This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 06/10/2019 at 22:16:21 (UTC).

TINA DAVIS VS HARBOR VILLAGE APARTMENTS

Case Summary

On 10/18/2016 TINA DAVIS filed a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury lawsuit against HARBOR VILLAGE APARTMENTS. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The case status is Disposed - Dismissed.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****7824

  • Filing Date:

    10/18/2016

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Dismissed

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

DAVIS TINA

Defendant and Respondent

HARBOR VILLAGE APARTMENTS

 

Court Documents

COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

10/18/2016: COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

Unknown

10/18/2016: Unknown

SUMMONS

10/18/2016: SUMMONS

NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

11/10/2016: NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE HEARING

11/10/2016: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE HEARING

Minute Order

2/15/2017: Minute Order

Minute Order

4/12/2017: Minute Order

Minute Order

6/30/2017: Minute Order

Minute Order

10/27/2017: Minute Order

 

Docket Entries

  • 10/27/2017
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 49; (OSC RE Dismissal; Order of Dismissal) -

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/27/2017
  • Minute order entered: 2017-10-27 00:00:00; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/27/2017
  • Minute Order

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/30/2017
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 49; Case Management Conference (Conference-Case Management; Matter continued) -

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/30/2017
  • Minute Order

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/30/2017
  • Minute order entered: 2017-06-30 00:00:00; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/12/2017
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 49; Case Management Conference (Conference-Case Management; No Appearance) -

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/12/2017
  • Minute order entered: 2017-04-12 00:00:00; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/12/2017
  • Minute Order

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/15/2017
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 49; Case Management Conference (Conference-Case Management; Court makes order pursuant to OSC) -

    Read MoreRead Less
3 More Docket Entries
  • 11/10/2016
  • OSC-RE Other (Miscellaneous); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/10/2016
  • NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/10/2016
  • Notice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/28/2016
  • at 11:00 AM in Department 308; (Order-Complex Determination; Case Determined to be non-Complex) -

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/28/2016
  • Notice of Case Relocation Rescheduling; Filed by Plaintiff

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/28/2016
  • Minute order entered: 2016-10-28 00:00:00; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/18/2016
  • Complaint; Filed by Tina Davis (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/18/2016
  • COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/18/2016
  • ORDER ON COURT FEE WAIVER

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/18/2016
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC637824    Hearing Date: July 23, 2020    Dept: 1

#1 – Tina Davis v. Harbor Village Apartments (BC637824) 

On July 6, 2017, Judge Barbara A. Meiers formally declared Tina Davis a vexatious litigant in Los Angeles Superior Court case BC642078 Tina Davis v. Walter Worth Millsap, III. The prefiling order listed vexatious litigant Tina Davis’ address as P.O. Box 561096 Los Angeles, California 90056. 

On August 1, 2019, Department 1 received a request for an OSC from Tina Davis who claims she is not the Tina Davis listed on the vexatious litigant list. Department 1 set an OSC Re: Determination that Tina Davis is not the Person Listed on the Vexatious Litigant List and issued an order on September 5, 2019. The order, which is hereby incorporated by reference, noted Ms. Davis did not explain why she requested the OSC and that the evidence she provided was insufficient to establish that she was not the same Tina Davis named in the vexatious litigant order. Ms. Davis did not appear at the September 5, 2019 hearing.

On May 21, 2020, Department 1 received a request from Tina Davis dated May 18, 2020 for a second hearing “to clear [her] name.” On June 9, 2020, the court set the second OSC for July 23, 2020.

Department 1 received the following documents from Tina Davis for consideration in connection with her second OSC:           

- A two-page letter from Tina Davis dated “7/18/20” [sic] entitled “Declaration letter for Court;”

- A one-page letter from Ruby Fontenot dated “7/18/20” [sic];

- A one-page letter from Tina Davis to Harbor Village Apartments dated “7/18/20” [sic];

- Nine pages from the Resident Charges/Payments Ledger from Related Management Company, L.P. – Harbor Village with handwritten notations;

- A copy of page 17 of the Vexatious Litigant List maintained by the Judicial Council dated February 5, 2019 with handwritten notations;

- A copy of a DMV registration card valid from March 16, 2015 to March 16, 2016 with handwritten notations;

- A copy of this court’s June 9, 2020 minute order in BC637824 with handwritten notations;

- A copy of this court’s September 5, 2019 minute order in BC637824 with handwritten notations;

- A copy of the February 15, 2017 minute order entered in BC637824 with handwritten notations;

- A copy of the October 28, 2016 minute order entered in BC637824 with handwritten notations;

- A copy of the June 30, 2017 minute order entered in BC637824 with handwritten notations;

- A copy of the June 5, 2017 minute order entered in BC642078 with handwritten notations; and

- A copy of the July 6, 2017 minute order entered in BC642078 with handwritten notations. 

In her “Declaration letter for Court,” Ms. Davis, the individual requesting this OSC, contends the declaration letter and supporting documents are submitted “to prove that I am not Tina Davis that has been placed on Vexatious Litigant List Case number #BC642078.” Ms. Davis further states:

“I don’t know how I have gotten mixed up with a person that possessed criminal mischief and unsetting [sic] behavior. This has caused me a great inconvenience I’m wishing this matter will be resolved as soon as possible. . . . I’m submitting two copies of minute order from 10/28/2016 honorable judge was Ann i Jones / minute order 02/15/2017 honorable judge Deirdre Hill both minute orders has 1011 Baycrest Lane Harbor city, Ca 90710 Harbor village apartment as the person I’m suing. The minute order had the same case number which is BC637824 So, someone combined the other Ms. Davis case with mine a clerical error. Which took place sometime in 2017.” [sic] 

On page 3 of the October 28, 2016 minute order in BC637824, Ms. Davis wrote “This my information from 2016 until 2017 when did my information get combine with another case under a different case number.” [sic] On page 1 of the June 5, 2017 minute order in BC642078, Ms. Davis wrote “This information was sent to me with someone else’s case number and information I felt that it was just a clerical error.” Ms. Davis did not indicate who sent the information to her and the June 5, 2017 order only indicates service of the order upon vexatious litigant Tina Davis at P.O. Box 561096. On page 2 of the June 5, 2017 minute order in BC642078, Ms. Davis wrote “My Case # number is BC637824 so, why did someone combine her information under my case number.” 

Ms. Davis has not made clear why she believes case BC637824 or its case information have been “combined [with] the other Ms. Davis’ case.” The court’s file in BC637824 contains no record of any interaction with the cases listed in the vexatious litigant order issued by Judge Meiers in BC642078 Tina Davis v. Walter Worth Millsap, III prior to this court’s September 5, 2019 order after the first OSC requested by Ms. Davis. Judge Meiers did not include BC637824 in her orders, none of the orders issued in BC637824 mention other civil cases, the vexatious litigant statutes, P.O. Box 561096, or the S. Hillcrest Dr. address used by vexatious litigant Tina Davis in BC642078. All of the court’s orders in BC637824 prior to September 5, 2019 were mailed to 1011 Baycrest Lane #K Harbor City, CA 90710. Thus, it appears the only intersection between BC637824 and the cases described in Judge Meiers’ June 5, 2017 minute order occurred when Ms. Davis requested the first OSC in Department 1.

A prefiling order and inclusion on the Judicial Council vexatious litigant list solely prevent named vexatious litigants from filing new litigation unless they obtain permission from Department 1 or file the litigation through an attorney. (CCP §§ 391 et seq.) Once again, Ms. Davis, did not explain why she has sought a judicial determination that she is not the same Tina Davis listed on the vexatious litigant list. Ms. Davis contends she filed only one civil case, BC637824 Tina Davis v. Harbor Village Apartments, which was dismissed without prejudice on October 27, 2017 after Ms. Davis failed to appear. As with the documents submitted in connection with the September 5, 2019 OSC, Ms. Davis did not present a proposed complaint that she seeks to file or provide any indication that the filing office rejected one of her filings.

In requesting the court set this hearing, Ms. Davis stated she wants to “clear her name.” However, unless and until Ms. Davis seeks to file new litigation within the meaning of CCP §§ 391 et seq, it is immaterial that Ms. Davis happens to share the same name with a vexatious litigant. Ms. Davis has not demonstrated any harm or prejudice caused by this coincidence. If Ms. Davis does not intend to file new litigation, there is no legal or practical purpose for the order Ms. Davis seeks. (Civ. Code, § 3532 (“The law neither does nor requires idle acts.”).)

The OSC is discharged. Tina Davis’ request for a judicial determination that she is not the individual named on the vexatious litigant list is premature and DENIED without prejudice.

Ms. Davis is advised the court shall not set another OSC unless Ms. Davis intends to file new litigation, demonstrates the clerk rejected her proposed filing, and includes the proposed litigation in her request.

Clerk shall give notice.