This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 08/16/2022 at 01:43:10 (UTC).

BEHROUZ ALIPANAHI VS GINA HARRIS REY

Case Summary

On 10/11/2017 BEHROUZ ALIPANAHI filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against GINA HARRIS REY. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are FREDERICK C. SHALLER, MICHAEL E. WHITAKER and STEPHEN I. GOORVITCH. The case status is Disposed - Dismissed.
Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****9305

  • Filing Date:

    10/11/2017

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Dismissed

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

FREDERICK C. SHALLER

MICHAEL E. WHITAKER

STEPHEN I. GOORVITCH

 

Party Details

Petitioner and Plaintiff

ALIPANAHI BEHROUZ

Respondents and Defendants

HARRIS-REY GINA

DOES 1 TO 25

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Petitioner and Plaintiff Attorneys

LIBMAN MICHAEL J.

LIBMAN MICHAEL JACOB

Respondent and Defendant Attorneys

MADIGAN MICHAEL V. ESQ.

MADIGAN MICHAEL VINCENT ESQ.

 

Court Documents

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL (SETTLEMENT))

6/8/2022: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL (SETTLEMENT))

Order - Dismissal

6/8/2022: Order - Dismissal

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL (SETTLEMENT)) OF 06/08/2022

6/8/2022: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL (SETTLEMENT)) OF 06/08/2022

Request for Dismissal

7/7/2022: Request for Dismissal

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE)

10/12/2021: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE)

Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF CONTINUED FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE

10/13/2021: Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF CONTINUED FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE

Notice - NOTICE AMENDED NOTICE OF CONTINUED FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE

10/13/2021: Notice - NOTICE AMENDED NOTICE OF CONTINUED FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE

Witness List

10/13/2021: Witness List

Statement of the Case

10/13/2021: Statement of the Case

Jury Instructions

10/13/2021: Jury Instructions

Exhibit List

10/13/2021: Exhibit List

Ex Parte Application - EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER TO CONTINUE TRIAL

10/15/2021: Ex Parte Application - EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER TO CONTINUE TRIAL

Opposition - OPPOSITION EX PARTE OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER TO CONTINUE TRIAL TO 01-18-22 OR 1-24-22; DECLARATION OF EL MAHDI YOUNG

10/15/2021: Opposition - OPPOSITION EX PARTE OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER TO CONTINUE TRIAL TO 01-18-22 OR 1-24-22; DECLARATION OF EL MAHDI YOUNG

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER TO CONTINUE TRIAL)

10/18/2021: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER TO CONTINUE TRIAL)

Reply - REPLY PLAINTIFFS REPLY TO DEFENDANTS OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS EX-PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER TO CONTINUE TRIAL TO 01/18/2022 OR 01/24/2022; SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF MICHAEL J. LIBMAN;

10/18/2021: Reply - REPLY PLAINTIFFS REPLY TO DEFENDANTS OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS EX-PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER TO CONTINUE TRIAL TO 01/18/2022 OR 01/24/2022; SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF MICHAEL J. LIBMAN;

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE)

1/5/2022: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE)

Status Conference Statement

3/3/2022: Status Conference Statement

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE)

3/30/2022: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE)

59 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 07/07/2022
  • DocketRequest for Dismissal; Filed by BEHROUZ ALIPANAHI (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 06/08/2022
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 32, Michael E. Whitaker, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement) - Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Court

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 06/08/2022
  • DocketOrder - Dismissal; Filed by Clerk

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 06/08/2022
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for ((Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement)) of 06/08/2022); Filed by Clerk

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 06/08/2022
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement))); Filed by Clerk

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 05/26/2022
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 32; Jury Trial - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 05/18/2022
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 32; Jury Trial - Not Held - Continued - Stipulation

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 05/12/2022
  • Docketat 10:00 AM in Department 32; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Vacated by Court

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 05/04/2022
  • Docketat 10:00 AM in Department 32, Michael E. Whitaker, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Continued - Stipulation

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 05/04/2022
  • Docketat 1:53 PM in Department 32, Michael E. Whitaker, Presiding; Nunc Pro Tunc Order

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
86 More Docket Entries
  • 05/15/2018
  • DocketReceipt; Filed by Clerk

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 05/15/2018
  • DocketCIVIL DEPOSIT

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 05/14/2018
  • DocketANSWER TO COMPLATNT ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT GINA HARRIS-REY; DEMAND FOR TRIAL BY JURY

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 05/14/2018
  • DocketAnswer (Demand for Trial by Jury); Filed by GINA HARRIS-REY (Defendant)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 05/01/2018
  • DocketREQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 05/01/2018
  • DocketRequest for Entry of Default / Judgment; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 02/07/2018
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/11/2017
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by BEHROUZ ALIPANAHI (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/11/2017
  • DocketSUMMONS

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/11/2017
  • DocketCOMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: ****9305    Hearing Date: January 22, 2021    Dept: 32

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 32

behrouz alipanahi,

Plaintiff,

v.

gina harris-rey,

Defendant.

Case No.: ****9305

Hearing Date: January 22, 2021

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

Defendant’s MOTION TO re-open discovery

Plaintiff Behrouz Alipanahi (“Plaintiff”) sued Defendant Gina Harris-Rey (“Defendant”) based on injuries Plaintiff sustained in a motor vehicle collision. Defendant moves to re-open discovery for the purpose of deposing Plaintiff’s expert, David Orlowski, Ph.D. (“Dr. Orlowski”). The motion is denied.

Trial is currently set for October 18, 2021, which the Court set in the order of September 15, 2020. However, the Court did not re-open discovery when it set the current trial date, except for the deposition of Plaintiff. Based on the former trial date of March 23, 2020, the fact discovery cutoff was February 24, 2020, and the expert discovery cutoff was March 9, 2020. (Code Civ. Proc., ;; 2024.020, subd. (a), 2024.030, 2016.060.)

In determining whether to re-open discovery, the Court must consider the necessity of and reasons for the additional discovery, the diligence or lack thereof by the party seeking to re-open discovery in attempting to complete discovery prior to the cutoff, whether permitting the discovery will prevent the case from going forward on the trial date or will otherwise prejudice any party, and any past continuances of the trial date. (See Code Civ. Proc., ; 2024.050, subd. (b).)

Defendant relies on a declaration of her counsel, El Mahdi Young (“Young”). Young states that, on February 19, 2020, Defendant noticed Orlowski’s deposition for March 16, 2020. (See Declaration of Eh Mahdi Young, ¶ 4, Exhibit A.) Defendant did not appear on that date. (Ibid.) If Defendant noticed Orlowski’s deposition for March 16, 2020, then Defendant noticed David Orlowski’s deposition on a date after the expert discovery cut-off. (Code Civ. Proc., ; 2024.030.) Defendant has not explained why Defendant could not have deposed Orlowski prior to the expert discovery cut-off. Accordingly, the motion is denied.

In addition, neither Plaintiff nor defendant has squarely addressed whether the Court specifically denied a request to re-open discovery other than for the deposition of Plaintiff at the September 15, 2020 hearing. To wit, did Defendant request to re-open discovery to depose David Orlowski at the September 15, 2020 hearing, and did the Court deny the request? If Defendant made the request and the Court denied it, then that will be a further basis to deny Defendant’s motion. But if Defendant did not make the request to re-open discovery to depose David Orlowski at the September 15, 2020 (considering the Court’s order to re-open discovery for the limited purpose of deposing Plaintiff), then Defendant has failed to sufficient state why her failure to do so is a basis to re-open discovery. The lack of a sufficient explanation would be another basis to deny Defendant’s motion.

Defendant is to give notice of this order, and file proof of service of such.

DATED: January 22, 2021 ___________________________

Michael E. Whitaker

Judge of the Superior Court



Case Number: ****9305    Hearing Date: February 26, 2020    Dept: 32

 

 

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 32

behrouz alipanahi,

Plaintiff,

v.

gina harris-rey,

Defendant.

Case No.: ****9305

Hearing Date: February 26, 2020

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

motion to compel deposition

Background

Plaintiff Behrouz Alipanahi (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendant Gina Harris-Rey (“Defendant”) following a motor vehicle collision. Defendant moves to compel Plaintiff to appear for deposition. The unopposed motion is granted.

LEGAL STANDARD

Defendant has the right to take Plaintiff’s deposition and is entitled to take Plaintiff’s depositions without leave of court.  (See Code Civ. Proc., ; 2025.210, subd. (a).)  Per Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.450, if a party to the action fails to appear for deposition after service of a deposition notice and the party has not served a valid objection to that deposition notice, the party that noticed the deposition may move for an order to compel the deponent to attend and testify at deposition.  (Code Civ. Proc., ;2025.450, subd. (a).)  

DISCUSSION

On May 15, 2018, Defendant noticed Plaintiff’s deposition for September 21, 2018. Defendant then re-noticed Plaintiff’s deposition for November 6, 2018, December 12, 2018, May 13, 2019, June 21, 2019, September 3, 2019, and February 26, 2020. (Declaration of Michael V. Madigan, ¶¶ 3-16.) To date, Plaintiff has not yet appeared for deposition. Accordingly, the motion to compel deposition is granted. 

Defendant requests sanctions against Plaintiff and counsel-of-record.  The Court concludes that sanctions are warranted per Code of Civil Procedure, section 2025.450, subdivision (g)(1).  The Court imposes sanctions against Plaintiff and his attorney of record, Michael J. Libman, in the amount of $443.15, which Defendant requests as her reasonable expenses in bringing this motion. The Court finds that this amount is fair and reasonable under the circumstances. 

CONCLUSION AND ORDER 

Defendant’s motion to compel Plaintiff’s deposition is granted. Plaintiff is to appear for deposition at the offices of Mark R. Weiner & Associates at 655 N. Central Avenue, Suite #1125 in Glendale on March 6, 2020 at 10 a.m. unless Defendant stipulates to a different date, time, and/or location. Plaintiff and his attorney of record, Michael J. Libman, jointly and severally, are ordered to pay sanctions in the amount of $443.15 to Defendant, by and through counsel, within 30 days of service of notice of this order. Defendant shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.

DATED: February 26, 2020 ___________________________

Stephen I. Goorvitch

Judge of the Superior Court



related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases represented by Lawyer LIBMAN MICHAEL JACOB