On 11/22/2017 CHRISTOPHER ZANGARA-PAYER filed a Contract - Business Governance lawsuit against DAVID PAYER. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are BARBARA M. SCHEPER, YOLANDA OROZCO and ELAINE LU. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
Pending - Other Pending
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
BARBARA M. SCHEPER
DOES 1 TO 10
GODWIN THOMAS H. ESQ.
GODWIN THOMAS HAMILTON ESQ.
MCDOUGALL HAROLD AUGUSTUS IV
ROSEMBLAT RAPHAEL A.
KENNEDY J. GRANT
2/2/2018: CROSS COMPLAINT OF CROSS COMPLAINANT DAVID PAYER FOR: (1) FORGERY; ETC.
12/7/2018: Notice of Case Reassignment and Order for Plaintiff to Give Notice
5/22/2019: Notice of Motion
5/24/2019: Minute Order
5/28/2019: Minute Order
6/6/2019: Ex Parte Application
6/11/2019: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)
6/11/2019: Motion for Sanctions
6/12/2019: Ex Parte Application
6/13/2019: Minute Order
6/13/2019: Minute Order
12/6/2017: NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE & OSC RE PROOF OF SERVICE
at 11:30 AM in Department 31, Yolanda Orozco, Presiding; Nunc Pro Tunc OrderRead MoreRead Less
at 09:00 AM in Department 30, Barbara M. Scheper, Presiding; Ex-Parte ProceedingsRead MoreRead Less
at 08:30 AM in Department 26, Elaine Lu, Presiding; Hearing on Ex Parte Application (for Order to Compel Deposition) - Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by CourtRead MoreRead Less
Certificate of Mailing for (Minute Order (Nunc Pro Tunc Order) of 06/13/2019); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
Minute Order ( (Ex-Parte Proceedings)); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
Minute Order ( (Nunc Pro Tunc Order)); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
Minute Order ( (Hearing on Plaintiff Christopher Zangara-Payer's Ex Parte App...)); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
Response ( to Ex Parte Application for Order; Memorandum of Points and Authorities; Declaration of J. Grant Kennedy); Filed by DAVID PAYER (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
Ex Parte Application (for Order to Compel Deposition); Filed by CHRISTOPHER ZANGARA-PAYER (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Reply (of Defendant to Opposition of Plaintiff to Defendant Motion to Compel Request for Admissions)Read MoreRead Less
ANSWER - CONTRACTRead MoreRead Less
Cross-Complaint; Filed by DAVID PAYER (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
Cross Complaint of Cross Complainant David Payer for: (1) Forgery; (2) Lack of Intent/Mistake; (3) Quiet Title; (4) Constructive Trust; (5) Accounting; (6) Restitution and Offset;; Filed by DAVID PAYER (Cross-Complainant)Read MoreRead Less
PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONSRead MoreRead Less
Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by CHRISTOPHER ZANGARA-PAYER (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE & OSC RE PROOF OF SERVICERead MoreRead Less
Notice of Case Management Conference; Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
COMPLAINTRead MoreRead Less
SUMMONSRead MoreRead Less
Complaint; Filed by CHRISTOPHER ZANGARA-PAYER (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Case Number: BC684506 Hearing Date: January 10, 2020 Dept: 26
Defense counsel, Raphael A. Rosemblat (“Counsel”), moves to be relieved as counsel for Defendant David Payer (“Client”). Counsel initially filed a motion to be relieved as counsel on December 2, 2019. On December 4, 2019, Counsel filed an amended motion to be relieved as counsel with a new proof of service.
The MC-052 form states that Counsel served Client via mail at Client’s last known mailing address, which Counsel states he has confirmed as current within 30 days of the motion by telephone.
Counsel states that there has been a break down in the attorney-client relationship such that Counsel can no longer represent Client, specifically, that communications have broken down between Client and Counsel.
The proof of service indicates that Counsel has served the moving papers on opposing counsel (Thomas Godwin) and Client (David Payer). However, Client is currently represented not only by Moving Counsel (Raphael A. Rosemblat) but also by J. Grant Kennedy, who associated in as counsel on May 29, 2019. Since the notice of association of counsel filed on May 29, 2019, Mr. Kennedy has neither filed a substitution of counsel nor moved to be relieved. Therefore, Mr. Kennedy remains counsel of record for David Payer. As such, Moving Counsel (Mr. Rosemblat) should have provided Mr. Kennedy with notice of the instant motion to be relieved.
Counsel is ordered to appear at the hearing and submit either proof of timely service of the moving papers on J. Grant Kennedy or other evidence of timely notice being given to J. Grant Kennedy of the instant motion. Failure to provide such evidence will result in a denial without prejudice of the instant motion to be relieved.
Counsel is also ordered to appear at the hearing and submit a corrected proposed order on form MC-053. The proposed order lodged with the Court has not been properly completed. Counsel must electronically submit a revised proposed before the hearing on this motion and bring a hard copy of the revised proposed to the hearing.
The proposed order must identify all upcoming hearings and list the address of the Court in all items. The Court’s records show the following upcoming hearings, which must all be listed in the revised proposed order:
In item 8 (additional hearings):
“Hearing on Motion to Continue Trial, reserved for January 31, 2020 at 8:30 am at 111 N. Hill St., Dept. 26, L.A., CA 90012”
“Hearing on Plaintiff Christopher Zangara-Payer’s Motion for Sanctions against David Payer, set for April 23, 2020 at 8:30 am at 111 N. Hill St., Dept. 26, L.A., CA 90012”
In Item 13: “Moving Counsel is ordered to serve all parties, including Client (David Payer), J. Grant Kennedy, and opposing Counsel (Thomas Godwin), with a copy of this signed order and file proof of service of such within three days. This order does not take effect until Moving Counsel files such proof of service. J. Grant Kennedy remains counsel of record for Defendant David Payer unless and until Kennedy files a substitution of counsel or successfully moves to be relieved.”
Counsel is responsible for determining if there are any other hearings scheduled or due dates for discovery for this case, including any motions hearings, which must all be listed in the proposed order. For each hearing, Counsel must state the date, time, and location of the hearing (“111 N. Hill St., Dept. 26, L.A., CA 90012”). For each due date for discovery, Counsel must identify the nature of the discovery responses that are outstanding, the due date, and the address where verified responses must be sent.
Provided that Counsel presents the supplemental evidence and corrected order described above at or before the hearing on this motion, the motion to be relieved as counsel will be granted. Otherwise, the motions will be denied without prejudice.
Counsel should note that after the orders are signed, the orders will only become effective upon the filing of a proof of service of a signed copy of each order on Client (David Payer), J. Grant Kennedy, and opposing Counsel (Thomas Godwin). Counsel will remain the attorney of record until Counsel files with the Court proof of service of the signed order. Counsel will be ordered to serve a copy of the signed orders (MC-053) on Client (David Payer), J. Grant Kennedy, and opposing Counsel (Thomas Godwin) within three days.
Case Number: BC684506 Hearing Date: November 27, 2019 Dept: 26
MINUTE ORDER ISSUED 11/21/19:
On July 15, 2019, the Court stayed this action in its entirety pending a petition to reopen probate matter BP09946 (In re: Estate of Robin E. Payer). At the status conference on October 17, 2019, the parties advised that a trial setting conference in the probate matter was set for November 7, 2019. Per Plaintiff’s request, the Court continued the Status Conference re probate matter to January 15, 2020 at 8:30 am. Based on the foregoing, the stay of the entire case is still in effect because the probate matter has not been resolved.
Prior to the stay, the parties filed and reserved several motions on the Court Reservation System (CRS), including a motion for sanctions set to be heard on 11/27/19, a motion to bifurcate reserved for hearing on 12/20/19, and a motion to continue trial set for 1/31/20. None of these motions will be heard until after the probate case has been resolved, and the stay in this case has been lifted. Therefore, the Court directs each moving party to reschedule its motion(s) on CRS to a date after which the parties anticipate a ruling from the Probate Court resolving the Probate Matter. After rescheduling the motion hearing reservation(s) on CRS, each moving party must immediately file and service notice of the new (continued) hearing date(s). If any moving party fails to reschedule its motion(s) on CRS prior to the current motion hearing date reserved on CRS, the Court will take the motion off calendar on the current hearing date, and the moving party will have to make a new CRS reservation and re-file moving papers for each such motion to be heard on a new CRS reservation date after the stay is lifted.
For example, as to Plaintiff’s motion for sanctions currently set for November 27, 2019, Plaintiff should, prior to November 27, 2019, reschedule the motion on CRS to a date after which the parties anticipate a ruling from the Probate Court and file, and Plaintiff should serve notice of the new hearing date. If by 8:30 am on 11/27/19 Plaintiff has failed to reschedule his motion for sanctions on CRS to a date after which the parties anticipate a ruling from the Probate Court, then the Court will take Plaintiff’s motion for sanctions off calendar on 11/27/19, and Plaintiff will have to make a new CRS reservation and re-file moving papers for his motion for sanctions.
The Court notes that one of the parties reserved a motion to continue trial for January 31, 2020, but that motion is moot as the trial date has been vacated. Therefore, the CRS reservation for the motion to continue trial set for January 31, 2020 is hereby cancelled.
The Court Clerk is to give notice to all parties.
Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases