This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 10/23/2020 at 01:12:08 (UTC).

ALFONSO LARA VS CITY OF SANTA MONICA ET AL

Case Summary

On 02/15/2018 ALFONSO LARA filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against CITY OF SANTA MONICA. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is STEPHEN I. GOORVITCH. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****3323

  • Filing Date:

    02/15/2018

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

STEPHEN I. GOORVITCH

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner

LARA ALFONSO

Defendants and Respondents

SANTA MONICA'S BIG BLUE BUS

PARKER GREGORY THELTON

DOES 1 TO 50

SANTA MONICA CITY OF

BUS SANTA MONICA'S BIG BLUE

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

POURSALIMI PAYAM Y. ESQ.

POURSALIMI PAYAM Y ESQ.

Defendant Attorney

ROHR CAROL ANN

 

Court Documents

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE)

10/21/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE)

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER RE: JUNE 18, 2020) OF 04/27/2020

4/27/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER RE: JUNE 18, 2020) OF 04/27/2020

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER RE: JUNE 18, 2020)

4/27/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER RE: JUNE 18, 2020)

[Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC (and Related Motion/Discovery Dates) Person - [PROPOSED ORDER] AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FSC (AND RELATED MOTION/DISCOVERY DATES) PERSO

3/23/2020: [Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC (and Related Motion/Discovery Dates) Person - [PROPOSED ORDER] AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FSC (AND RELATED MOTION/DISCOVERY DATES) PERSO

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION TO BIFURCATE)

1/9/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION TO BIFURCATE)

Notice of Ruling

1/10/2020: Notice of Ruling

Motion to Bifurcate

12/9/2019: Motion to Bifurcate

Notice of Ruling

9/18/2019: Notice of Ruling

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER CONTINUING FINAL ST...)

9/18/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER CONTINUING FINAL ST...)

Ex Parte Application - EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER CONTINUING FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE AND TRIAL WITH ALL DISCOVERY AND MOTION CUT-OFF DATES BASED UPON THE NEW TRIAL DATE-UNOPPOSED

9/18/2019: Ex Parte Application - EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER CONTINUING FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE AND TRIAL WITH ALL DISCOVERY AND MOTION CUT-OFF DATES BASED UPON THE NEW TRIAL DATE-UNOPPOSED

Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

8/12/2019: Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS -

2/26/2018: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS -

[Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC (and Related Motion/Discovery Dates) Person - [PROPOSED ORDER] AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FSC (AND RELATED MOTION/DISCOVERY DATES) PERSO

3/15/2019: [Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC (and Related Motion/Discovery Dates) Person - [PROPOSED ORDER] AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FSC (AND RELATED MOTION/DISCOVERY DATES) PERSO

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY DUTY

3/23/2018: ANSWER TO COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY DUTY

PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS -

3/19/2018: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS -

PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS -

3/10/2018: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS -

SUMMONS -

2/15/2018: SUMMONS -

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

2/15/2018: COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES) -

8 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 09/23/2021
  • Hearing09/23/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department 32 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/09/2021
  • Hearing09/09/2021 at 10:00 AM in Department 32 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Final Status Conference

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/21/2020
  • Docketat 10:30 AM in Department 32, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Trial Setting Conference - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/21/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Trial Setting Conference)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/30/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 32, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Jury Trial ((1x3mos)) - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/18/2020
  • Docketat 10:00 AM in Department 32, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/27/2020
  • Docketat 09:14 AM in Department 32, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Court Order

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/27/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Court Order re: June 18, 2020)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/27/2020
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for ((Court Order re: June 18, 2020) of 04/27/2020); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/20/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 32, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Jury Trial ((1x3mos)) - Not Held - Continued - Stipulation

    Read MoreRead Less
22 More Docket Entries
  • 03/19/2018
  • DocketProof-Service/Summons; Filed by Alfonso Lara (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/19/2018
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/08/2018
  • DocketProof-Service/Summons; Filed by Alfonso Lara (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/08/2018
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/26/2018
  • DocketProof-Service/Summons; Filed by Alfonso Lara (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/26/2018
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/15/2018
  • DocketSUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/15/2018
  • DocketCOMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/15/2018
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Alfonso Lara (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/15/2018
  • DocketSummons; Filed by Alfonso Lara (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC693323    Hearing Date: January 09, 2020    Dept: 5

 

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 5

ALFONSO LARA,

Plaintiff,

v.

CITY OF SANTA MONICA, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: BC693323

Hearing Date: January 9, 2020

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

motion to bifurcate liability and damages at trial

Defendants City of Santa Monica and Gregory Thelton Parker move to bifurcate the issue of liability from the issue of damages at trial. Defendants allege that Parker “experienced a documented stroke while operating a Big Blue Bus on September 25, 2017,” which “interfered with his ability to control the bus and resulted in a collision with the vehicle driven by Plaintiff, Alfonso Lara.” (Defendants’ Motion, at p. 1.) Defendants seek to try the issue of liability first, arguing that liability is disputed and the “Sudden Emergency Doctrine” would provide a complete defense.

Under Code of Civil Procedure section 598, “The court may, when the convenience of witnesses, the ends of justice, or the economy and efficiency of handling the litigation would be promoted thereby . . . make an order . . . that the trial of any issue or any part thereof shall precede the trial of any other issue or any part thereof in the case[.]”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 598.) In this case, Defendants have failed to demonstrate that trial of liability separately from damages would result in efficiencies. Instead, it is likely that it would result in duplication of effort.  In order to prevail against Defendants, Plaintiff will have to demonstrate that Defendants were negligent and that Defendants’ negligence caused Plaintiff’s injuries. It is logical and efficient for Plaintiff to present evidence on how and why Defendants were negligent at the same time as Plaintiff presents evidence on the injuries that resulted from that accident. Defendants have not demonstrated that the damages Plaintiff claims are so complex or attenuated from the accident that it would be more efficient to try damages separately. Indeed, given the relatively straightforward nature of this case, bifurcation is not necessary in this case.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Defendants’ motion for bifurcation is denied. This order is without prejudice to Defendants raising this issue before the trial court. A trial court may “on its own motion . . . make such an order at any time.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 598.) Defendants shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.

DATED: January 9, 2020 ___________________________

Hon. Stephen I. Goorvitch

Judge of the Superior Court