Search

Attributes

This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 07/03/2019 at 04:03:54 (UTC).

SAMUEL NATHAN BERGER VS LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

Case Summary

On 07/20/2015 SAMUEL NATHAN BERGER filed a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury lawsuit against LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. 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:

    ****8642

  • Filing Date:

    07/20/2015

  • 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

BERGER SAMUEL NATHAN

Defendants and Respondents

DEAN JAMIE

DOES 1 THROUGH 25

LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

Guardian Ad Litem

BERGER ROBERT M.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

LAW OFFICES OF ROBERT M. BERGER

BENSON GORDON S. ESQ.

BERGER ROBERT MICHAEL

Defendant and Respondent Attorneys

ALBRIGHT CLIFTON W. ESQ.

ALBRIGHT YEE & SCHMIT LLP

 

Court Documents

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

7/20/2015: COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

8/25/2015: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

9/18/2015: ANSWER TO COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

ORDER AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FSC [AND RELATED MOTION/DISCOVERY DATES]

12/5/2016: ORDER AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FSC [AND RELATED MOTION/DISCOVERY DATES]

NOTICE OF ENTRY OF ORDER RE CONTINUED TRIAL, FSC, ETC.

12/7/2016: NOTICE OF ENTRY OF ORDER RE CONTINUED TRIAL, FSC, ETC.

NOTICE OF RULING RE EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE, AND ALL RELATED DATES BY AT LEAST SIX MONTHS

2/16/2017: NOTICE OF RULING RE EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE, AND ALL RELATED DATES BY AT LEAST SIX MONTHS

Minute Order

10/25/2017: Minute Order

Unknown

10/25/2017: Unknown

NOTICE OF REJECTION - APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM

11/20/2017: NOTICE OF REJECTION - APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM

APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM-CIVIL

11/20/2017: APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM-CIVIL

 

Docket Entries

  • 05/30/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Jury Trial - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/16/2019
  • at 10:00 AM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/29/2019
  • at 4:45 PM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Non-Appearance Case Review

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/29/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Non-Appearance Case Review Re Notice of Settlement)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/29/2019
  • Notice of Settlement; Filed by Samuel Nathan Berger (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/29/2019
  • Certificate of Mailing for (Minute Order (Non-Appearance Case Review Re Notice of Settlement) of 04/29/2019); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/20/2018
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 4; Unknown Event Type - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/28/2018
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 4; (OSC-RE Other (Miscellaneous); Court makes order) -

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/28/2018
  • Stipulation; Filed by Los Angeles Unified School District (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/28/2018
  • Minute order entered: 2018-06-28 00:00:00; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
28 More Docket Entries
  • 12/07/2016
  • NOTICE OF ENTRY OF ORDER RE CONTINUED TRIAL, FSC, ETC.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/05/2016
  • [Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC (and Related Motion/Discovery Dates) Personal Injury Courts Only (Central District); Filed by Defendant/Respondent

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/05/2016
  • ORDER AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FSC [AND RELATED MOTION/DISCOVERY DATES]

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/31/2015
  • Declaration; Filed by Defendant/Respondent

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/18/2015
  • Answer; Filed by Los Angeles Unified School District (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/18/2015
  • ANSWER TO COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/25/2015
  • Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by Samuel Nathan Berger (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/25/2015
  • PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/20/2015
  • Complaint; Filed by Samuel Nathan Berger (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/20/2015
  • COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC588642    Hearing Date: November 19, 2020    Dept: 28

Petition to Approve Minor’s Compromise

Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows. pposing papers have been filed.

BACKGROUND

On July 20, 2015, Plaintiff Samuel Nathan Berger, by and through his guardian ad litem Robert M. Berger, filed a complaint against Defendants Los Angeles Unified School District and Jamie Dean.  Plaintiff alleges negligence in the complaint arising from an unsupervised fall that occurred on July 26, 2013.

On September 3, 2020, Petitioner Robert M. Berger filed a petition to approve a compromise of disputed claim and pending action for Claimant Samuel Nathan Berger.

An Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement) is scheduled for January 20, 2021.

PARTYS REQUEST

Petitioner Robert M. Berger (“Petitioner”) asks the Court grant the petition to approve the compromise of pending action for Claimant Samuel Nathan Berger (“Claimant”).

LEGAL STANDARD

Pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 7.952(a), Petitioner and Claimant are required to attend the hearing on the petition.  However, the Court finds that Petitioner’s and Claimant’s attendance are not required due to Claimant’s age and the settlement amount. 

DISCUSSION

The Court finds the petition is properly approved.  Petitioner has filed all required attachments and terms.  The $100,000.00 settlement is reasonable considering Claimant’s injuries have healed.  The requested $25,000.00 in attorney’s fees is reasonable considering the work performed in this action, including discovery, attending hearings, and engaging in settlement conversations.  The requested costs are adequately explained.  The Probate Department has determined the proposed special needs trust comports with applicable statutory law.

CONCLUSION

The petition is APPROVED.

Petitioner is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

The parties are directed to the header of this tentative ruling for further instructions.

Case Number: BC588642    Hearing Date: July 08, 2020    Dept: 28

Petition to Approve Minor’s Compromise

Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows. pposing papers have been filed.

BACKGROUND

On July 20, 2015, Plaintiff Samuel Nathan Berger, by and through his guardian ad litem Robert M. Berger, filed a complaint against Defendants Los Angeles Unified School District and Jamie Dean.  Plaintiff alleges negligence in the complaint arising from an unsupervised fall that occurred on July 26, 2013.

On February 11, 2020, Petitioner Robert M. Berger filed a petition to approve a compromise of pending action for Plaintiff Samuel Nathan Berger.

On March 12, 2020, the Court continued the hearing on the petition to May 1, 2020.

On April 15, 2020, the Court continued the hearing on the petition to July 8, 2020.

An Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement) is scheduled for September 8, 2020.

PARTYS REQUEST

Petitioner Robert M. Berger (“Petitioner”) asks the Court grant the petition to approve the compromise of pending action for Claimant Samuel Nathan Berger (“Claimant”).

LEGAL STANDARD

Pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 7.952(a), Petitioner and Claimant are required to attend the hearing on the petition.  However, the Court finds that Claimant’s attendance is not required due to Claimant’s age and the settlement amount. 

DISCUSSION

The Court finds the petition must be denied.

Initially, the Court finds that approval of the petition will leave unresolved liens.  Paragraph 13 states Claimant has incurred $2,684.99 in medical expenses.  $1,084.73 are to be reimbursed Petitioner.  $1,057 were paid by a non-ERISA insured plan and are not requested to be reimbursed.  This leaves unaccounted medical expenses amount to $27.73.

Additionally, the terms of the proposed special needs trust are not acceptable for nine reasons.

First, the proposed special needs trust reads as through it is a third party trust created with third party’s funds.  However, this is not a third party trust.  It is a first party trust because it is funded with Claimant’s personal injury settlement and not with Petitioner’s own funds.  A new trust should be prepared without reference to the Petitioner as the settlor.

Second, notice is required to be given at least 15 days prior to the hearing date to the governmental agencies set forth in California Probate Code section 3611, subdivision (c).  Namely, the State Director of Health Care Services (DHS), the Director of State Hospitals (DSH), and the Director of Developmental Services (DDS).  There is no evidence showing the required notice was given.

Third, the trust provides for Petitioner to be appointed the initial trustee.  Article 3.1 of the trust proposes to appoint three other individuals as successor trustees in the event of the current trustee’s inability to act.  That section should be revised to remove the names of all of the proposed successor trustees.  A provision should be made for any successor trustees to be appointed by the Court pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 7.903, subdivision (c)(3).  Section 3.2 and 3.3, providing the trustee may appoint co-trustees and allocate duties, should be removed.

Fourth, Section 3.8 should be revised to provide all trustee fees are subject to Court approval pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 7.903, subdivision (c)(8). The trustee may not take fees without a Court order.

Fifth, Section 3.9 should be revised to provide all attorney fees are subject to Court approval pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 7.903, subdivision (c)(8).

Sixth, California Rules of Court, rule 7.903, subdivision (c)(4) permits only those investments allowed under Probate Code section 2574.  Other investments require Court approval. Article 4 should be revised to the extent it conflicts with California Rules of Court, rule 7.903, subdivision (c)(4) and Los Angeles Superior Court, Local Rule 4.116, subdivision (b)(2)-(3).  Section 4.9 of Article 4 should be revised to comply with Local Rule 4.116, subdivision (b)(4).

Seventh, Section 3.12 should be revised to provide all trustees are required to post bond in the amount required under California Probate Code section 2320 pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 7.903, subdivision (c)(5).  The amount of bond is calculated according to California Rules of Court, rule 7.207.

Eighth, California Rules of Court, rule 7.903, subdivision (c)(6) requires the trustee to file accounts in the manner and frequency required by California Probate Code sections 1060 and 2620, et seq. This provision must be included in the trust.

Ninth, Petitioner needs to present evidence in the showing the requirements are met in California Probate Code section 3604, subdivision (b)(1)-(3) for the establishment of a special needs trust.

CONCLUSION

The petition is DENIED.

Petitioner is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

The parties are directed to the header of this tentative ruling for further instructions.

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases represented by Lawyer ALBRIGHT CLIFTON W.