This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 06/06/2019 at 21:16:04 (UTC).

MARIA CLAUDIA JIMENEZ-REGALADO ET AL VS 3905 STEVELY LLC

Case Summary

On 01/07/2016 MARIA CLAUDIA JIMENEZ-REGALADO filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against 3905 STEVELY LLC. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is GREGORY KEOSIAN. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****6504

  • Filing Date:

    01/07/2016

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

GREGORY KEOSIAN

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs, Petitioners and Guardian Ad Litems

PAZ JOSE LUIS DE LA CRUZ

JIMENEZ-REGALADO MARIA CLAUDIA

HERNANDEZ-MERCADO PAULINA

PEREZ-CORNEJO SANDRA MIREYA

HERNANDEZ-MERCADO LIDIA BEATRIZ

AVILA GERARDO CALDERON

RAMIREZ MARIA ELENA

SOJO OSCAR

GARCIA REBECA ABIGAIL

SANCHEZ PAULINO JR.

Defendants and Respondents

MBVR LLC

3905 STEVELY LLC

DE LA TORRE PATRICK

DOES 1 TO 100

Minors

JIMENEZ JOSE IGNACIO CASTRO

JIMENEZ JUAN MANUEL CASTRO

SOJO SCARLETT

SANCHEZ JOSE

PEREZ JESSE CALDERON

GARCIA VICTOR JOSUE

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff, Petitioner and Minor Attorney

CASTELBLANCO LAW GROUP APLC

Defendant and Respondent Attorneys

WOOD CARY L. ESQ

DE SIMONE GERRY ESQ.

PATEL SARITA T.

MANDELL BARBARA J. ESQ.

 

Court Documents

DEFENDANT 3905 STEVELY, LLC OBJECTION TO DECLARATION OF SHILPA ANAND IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND THEIR COMPLAINT

3/22/2018: DEFENDANT 3905 STEVELY, LLC OBJECTION TO DECLARATION OF SHILPA ANAND IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND THEIR COMPLAINT

PLAINTIFFS' REPLY TO DEFENDANT'S OPPOSITION OF MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND THE COMPLAINT, ETC

3/28/2018: PLAINTIFFS' REPLY TO DEFENDANT'S OPPOSITION OF MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND THE COMPLAINT, ETC

Proof of Service

3/28/2018: Proof of Service

NSWER OF SUNRISE MAINTENANCE SERVICES, INC., A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY TO PLAINTIFFS' FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

6/1/2018: NSWER OF SUNRISE MAINTENANCE SERVICES, INC., A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY TO PLAINTIFFS' FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM - CIVIL

1/8/2016: APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM - CIVIL

APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM - CIVIL

1/8/2016: APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM - CIVIL

APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM - CIVIL

1/8/2016: APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM - CIVIL

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE HEARING

1/13/2016: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE HEARING

DECLARATION OF DUE DILIGENCE

3/10/2016: DECLARATION OF DUE DILIGENCE

PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS

3/10/2016: PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS

DECLARATION OF DUE DILIGENCE

3/25/2016: DECLARATION OF DUE DILIGENCE

Minute Order

4/4/2016: Minute Order

ASSOCIATION OF COUNSEL

4/14/2016: ASSOCIATION OF COUNSEL

NOTICE RE: CONTINUANCE OF HEARING

4/18/2016: NOTICE RE: CONTINUANCE OF HEARING

DEFENDANT 3905 STE VELY LLC'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS' OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE

5/3/2016: DEFENDANT 3905 STE VELY LLC'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFFS' OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STRIKE

Unknown

5/4/2016: Unknown

Unknown

5/31/2016: Unknown

CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER

6/13/2016: CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER

69 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 08/28/2018
  • Association of Attorney; Filed by 3905 Stevely LLC (Defendant); PEYMAN YOUABIAN (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/28/2018
  • NOTICE OF ASSOCIATION OF COUNSEL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/07/2018
  • at 09:00 AM in Department 61; Jury Trial (Jury Trial; Matter continued) -

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/30/2018
  • at 09:00 AM in Department 61; Final Status Conference (Final Status Conference; Matter continued) -

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/13/2018
  • Notice of Ruling; Filed by 3905 Stevely LLC (Defendant); SUNRISE MAINTENANCE SERVICES, INC. (Defendant); PEYMAN YOUABIAN (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/13/2018
  • NOTICE OF RULING

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/12/2018
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 61; Ex-Parte Proceedings - Held - Motion Granted

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/12/2018
  • EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; ETC.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/12/2018
  • Order; Filed by Defendant/Respondent

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/12/2018
  • Ex-Parte Application; Filed by Defendant/Respondent

    Read MoreRead Less
154 More Docket Entries
  • 01/08/2016
  • APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM - CIVIL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/08/2016
  • APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM - CIVIL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/08/2016
  • APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM - CIVIL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/08/2016
  • APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM - CIVIL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/08/2016
  • APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM - CIVIL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/08/2016
  • APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM - CIVIL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/08/2016
  • APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM - CIVIL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/08/2016
  • APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM - CIVIL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/07/2016
  • HABITABILITY COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/07/2016
  • Complaint; Filed by Maria Claudia Jimenez-Regalado (Plaintiff); Jose Luis De La Cruz Paz (Plaintiff); sandra Mireya Perez-Cornejo (Plaintiff) et al.

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC606504    Hearing Date: February 26, 2020    Dept: 61

Plaintiffs Cielo Herrera and Ana Herrera’s Petition to Approve Minors’ Compromise is GRANTED.

  1. PETITION FOR MINOR’S COMPROMISE

The settlement that Plaintiffs seek to have approved is as follows. The global settlement amount offered to all Plaintiffs by Defendants is $200,000. (Petition Att. 12C.) Of this amount, $6,786.74 will go to costs, and $73,662.54 (about 37%) will go toward attorney fees. (Ibid.) Each minor plaintiff, including remaining claimants Cielo Herrera, and Ana Herrera, is to receive a gross $5,000 allocation, with $169.67 going to costs and $1,207.58 (about 24% of the gross) going to attorney fees. (Ibid.) Thus each minor plaintiff will receive the net amount of $3,622.75. (Ibid.) The funds shall be deposited in accounts subject to withdrawal upon authorization bty the court.

In all cases under Code of Civil Procedure section 372 or Probate Code sections 3600-3601, unless the court has approved the fee agreement in advance, the court must use a reasonable fee standard when approving and allowing the amount of attorney's fees payable from money or property paid or to be paid for the benefit of a minor or a person with a disability.

The court must give consideration to the terms of any representation agreement made between the attorney and the representative of the minor or person with a disability and must evaluate the agreement based on the facts and circumstances existing at the time the agreement was made, except where the attorney and the representative of the minor or person with a disability contemplated that the attorney's fee would be affected by later events.

(CRC Rule 7.955, subd. (a)(1)–(2).)

Based on the fee agreement between Plaintiffs and their counsel, which are attached to the petitions here, and on the factors identified in CRC Rule 7.955, subd. (b), the court finds that the 24% contingency fees charged in this matter to the minor plaintiffs are reasonable.

Plaintiffs’ Petitions to Approve Minors’ Compromise are GRANTED.

Plaintiffs to give notice.

Case Number: BC606504    Hearing Date: January 29, 2020    Dept: 61

Plaintiffs Emerie Clementine Canelas, Evan Josue Canelas, Kevin Yareth Canelas, Cielo Herrera, and Ana Herrera’s Petition to Approve Minors’ Compromise is GRANTED.

Case Number: BC606504    Hearing Date: November 25, 2019    Dept: 61

Plaintiffs Oscar Francisco Sojo Hernandez, Scarlett Sojo, Besaida Abigail Tobar Garcia, Jesse Calderon Perez, Jose Angel Sanchez, Jose Ignacio Castro Jimenez, Gerardo Calderon Avila, and Victor Josue Garcia’s Petitions to Approve Minor’s Compromise are GRANTED pending hearing with minors and guardians.

  1. PETITION FOR MINOR’S COMPROMISE

The settlement that Plaintiffs seek to have approved is as follows. The global settlement proceeds paid by Defendant to Plaintiffs is $2.5 million. (Petition at p. 3.) Of this amount, each minor claimant is to receive $30,000 in gross proceeds. (Petition at p. 6.) From this amount, $7,500 (25%) will be deducted to pay attorney fees, leaving each minor claimant with net proceeds of $22,500.00. (Petition at p. 6.) These proceeds are to be deposited in single-premium deferred annuities subject to withdrawal upon court approval. (Petition at p. 9.)

In all cases under Code of Civil Procedure section 372 or Probate Code sections 3600-3601, unless the court has approved the fee agreement in advance, the court must use a reasonable fee standard when approving and allowing the amount of attorney's fees payable from money or property paid or to be paid for the benefit of a minor or a person with a disability.

The court must give consideration to the terms of any representation agreement made between the attorney and the representative of the minor or person with a disability and must evaluate the agreement based on the facts and circumstances existing at the time the agreement was made, except where the attorney and the representative of the minor or person with a disability contemplated that the attorney's fee would be affected by later events.

(CRC Rule 7.955, subd. (a)(1)–(2).)

Based on the fee agreement between Plaintiffs and their counsel, which are attached to the petitions here, and on the factors identified in CRC Rule 7.955, subd. (b), the court finds that the 25% contingency fees charged in this matter to the minor plaintiffs are reasonable.

Plaintiffs’ Petitions to Approve Minors’ Compromise are GRANTED, pending hearing with minors and guardians.