Search

Attributes

This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 05/29/2019 at 01:12:01 (UTC).

DANIEL LEWANDOWSKI VS STATE FARM MUTUAL

Case Summary

On 10/24/2017 DANIEL LEWANDOWSKI filed an Other - Arbitration lawsuit against STATE FARM MUTUAL. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****1285

  • Filing Date:

    10/24/2017

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Other - Arbitration

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner

LEWANDOWSKI DANIEL

Defendant and Respondent

STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

BARRY CLIFFORD N. ESQ.

KRUEGER PAUL MICHAEL

Defendant Attorney

VASQUEZ STEPHANIE

 

Court Documents

RESPONDENT STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY'S OPPOSITION TO PETITIONER ETC.

2/2/2018: RESPONDENT STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY'S OPPOSITION TO PETITIONER ETC.

NOTICE OF COURT ORDER RE CONTINUANCE OF HEARING

3/12/2018: NOTICE OF COURT ORDER RE CONTINUANCE OF HEARING

NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT AND OF ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF TO GIVE NOTICE

3/14/2018: NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT AND OF ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF TO GIVE NOTICE

NOTICE OF CASE RE-ASSIGNMENT

3/26/2018: NOTICE OF CASE RE-ASSIGNMENT

PLAINTIFF DANIEL LEWANDOWSKI'S REPLY TO RESPONDENT STATE FARM'S OPPOSITION TO THE MOTION FOR ORDER COMPELLING ARBITRATION OF UNDER-INSURED MOTORIST CLAIM AND FOR AN ORDER SELECTING THE ARBITRATOR

4/3/2018: PLAINTIFF DANIEL LEWANDOWSKI'S REPLY TO RESPONDENT STATE FARM'S OPPOSITION TO THE MOTION FOR ORDER COMPELLING ARBITRATION OF UNDER-INSURED MOTORIST CLAIM AND FOR AN ORDER SELECTING THE ARBITRATOR

NOTICE OF COURT RULING

4/10/2018: NOTICE OF COURT RULING

Minute Order

4/10/2018: Minute Order

STIPULATION RE: CONTINUING THE OCTOBER 10, 2018 POST ARBITRATION STATUS CONFERENCE

8/7/2018: STIPULATION RE: CONTINUING THE OCTOBER 10, 2018 POST ARBITRATION STATUS CONFERENCE

STIPULATION TO ALLOW DEFENDANT SHANA RAYWOOD DBA REBECCA HAMILTON AND QBW SERVICES, LLC TO APPEAR AT MANDATORY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE BY TELEPHONE

8/7/2018: STIPULATION TO ALLOW DEFENDANT SHANA RAYWOOD DBA REBECCA HAMILTON AND QBW SERVICES, LLC TO APPEAR AT MANDATORY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE BY TELEPHONE

STIPULATION RE: CONTINUING THE OCTOBER 1O 2018 POST ARBITRATION STATUS COKFERENCE

8/7/2018: STIPULATION RE: CONTINUING THE OCTOBER 1O 2018 POST ARBITRATION STATUS COKFERENCE

NOTICE OF FIRM NAME CHANGE

9/20/2018: NOTICE OF FIRM NAME CHANGE

Minute Order

10/10/2018: Minute Order

Notice of Case Reassignment and Order for Plaintiff to Give Notice

1/22/2019: Notice of Case Reassignment and Order for Plaintiff to Give Notice

Minute Order

2/7/2019: Minute Order

PETITIONER DANIEL LEWANDOWSKI'S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR ORDER COMPELLLNG ARBITRATION OF UNDER-INSURED MOTORIST CLAIM AND FOR AN ORDER SELECTING THE ARBITRATOR

12/7/2017: PETITIONER DANIEL LEWANDOWSKI'S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR ORDER COMPELLLNG ARBITRATION OF UNDER-INSURED MOTORIST CLAIM AND FOR AN ORDER SELECTING THE ARBITRATOR

SUMMONS

12/7/2017: SUMMONS

PETITIONER, DANIEL LEWANDOWSKI'S, PETITION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION OF UNDER-INSURED MOTORIST CLAIM PURSUANT TO INS. CODE 11580.2 PURSUANT TO CODE CIV. PROC. 1281.6

10/24/2017: PETITIONER, DANIEL LEWANDOWSKI'S, PETITION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION OF UNDER-INSURED MOTORIST CLAIM PURSUANT TO INS. CODE 11580.2 PURSUANT TO CODE CIV. PROC. 1281.6

5 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 02/07/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 37; Post-Arbitration Status Conference - Not Held - Continued - Stipulation

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/07/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Post-Arbitration Status Conference)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/22/2019
  • Notice of Case Reassignment and Order for Plaintiff to Give Notice; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/10/2018
  • at 08:31 AM in Department 37; Post-Arbitration Status Conference - Held - Continued

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/10/2018
  • Minute Order ((Post-Arbitration Status Conference)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/10/2018
  • Minute order entered: 2018-10-10 00:00:00; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/20/2018
  • NOTICE OF FIRM NAME CHANGE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/20/2018
  • Notice; Filed by STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/07/2018
  • STIPULATION RE: CONTINUING THE OCTOBER 10, 2018 POST ARBITRATION STATUS CONFERENCE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/07/2018
  • STIPULATION TO ALLOW DEFENDANT SHANA RAYWOOD DBA REBECCA HAMILTON AND QBW SERVICES, LLC TO APPEAR AT MANDATORY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE BY TELEPHONE

    Read MoreRead Less
13 More Docket Entries
  • 03/14/2018
  • NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT AND OF ORDER FOR PLAINTIFF TO GIVE NOTICE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/12/2018
  • NOTICE OF COURT ORDER RE CONTINUANCE OF HEARING

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/02/2018
  • Opposition Document; Filed by Defendant/Respondent

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/02/2018
  • RESPONDENT STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY'S OPPOSITION TO PETITIONER ETC.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/07/2017
  • Notice of Hearing; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/07/2017
  • PETITIONER DANIEL LEWANDOWSKI'S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR ORDER COMPELLLNG ARBITRATION OF UNDER-INSURED MOTORIST CLAIM AND FOR AN ORDER SELECTING THE ARBITRATOR

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/07/2017
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/07/2017
  • Summons; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/24/2017
  • Petition; Filed by null

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/24/2017
  • PETITIONER, DANIEL LEWANDOWSKI'S, PETITION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION OF UNDER-INSURED MOTORIST CLAIM PURSUANT TO INS. CODE 11580.2 PURSUANT TO CODE CIV. PROC. 1281.6

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BS171285    Hearing Date: October 09, 2020    Dept: 37

HEARING DATE: October 9, 2020

CASE NUMBER: BS171285

CASE NAME: Daniel Lewandowski v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, et al.

TRIAL DATE: None

PROOF OF SERVICE: OK

MOTION: Respondent’s Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set Two

MOVING PARTY: Respondent, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company

OPPOSING PARTY: Petitioner, Daniel Lewandowski

OPPOSITION: None as of October 7, 2020

REPLY: No opposition filed.

TENTATIVE: Respondent’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set Two is granted. Petitioner is to serve verified responses without objection within 30 days. Sanctions are awarded in the amount of $805. Respondent is to give notice.

MOTION: Respondent’s Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Production, Set Three

MOVING PARTY: Respondent, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company

OPPOSING PARTY: Petitioner, Daniel Lewandowski

OPPOSITION: None as of October 7, 2020

REPLY: No opposition filed.

TENTATIVE: Respondent’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Requests for Production, Set Three is granted. Petitioner is to serve verified responses without objection within 30 days and produce documents. Sanctions are awarded in the amount of $805. Respondent is to give notice.

Background

This action arises out of a Petition to Compel Arbitration filed by Petitioner, Daniel Lewandowski (“Petitioner”) against Respondent State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (“Respondent.”) Petitioner contends that he had a valid policy with Respondent which provided for uninsured motorist coverage. Further, Petitioner contends that he was involved in a vehicle accident on September 29, 2013 because of two separate collisions between Petitioner and non-party Yumiko George (“George”) and between George and non-party Mary Funk. (“Funk”) Petitioner alleges that he proceeded with litigation against both George and Funk and that when he demanded that Respondent settle the claim, State Farm wrongfully refused to settle. Thus, Petitioner argued that arbitration must be compelled based on the insurance policy between Petitioner and Respondent.

On April 10, 2018, the court granted Petitioner’s Petition to Compel Arbitration. After numerous continuances, the court held a Post-Arbitration Status Conference on July 23, 2020. At this conference, the parties represented that arbitration had not yet been held. Thus, the court directed the parties to meet and confer to select an arbitrator within 30 days.

Respondent now moves to compel Petitioner to respond to Requests for Production, Set Three and Special Interrogatories, Set Two. No opposition has been filed to either motion.

Procedural History

Respondent served Petitioner with Requests for Production, Set Three and Special Interrogatories, Set Two on May 20, 2020. (see Declaration of Robert Gardner in Support of Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Production (“Gardner RFP Decl.”), ¶ 8, Exhibit C; Declaration of Robert Gardner in Support of Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories (“Gardner SROG Decl.”), ¶ 8, Exhibit C.) Respondent’s discovery was served by fax and by email. (Id.) Along with Respondent’s discovery, Respondent sent a letter on May 20, 2020 proposing electronic service in light of the COVID-19 pandemic. (see, e.g., Gardner RFP Decl. ¶ 9, Exhibit E.) Respondent’s letter indicated that if Petitioner did not object to the proposed electronic service, Respondent would assume Petitioner is agreeable. (Id.)

Although not required, Respondent attests that it met and conferred on many occasions to inquire into the status of Petitioner’s responses. First, Respondent’s counsel Robert Gardner that he sent a letter on July 24, 2020 informing Petitioner that responses were never received and requesting responses by July 31, 2020. (Gardner Decl. ¶ 11.) Second, Gardner attests that he attended a deposition in this matter on August 4, 2020, at which he spoke to Petitioner’s counsel and was informed that Petitioner’s counsel would “look into” the status of responses. (Gardner Decl. ¶ 12.) Third, Gardner attests that he sent another email on August 13, 2020 following up on the status of Petitioner’s responses and then a fourth email on August 19, 2020. (Gardner Decl. ¶¶ 14-15, Exhibits H-I.)

Gardner attests that he has not responded to Respondent’s discovery as of the filing of the instant motions. (Gardner Decl. ¶ 16.)

Discussion

Responses to requests for production, and interrogatories are due “within 30 days after service” of the requests or interrogatories.¿ (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.260, subd. (a), 2031.260.) 

If a party served with interrogatories or requests for production fails to timely respond, the propounding party may move for an order compelling responses. ¿(Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, subd. (b), 2031.300, subd. (b).)

Respondent has demonstrated based on the Gardner Declaration that Petitioner was properly served with Requests for Production, Set Three and Special Interrogatories, Set Two. Further, Respondent has demonstrated, although not required, that it followed up with Petitioner regarding responses on numerous occasions but that no responses were received to date.

For these reasons, Respondent’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set Two is granted. Additionally, Respondent’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Requests for Production, Set Three is granted.

Monetary Sanctions

The court may impose sanctions against any party for engaging in conduct constituting a “misuse of the discovery process.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.030 (a).) Misuse of the discovery process includes “failing to respond or submit to an authorized method of discovery.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.010 (d).)

Respondent requests sanctions in the amount of $980 for the Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Production and $1,440 for the Motion to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories. (Gardner RFP Decl. ¶ 18, Gardner SROG Decl. ¶ 18.) Gardner attests in support of each motion that his billing rate is $230 per hour and that he spent a combined 4 hours on the Requests for Production motion, and a combined 6 hours on the Special Interrogatories motion. (Id.)

The court finds that some award of sanctions is warranted. As such, the court awards a reduced amount of sanctions in the amount of $980 per motion based on the relative simplicity of issues presented in both motions.

Conclusion

Respondent’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set Two is granted. Petitioner is to serve verified responses without objection within 30 days. Sanctions are awarded in the amount of $980. Respondent is to give notice.

Respondent’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Requests for Production, Set Three is granted. Petitioner is to serve verified responses without objection within 30 days and produce documents. Sanctions are awarded in the amount of $980. Respondent is to give notice.

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company is a litigant