Search

Attributes

This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 04/20/2021 at 13:30:30 (UTC).

CINDA MICKOLS VS DR. MARK ANDREW LIKER, ET AL.

Case Summary

On 10/09/2020 CINDA MICKOLS filed a Personal Injury - Medical Malpractice lawsuit against DR MARK ANDREW LIKER. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are SAMANTHA JESSNER, DANIEL J. BUCKLEY, DAVID J. COWAN, KRISTIN S. ESCALANTE and SERENA R. MURILLO. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******8847

  • Filing Date:

    10/09/2020

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Medical Malpractice

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Spring Street Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

SAMANTHA JESSNER

DANIEL J. BUCKLEY

DAVID J. COWAN

KRISTIN S. ESCALANTE

SERENA R. MURILLO

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

MICKOLS CINDA

Defendants

MAGALONG DR. MARY GRACE

CHUPA RFNA BARRY

LIKER DR. MARK ANDREW

RUBIACO DR. GARY S.

ASH DR. LORRAINE M.

CHEN DR. JEFFREY

ABUMERI DR. IMAD

ADVENTIST HEALTH BAKERSFIELD

JOSHI DR. SUDHIR SHYAM

SAN JOAQUIN COMMUNITY HOSPITAL

SAN JOAQUIN COMMUNITY COLLEGE

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorneys

KOCAJ ADAM

HABBAS SAMER SAMI ESQ.

Defendant Attorneys

TOMLINSON RODNEY G.

TOMLINSON RODNEY GLEN ESQ.

CORSON PAUL MEIER

VAZQUEZ ANDREA DAWN

LAW YUK K.

WHITE WILLIAM MERLE

LAW YUK KWONG ESQ.

OZERAN DAVID JAY ESQ.

GONZALEZ MICHAEL DALE ESQ.

WEND CHRISTOPHER P.

CORSON PAUL MEIER ESQ.

 

Court Documents

Notice of Related Case - NOTICE OF RELATED CASE RE: 20STCV38847 AND BCV - 20-102350 SDS (BAKERSFIELD)

12/10/2020: Notice of Related Case - NOTICE OF RELATED CASE RE: 20STCV38847 AND BCV - 20-102350 SDS (BAKERSFIELD)

Notice of Ruling

1/6/2021: Notice of Ruling

Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

1/14/2021: Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

Answer

1/19/2021: Answer

Reply - REPLY REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT LORRAINE M. ASH, D.O.'S MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE TO KERN COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

12/29/2020: Reply - REPLY REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT LORRAINE M. ASH, D.O.'S MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE TO KERN COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT

Request for Judicial Notice

12/10/2020: Request for Judicial Notice

Opposition - OPPOSITION TO CHANGE VENUE

12/8/2020: Opposition - OPPOSITION TO CHANGE VENUE

Notice - NOTICE NTC OF CHANGE OF HEARING DATE, TIME & LOCATION

11/24/2020: Notice - NOTICE NTC OF CHANGE OF HEARING DATE, TIME & LOCATION

Answer

11/20/2020: Answer

Demand for Jury Trial

11/23/2020: Demand for Jury Trial

Answer

11/23/2020: Answer

Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

11/18/2020: Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

Motion re: - MOTION RE: MOTION RE: (JOINDER TO MOTION TO CHANGE VENUE)

11/18/2020: Motion re: - MOTION RE: MOTION RE: (JOINDER TO MOTION TO CHANGE VENUE)

Answer

11/18/2020: Answer

Motion to Transfer

11/13/2020: Motion to Transfer

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR [PI GENERAL ORDER], STANDING ORDER RE PI PROCEDURES AND HEARING DATE

10/22/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR [PI GENERAL ORDER], STANDING ORDER RE PI PROCEDURES AND HEARING DATE

PI General Order

10/22/2020: PI General Order

Notice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case

10/9/2020: Notice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case

39 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 10/06/2023
  • Hearing10/06/2023 at 08:30 AM in Department 29 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/08/2022
  • Hearing04/08/2022 at 08:30 AM in Department 29 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/25/2022
  • Hearing03/25/2022 at 10:00 AM in Department 29 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Final Status Conference

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/03/2021
  • DocketNotice (Notice of Designation of Trial Attorney); Filed by San Joaquin Community Hospital - dba - Adventist Health Bakersfield Erroneously Sued As Adventist Health Bakersfield (Defendant); Barry Chupa RFNA (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/03/2021
  • DocketNotice of Posting of Jury Fees; Filed by San Joaquin Community Hospital - dba - Adventist Health Bakersfield Erroneously Sued As Adventist Health Bakersfield (Defendant); Barry Chupa RFNA (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/03/2021
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by San Joaquin Community Hospital - dba - Adventist Health Bakersfield Erroneously Sued As Adventist Health Bakersfield (Defendant); Barry Chupa RFNA (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/01/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 29, Serena R. Murillo, Presiding; Hearing on Motion - Other (Notice of Joinder and Joinder to Defendant Lorraine M. Ash, D.O.'s Motion to Change Venue; Memorandum of Points and Authorities; and Declaration of Tara M. Tarasen) - Not Held - Clerical Error

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/01/2021
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 29, Serena R. Murillo, Presiding; Hearing on Motion - Other (Notice of Joinder and Joinder to Defendant Lorraine M. Ash, D.O.'s Motion to Change Venue; Memorandum of Points and Authorities; and Declaration of Tara M. Tarasen) - Not Held - Continued - Court's Motion

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/25/2021
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 29, Serena R. Murillo, Presiding; Hearing on Motion - Other (Joinder to Motion to Change Venue) - Not Held - Continued - Party's Motion

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/19/2021
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by Dr. Lorraine M. Ash (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
46 More Docket Entries
  • 11/10/2020
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by Cinda Mickols (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/10/2020
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by Cinda Mickols (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/10/2020
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by Cinda Mickols (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/10/2020
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by Cinda Mickols (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/22/2020
  • DocketPI General Order; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/22/2020
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for ([PI General Order], Standing Order re PI Procedures and Hearing Date); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/09/2020
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by Cinda Mickols (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/09/2020
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/09/2020
  • DocketSummons (on Complaint); Filed by Cinda Mickols (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/09/2020
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Cinda Mickols (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 20STCV38847    Hearing Date: January 06, 2021    Dept: 29

Mickols v. Liker, et al. 20STCV38847

Motion to Change Venue filed by Defendant Lorraine M. Ash, D.O. and joined by Defendants Jeffrey Chen, D.O.; Gary S. Rubiaco, M.D.; Mary Grace Magalong, M.D.; and San Joaquin Community Hospital dba Adventist Health Bakersfield (erroneously sued as San Joaquin Community Hospital and Adventist Health Bakersfield) is DENIED. (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 395, subd. (a); 397, subd. (a).) Defendants have not met their burden of establishing that ALL defendants reside outside of Los Angeles County.

DISCUSSION

In the complaint, Plaintiff Cinda Mickols alleges that she was injured by the alleged professional negligence of Defendants Dr. Mark Andrew Liker; Adventist Health Bakersfield; San Joaquin Community Hospital; Dr. Sudhir Shyam Joshi; Dr. Imad Abumeri; Dr. Mary Grace Magalong; Dr. Gary S. Rubiaco; Dr. Lorraine M. Ash; Dr. Jeffrey Chen; and Dr. Barry Chupa RFNA.

Lorraine M. Ash, D.O., moves for a change of venue to Kern County. The sole basis for the motion is that the action was brought in the wrong court as set forth in Code of Civil Procedure section 395, subdivision (a). The motion was joined by Defendants Jeffrey Chen, D.O.; Gary S. Rubiaco, M.D.; Mary Grace Magalong, M.D., and San Joaquin Community Hospital dba Adventist Health Bakersfield (erroneously sued as San Joaquin Community Hospital and Adventist Health Bakersfield).

In an action for personal injury or wrongful death, venue is proper “in either the county where the injury occurs or the injury causing death occurs or the county where the defendants, or some of them reside at the commencement of the action.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 395.) The Court may, on motion, change the place of trial “[w]hen the court designated in the complaint is not the proper court.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 397, subd. (a)).

As the moving party, defendant must overcome the presumption that plaintiff has selected a proper venue. “[I]t is the moving defendant's burden to demonstrate that the plaintiff's venue selection is not proper under any of the statutory grounds.” (Fontaine v. Sup.Ct. (Cashcall, Inc.) (2009) 175 Cal. App. 4th 830, 836.) Here, the injury allegedly occurred in Kern County, but venue is still proper in Los Angeles County if at least one defendant lives in Los Angeles.

Where the complaint alleges defendant's local residence as the basis for venue, defendant must establish he or she resided elsewhere at the time the action was commenced; and, if there are several defendants, that no codefendant resided in the county in which plaintiff filed suit. (Sequoia Pine Mills, Inc. v. Sup.Ct. (Avram) (1968) 258 Cal. App. 2d 65, 68.)

Further, where the complaint and record are silent as to the residence of one or more of the defendants, “the presumption is that the defendants are residents of the county wherein the action is commenced” and the burden of proof is on the party seeking to transfer venue that ALL defendants reside in a different county. (Id.)

Here, the evidence shows that Lorraine Ash D.O.; Jeffrey Chen D.O.; Gary S. Ribiaco M.D. and Mary Grace Magalong, M.D reside and have their principal places of business in Kern County and that San Joaquin Community Hospital dba Adventist Health Bakersfield (erroneously sued as San Joaquin Community Hospital and Adventist Health Bakersfield) has its principal place of business in Kern County. Further, the complaint alleges that Defendants Chupa, Joshi, and Abumeri “practic[ed] [his or her] profession in Kern County.” The court assumes, without deciding, that an allegation that a professional defendant “practices [his or her] profession” in a county is akin to an admission that the defendant resides in that county for the purposes of the venue statute.

The moving and joining defendants, however, have presented no evidence regarding the residence of Defendant Dr. Mark Andrew Liker. Plaintiff is entitled to a presumption that Defendant Liker resides in Los Angeles, and the parties seeking to transfer venue bear the burden of proving that he resides elsewhere. The moving and joining defendants thus have not met their burden of establishing that the action was filed in the wrong court.

The moving and joining defendants have not moved for a transfer of venue pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 397, subd. (c), on the grounds that “the convenience of witnesses and the ends of justice will be promoted by the change,” and thus the court does not reach that issue. The court notes that it is generally only the convenience of nonparty witnesses that is considered in a motion to transfer on this ground. (Rios v. Lacey Trucking Co. (1954) 123 Cal. App. 2d 865, 868; Rothschild v. Superior Court of San Francisco (1963) 216 Cal. App. 2d 778, 780.) Absent extraordinary circumstances, the convenience of a party or the employees of a party is not to be considered. (Id.) Further, such a motion may not be based on hearsay declarations of counsel; rather, declarations from the witnesses themselves must be submitted. (Lieppman v. Lieber (1986) 180 Cal. App. 3d 914, 919; Tutor-Saliba-Perini Joint Venture v. Sup.Ct. (San Diego Unified Port Dist.) (1991) 233 Cal. App. 3d 736, 744; Union Trust Life Ins. Co. v. Superior Court (1968) 259 Cal. App. 2d 23, 25.) No such evidence has been presented, and the court does not construe the motion to have been brought under subdivision (c) of section 397.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where SAN JOAQUIN COMMUNITY HOSPITAL, A CALIFORNIA CORP. is a litigant

Latest cases where ADVENTIST HEALTH WHITE MEMORIAL is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer HABBAS, SAMER

Latest cases represented by Lawyer KOCAJ ADAM