This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 03/04/2021 at 11:23:28 (UTC).

ELMER ARMANDO JACINTO PALMA ET AL VS LOS ANGELES COUNTY MET

Case Summary

On 02/03/2017 ELMER ARMANDO JACINTO PALMA filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against LOS ANGELES COUNTY MET. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are BENNY C. OSORIO, ELAINE LU, YOLANDA OROZCO, DEBORAH L. CHRISTIAN, STEPHEN I. GOORVITCH and MICHAEL E. WHITAKER. The case status is Other.

Case Details Parties Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****9172

  • Filing Date:

    02/03/2017

  • Case Status:

    Other

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

BENNY C. OSORIO

ELAINE LU

YOLANDA OROZCO

DEBORAH L. CHRISTIAN

STEPHEN I. GOORVITCH

MICHAEL E. WHITAKER

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs and Petitioners

LOCKETTE CAMILLE DIANE

PALMA ELMER ARMANDO JACINTO

Defendants, Respondents and Not Classified By Court

DOES 1 TO 25

LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN

METRO

MENDEZ MARIO DANIEL BORRAYO

RUSSELL NORMAN

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorney

VAZIRI SIAMAK ESQ.

Defendant and Respondent Attorneys

LA FOLLETTE JOHNSON DE HAAS FESLER

PLUMA GILLIAN

Court Documents

Court documents are not available for this case.

 

Docket Entries

  • 11/18/2020
  • DocketRequest for Dismissal ((not entered)); Filed by Elmer Armando Jacinto Palma (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/23/2020
  • Docketat 3:30 PM in Department 32, Michael E. Whitaker, Presiding; Hearing on Demurrer - without Motion to Strike - Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Party

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/23/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Hearing on Demurrer - without Motion to Strike)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/21/2020
  • DocketNotice (of Taking Defendants Demurrer to Cross Complainant Norman Russell); Filed by Los Angeles County Metropolitan (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/04/2020
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 32, Michael E. Whitaker, Presiding; Hearing on Demurrer - without Motion to Strike - Not Held - Continued - Court's Motion

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/28/2020
  • DocketNotice (of continuance of Defendant's Demurrer); Filed by Los Angeles County Metropolitan (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/17/2020
  • Docketat 08:48 AM in Department 32, Michael E. Whitaker, Presiding; Court Order

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/17/2020
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for ((Court Order) of 04/17/2020); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/17/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Court Order)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/18/2020
  • DocketDemurrer - without Motion to Strike; Filed by Los Angeles County Metropolitan (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
58 More Docket Entries
  • 07/28/2017
  • DocketNotice of Related Cases

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/03/2017
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by Los Angeles County Metropolitan (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/03/2017
  • DocketANSWER TO COMPLAINT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/03/2017
  • DocketDEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/03/2017
  • DocketDemand for Jury Trial; Filed by Los Angeles County Metropolitan (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/16/2017
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/16/2017
  • DocketProof-Service/Summons; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/03/2017
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Camille Diane Lockette (Plaintiff); Elmer Armando Jacinto Palma (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/03/2017
  • DocketCOMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES: GOVERNMENT CLAIM LIABILITY - CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SEC. 815.2.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/03/2017
  • DocketSUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC649172    Hearing Date: July 23, 2020    Dept: 32

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 32

elmer armando jacinto palma, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

Los Angeles County Metropolitan transportation authority,

Defendant.

Case No.: BC649172, consolidated with

BC654567, BC646257, and

BC664475

Hearing Date: July 23, 2020

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

DEMURRER TO Cross-complaint

Background

Plaintiffs Elmer Armando Jacinto Palma and Camille Diane Lockette (“Plaintiffs”) filed this action against Defendant Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (“Metro”) following a motor vehicle collision. Plaintiffs later named Defendant Norman Russell (“Russell”) via Doe amendment. Russell then filed a cross-complaint against Metro. Metro demurs to the cross-complaint, which Russell opposes. The demurrer is sustained with leave to amend.

LEGAL STANDARD

“It is black letter law that a demurrer tests the legal sufficiency of the allegations in a complaint.”  (Lewis v. Safeway, Inc. (2015) 235 Cal.App.4th 385, 388.)  In ruling on a demurrer, the court must “liberally construe[]” the allegations of the complaint.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 452.) “This rule of liberal construction means that the reviewing court draws inferences favorable to the plaintiff, not the defendant.”  (Perez v. Golden Empire Transit Dist. (2012) 209 Cal.App.4th 1228, 1238.)

DISCUSSION

Metro alleges that Russell has not alleged compliance with the claims presentation requirement. Per the Government Claims Act, a party with a claim for damages against a public entity must first file claim directly with that entity. The party may file a lawsuit only if the public entity denies or rejects the claim. (Gov. Code §§ 905, 945.4; City of Ontario v. Superior Court (1993) 12 Cal.App.4th 894.) The claims presentation requirement provides the public entity with an opportunity to evaluate the claim and decide whether to pay on the claim. (Roberts v. County of Los Angeles (2009) 175 Cal.App.4th 474.) Failure to allege facts demonstrating compliance with the claims presentation requirement subjects the complaint to a general demurrer. (State of Calif. v. Superior Court (2004) 32 Cal.4th 1234, 1239.) Russell does not allege any facts in his cross-complaint regarding his compliance with the claims presentation requirement.

Conclusion and Order

Metro’s demurrer is sustained with leave to amend. Russell may file an amended cross-complaint within ten (10) days of notice. Metro shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.

DATED: July 23, 2020 ___________________________

Stephen I. Goorvitch

Judge of the Superior Court

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where METRO is a litigant