On 10/14/2015 NICOLE BAUTISTA filed a Civil Right - Other Civil Right lawsuit against MUSCLEWOOD INVESTMENT PROPERTIES LL. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is DALILA CORRAL LYONS. The case status is Disposed - Dismissed.
****7411
10/14/2015
Disposed - Dismissed
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
DALILA CORRAL LYONS
BAUTISTA NICOLE
RUIZ OSCAR
DOES 1 THROUGH 10
LOPEZ EDWARD
MUSCLEWOOD INVESTMENT PROPERTIES LLC
BARBOSA PATRICIA
BREMER WHYTE BROWN & O'MEARA LLP
LEINEWEBER CECILIA K.
12/13/2018: Unknown
2/25/2019: Minute Order
11/3/2015: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE HEARING
2/8/2016: Unknown
2/24/2016: DECLARATION OF AYMAN MOURAD IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF?S RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: FAILURE TO FILE PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT
2/25/2016: Minute Order
2/25/2016: Unknown
5/23/2016: PLAINTIFFS' REQUEST TO DENY DEFENDANTS' LATE REPLY ISO DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF THE COMPLAINT FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH RULES
6/6/2016: Unknown
6/6/2016: Unknown
6/21/2016: DEFENDANTS MUSCLE WOOD PROPERTY INVESTMENTS, LLC AND EDWARD LOPEZ'S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
6/27/2016: DECLARATION OF PATRICIA BARBOSA ISO NOTICE OF UNAVAILABILITY OF PLAINTIFFS' COUNSEL FOR DEMURRER AND MOTION TO STRIKE HEARING ON JULY 26, 2016
8/12/2016: PLAINTIFFS NICOLE BAUTISTA AND OSCAR RUIZ'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF THE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT
9/12/2016: PLAINTIFFS' NOTICE OF WITHDRAWAL OF MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA FOR OSCAR RUIZ'S MEDICAL RECORDS, VETERINARY RECORDS, AND RECORDS FROM GUIDE DOGS OF AMERICA
9/13/2016: RULING
9/13/2016: ORDER APPOINTING COURT APPROVED REPORTER AS OFFICIAL REPORTER PRO TEMPORE
9/27/2016: Minute Order
11/4/2016: NOTICE OF FILING ORIGINAL PROOF OF PERSONAL SERVICE
Answer; Filed by Musclewood Investment Properties, LLC (Defendant); Edward Lopez (Defendant)
at 08:30 AM in Department 20, Dalila Corral Lyons, Presiding; Case Management Conference - Held
Minute Order ( (CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE;)); Filed by Clerk
Case Management Order; Filed by Clerk
Proof of Service by Mail; Filed by Nicole Bautista (Plaintiff)
Case Management Statement; Filed by Nicole Bautista (Plaintiff)
Proof of Service by Mail; Filed by Nicole Bautista (Plaintiff)
Case Management Statement; Filed by Musclewood Investment Properties, LLC (Defendant)
at 08:30 AM in Department 20, Dalila Corral Lyons, Presiding; Ex-Parte Proceedings (to Extend time to File Memorandum of Costs and Motion for Attorney Fees) - Held - Motion Granted
Order Granting ex parte application to extend time to file memorandum of costs and notice and motion for attorney's fees following Reverse and Remand by the Court of Appeals; Filed by Musclewood Investment Properties, LLC (Defendant); Edward Lopez (Defendant)
Proof-Service/Summons
PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT ON EDWARD LOPEZ
PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT ON MUSCLEWOOD INVESTMENT PROPERTIES, LLC
NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONEERENCE
OSC-Failure to File Proof of Serv; Filed by Clerk
Notice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE HEARING
SUMMONS
Complaint; Filed by Nicole Bautista (Plaintiff); Oscar Ruiz (Plaintiff)
COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF AND DAMAGES: FOR DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION IN VIOLATION OF THE DISABLED PERSON ACT; THE BANE ACT; 4EGLIGENCE (CA.1.CIV.CODE 54 ET SEQ. ALCIV.CODE 52.1 ET SEQ, CAL. EVID. CODE 699)
Case Number: BC597411 Hearing Date: February 24, 2020 Dept: 20
Tentative Ruling
Judge David J. Cowan
Department 20
Hearing Date: Monday, February 24, 2020
Case Name: Bautista, et al. v. Musclewood Investment Properties, LLC, et al.
Case No.: BC597411
Motion: Leave to File Cross-Complaint
Moving Party: Defendants Edward Lopez and Musclewood Property Investment, LLC
Responding Party: *UNOPPOSED*
Notice: OK
Recommended Ruling: Defendants’ Motion for Leave to File a Cross-Complaint is GRANTED.
Defendants are ordered to file the proposed Cross-Complaint under separate cover within 10 days of this ruling.
The Court now sets a hearing re: service of the cross-complaint for June 4, 2020 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 20.
Moving party to give notice.
ANALYSIS
Defendants Edward Lopez and Musclewood Property Investment, LLC seek leave to file a cross-complaint under CCP sec. 426.50 on the grounds that the proposed cross-complaint states related causes of action arising out of the same occurrence as the complaint and that Defendants acted in good faith in bringing this motion as soon as reasonably possible. “A motion to file a cross-complaint at any time during the course of the action must be granted unless bad faith of the moving party is demonstrated where forfeiture would otherwise result.” (Silver Organizations Ltd. v. Frank (1990) 217 Cal.App.3d 94, 98-99) A finding of bad faith must be supported by substantial evidence. (Id. at 99) “The granting of leave to file a cross-complaint is particularly of importance in avoiding forfeiture of causes of action because of the principle expressed in [CCP sec. 426.30] that cross-complaints relating to the subject of the action must be filed therein or are deemed lost.” (Foot’s Transfer Storage Co. v. Superior Court (1980) 114 Cal.App.3d 897, 900)
The underlying complaint states a cause of action for discrimination under the California Disabled Persons Act based on alleged attacks on Plaintiff’s guide dog by Defendants’ “guard dog.” Defendants’ cross-complaint alleges cross-defendants owned the dog and failed to restrain it—and are thus responsible instead under theories of equitable and comparative indemnity. These causes of action clearly relate to the subject of the underlying action, and so granting leave to file a cross-complaint “is particularly of importance” here. (Foot’s Transfer, supra, at 900)
Defendants have established they acted in good faith in bringing this motion as soon as reasonably possible, in light of post-remand settlement discussions, discovery, and certain extenuating circumstances requiring the continuance of earlier-set hearing dates on this Motion. There is no evidence of any bad faith, and no opposition has been filed. Accordingly, the motion must be granted under Silver Organizations.
CONCLUSION
Defendants’ Motion for Leave to File a Cross-Complaint is GRANTED.
Defendants are ordered to file the proposed Cross-Complaint under separate cover within 10 days of this ruling. The Court sets a hearing re: service of the cross-complaint for June 4, 2020 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 20.
Moving party to give notice.