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 Judges overseeing this case are DALILA CORRAL LYONS and KEVIN C. BRAZILE. The case status is Other.
****7411
10/14/2015
Other
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
DALILA CORRAL LYONS
KEVIN C. BRAZILE
BAUTISTA NICOLE
RUIZ OSCAR
DOES 1 THROUGH 10
LOPEZ EDWARD
MUSCLEWOOD INVESTMENT PROPERTIES LLC
MENDEZ CARLOS
MENDEZ OTTO
DEFENDANTS EDWARD LOPEZ AND MUSCLEWOOD PROPERTY INVESTMENTS LLC
BARBOSA PATRICIA
BREMER WHYTE BROWN & O'MEARA LLP
LEINEWEBER CECILIA K.
LEINEWEBER CECILIA K.
2/3/2020: Notice of Case Reassignment and Order for Plaintiff to Give Notice
5/14/2020: RETURNED MAIL - RETURNED MAIL UNABLE TO FORWARD [ON 5/14 RE-SENT TO CORRECT ADDRESS AND TO FILE A CHANGE OF ADDRESS]
1/4/2021: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)
12/13/2018: Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for Minute Order (COURT ORDER:) of 12/13/2018
2/25/2019: Minute Order - Minute Order (CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE;)
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 -
Docketat 10:30 AM in Department 20, Kevin C. Brazile, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement) - Not Held - Vacated by Court
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 20, Kevin C. Brazile, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement) - Not Held - Rescheduled by Court
DocketRequest for Dismissal; Filed by Musclewood Investment Properties, LLC (Cross-Complainant); Edward Lopez (Cross-Complainant)
DocketNotice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order; Filed by Clerk
DocketRequest for Dismissal; Filed by Nicole Bautista (Plaintiff); Oscar Ruiz (Plaintiff)
DocketProof of Service (not Summons and Complaint); Filed by Oscar Ruiz (Plaintiff)
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 20, Kevin C. Brazile, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: (Request for entry of default as to Cross Defendant, Carlos Mendez) - Not Held - Vacated by Court
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 20, Kevin C. Brazile, Presiding; Status Conference (reSettlement) - Not Held - Vacated by Court
DocketOrder to Show Cause re: Dismissal (Settlement); Filed by Clerk
DocketProof of Service (not Summons and Complaint); Filed by Oscar Ruiz (Plaintiff)
DocketPROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT ON MUSCLEWOOD INVESTMENT PROPERTIES, LLC
DocketPROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT ON EDWARD LOPEZ
DocketProof-Service/Summons
DocketORDER TO SHOW CAUSE HEARING
DocketNOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONEERENCE
DocketNotice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk
DocketOSC-Failure to File Proof of Serv; Filed by Clerk
DocketSUMMONS
DocketComplaint; Filed by Nicole Bautista (Plaintiff); Oscar Ruiz (Plaintiff)
DocketCOMPLAINT 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.