at 1:30 PM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Terminating Sanctions - Held - Motion Denied

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/28/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Defendant Chirstopher Lavar Turpin's Terminating Sanctions)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/14/2019
  • Opposition (PLAINTIFF?S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT?S MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION AND PLAINTIFF?S REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,370.00); Filed by Jenniefer Pacelli (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/14/2019
  • Declaration (DECLARATION OF CHRISTOPHER ARZOOMANIAN IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT?S MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION AND PLAINTIFF?S REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,370.00); Filed by Jenniefer Pacelli (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/14/2019
  • Declaration (DECLARATION OF MELKON R. MELKONIAN IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT?S MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE MOTION TO COMPEL DEPOSITION AND PLAINTIFF?S REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,370.00); Filed by Jenniefer Pacelli (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/20/2019
  • Motion for Terminating Sanctions; Filed by Christopher Turpin (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/18/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal - Not Held - Vacated by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/07/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Jury Trial - Not Held - Advanced and Continued - by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
110 More Docket Entries
  • 04/25/2016
  • CIVIL DEPOSIT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/25/2016
  • DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/25/2016
  • Receipt; Filed by Nic's Beverly Hills (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/25/2016
  • Demand for Jury Trial; Filed by Nic's Beverly Hills (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/25/2016
  • Answer; Filed by Nic's Beverly Hills (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/25/2016
  • PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/25/2016
  • Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by Jenniefer Pacelli (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/16/2016
  • COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES: 1. NEGLIGENCE; ETC

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/16/2016
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/16/2016
  • Complaint; Filed by Jenniefer Pacelli (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC613552    Hearing Date: November 01, 2019    Dept: 4A

Motion to Strike Costs & Request for Sanctions

Having considered the moving and opposing papers, the Court rules as follows.

BACKGROUND

On March 16, 2016, Plaintiff Jenniefer Pacelli (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendants NIC’s Beverly Hills and DOES 1 through 10, asserting causes of action for negligence, assault, and battery.

On April 25, 2016, Defendant NIC’s Beverly Hills filed an answer to the complaint.

On January 12, 2017, Plaintiff filed an Amendment to Complaint, identifying Defendant Christopher Turpin (“Defendant”) as DOE 1.

On February 21, 2018, Defendant filed an answer to the complaint. Defendant also filed a cross-complaint against Plaintiff and ROES 1 through 20, asserting causes of action for negligence, battery, and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

On April 11, 2018, the Court granted Defendant NIC’s Beverly Hills’ motion for summary judgment.

On July 10, 2018, Plaintiff filed an answer to the cross-complaint.

On August 9, 2019, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Settlement of Entire Case.

On August 14, 2019, Plaintiff filed a Request for Dismissal (signed by Plaintiff’s counsel and Defendant), dismissing the entire action with prejudice.

On September 4, 2019, Defendant filed and served a Memorandum of Costs.

PARTY’S REQUEST

Plaintiff moves for an order striking Defendant’s Memorandum of Costs. Plaintiff also moves for an award of monetary sanctions in the amount of $1,580.00.

LEGAL STANDARD

Any notice of motion to strike or to tax costs must be served and filed 15 days after service of the cost memorandum. If the cost memorandum was served by mail, the period is extended as provided in Code of Civil Procedure section 1013. If the cost memorandum was served electronically, the period is extended as provided in Code of Civil Procedure section 1010.6(a)(4).” (CRC 3.1700(b)(1).)

“Unless objection is made to the entire cost memorandum, the motion to strike or tax costs must refer to each item objected to by the same number and appear in the same order as the corresponding cost item claimed on the memorandum of costs and must state why the item is objectionable.” (CRC 3.1700(b)(2).)

DISCUSSION

Plaintiff Jenniefer Pacelli (“Plaintiff”) moves for an order striking the Memorandum of Costs filed by Defendant Christopher Turpin (“Defendant”) on September 4, 2019. Plaintiff also moves for an award of sanctions in the amount of $1,580.00.

Plaintiff is entitled to an order striking Defendant’s Memorandum of Costs. Plaintiff submitted evidence that the parties entered into a Settlement Agreement and General Release (“Settlement Agreement”). (Declaration of Arzoomanian ¶3; Exhibit B.) Under the terms of the Settlement Agreement, Defendant agreed to release his claims against Plaintiff, including any costs. The Settlement Agreement provides, in pertinent part, as follows:

Christopher L. Turpin (Defendant/Cross Complainant) hereby release and forever discharge Jenniefer Pacelli (Plaintiff/Cross Defendant)of and from any and all claims, actions, causes of action, demands, rights, damages, costs, loss of service, expenses and compensation whatsoever, which Christopher L. Turpin (Defendant/Cross Complainant) now have or which may hereafter accrue on account of or in any way growing out of any and all known and unknown, damages and the consequences thereof relating to the incident which alleged occurred on March 6, 2015, as more fully described in Los Angeles County Superior Court Case No. BC613552…”

(Declaration of Arzoomanian §3; Exhibit B.) (Emphasis Added.)

Defendant concedes the parties reached an agreement to dismiss their respective actions and basically do a “walk away.” Defendant also concedes he signed the Settlement Agreement. (Opposition, pg. 3.)

Defendant argues the Settlement Agreement is silent as to costs. (Opposition, pg. 3.) However, as discussed above, under the terms of the Settlement Agreement, Defendant agreed to release his claims against Plaintiff, including costs.

Defendant also argues Plaintiff did not properly challenge his claimed costs. However, Plaintiff, via the instant motion, objected to the entire Memorandum of Costs by arguing Defendant is not entitled to any costs.

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff’s motion to strike Defendant’s Memorandum of Costs is granted. Plaintiff’s request for monetary sanctions is denied. Plaintiff did not cite to case law or authority to support the request for sanctions.

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of the Court’s ruling.