On 08/16/2017 ELMER R CASTELLANOS filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against ETHAN JOHN WHITED. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is STEPHEN I. GOORVITCH. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
****2522
08/16/2017
Pending - Other Pending
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
STEPHEN I. GOORVITCH
CASTELLANOS ELMER R.
PALENCIA FRANCISCO
WHITED ETHAN JOHN
DOES 1 TO 25
ZEYTUNTSYAN ANDREW ESQ.
ZEYTUNTSYAN ANDRANIK ANDREW ESQ.
GARCIA KEVIN
SHAVER KORFF & CASTRONOVO LAW O/O
KORFF EVE HELENE
8/26/2020: RETURNED MAIL - RETURNED MAIL (MINUTES OF 04-01-20)
6/25/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (NUNC PRO TUNC ORDER)
4/21/2020: Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE OF MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS
4/15/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER)
4/1/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER RE: MAY 07, 2020) OF 04/01/2020
3/17/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER: MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS) OF 03/17/2020
3/17/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER: MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS)
2/27/2020: Proof of Service - Order Granting Attorney's Motion to be Relieved as Counsel
11/15/2019: Order Granting Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil
11/15/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY (NOT "FURTHER DISCOVERY...)
11/6/2019: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER: MOTION TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL) OF 11/06/2019
10/10/2019: Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion
10/16/2019: Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel
10/10/2019: Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion
8/2/2019: Notice of Ruling
7/17/2019: Ex Parte Application - EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FSC, AND ALL TRIAL RELATED DISCOVERY AND EXPERT CUTOFF DATES
12/26/2018: [Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC (and Related Motion/Discovery Dates) Person - [Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC (and Related Motion/Discovery Dates) Perso
8/16/2017: COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES) -
Hearing03/29/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department 32 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Jury Trial
Hearing03/16/2021 at 10:00 AM in Department 32 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Final Status Conference
DocketRETURNED MAIL ((Minutes of 04-01-20)); Filed by Clerk
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 32, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; (OSC RE Dismissal) - Not Held - Vacated by Court
Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 32, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Terminating Sanctions - Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Party
Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 32, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Terminating Sanctions - Not Held - Continued - Party's Motion
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 32, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Trial Setting Conference - Held
Docketat 1:37 PM in Department 32, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Nunc Pro Tunc Order
DocketMinute Order ( (Trial Setting Conference)); Filed by Clerk
DocketMinute Order ( (Nunc Pro Tunc Order)); Filed by Clerk
Docket[Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC (and Related Motion/Discovery Dates) Personal Injury Courts Only (Central District); Filed by ETHAN JOHN WHITED (Defendant)
DocketANSWER TO COMPLAINT; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
DocketCIVIL DEPOSIT
DocketAnswer; Filed by ETHAN JOHN WHITED (Defendant)
DocketMiscellaneous-Other; Filed by ETHAN JOHN WHITED (Defendant)
DocketPROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS
DocketProof-Service/Summons; Filed by ELMER R. CASTELLANOS (Plaintiff)
DocketCOMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)
DocketComplaint; Filed by ELMER R. CASTELLANOS (Plaintiff); FRANCISCO PALENCIA (Plaintiff)
DocketSUMMONS
Case Number: BC672522 Hearing Date: July 31, 2020 Dept: 32
elmer r. castellanos, et al., Plaintiffs, v.
ethan john whited,
Defendant. |
Case No.: BC672522
Hearing Date: July 31, 2020
[TENTATIVE] order RE: motion for terminating sanctions
|
Defendant Ethan John Whited (“Defendant”) moves to dismiss the complaint of Plaintiff Elmer R. Castellanos (“Plaintiff”) as a terminating sanction. The court has discretion to impose terminating sanction when a party willfully disobeys a discovery order. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2023.010, subd. (g), 2030.290, subd. (c).) The court may impose a terminating sanction by striking a party’s pleading. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.030, subd. (d)(1).)
In its order of November 15, 2019, the Court ordered Plaintiff to serve verified responses to special interrogatories and requests for production of documents that Defendant served on Plaintiff within 60 days of notice of the order. Defendant served Plaintiff with notice of the ruling by mail on November 18, 2019. Plaintiff thus had until January 22, 2020 to serve responses in compliance with this Court’s order. As of the filing date of these motions, Plaintiff has not served responses to the discovery. Plaintiff has thus disobeyed this Court’s order of November 15, 2019. Further, Plaintiff has not opposed the motions, and has waived the right to argue that terminating sanctions are unwarranted. (Sexton v. Superior Court (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 1403, 1410.) The Court has considered the option of lesser sanctions but finds that none would compel Plaintiff’s compliance with this Court’s orders and his discovery obligations. Therefore, the motion is granted. However, the Court concludes that monetary sanctions would be futile, and, in any event, terminating sanctions are sufficient.
CONCLUSION AND ORDER
Defendant’s motion for terminating sanctions is granted. Plaintiff’s complaint against Defendant is dismissed with prejudice. Defendant shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.
DATED: July 31, 2020 ___________________________
Stephen I. Goorvitch
Judge of the Superior Court
Case Number: BC672522 Hearing Date: June 29, 2020 Dept: 32
elmer r. castellanos, et al., Plaintiffs, v.
ethan john whited,
Defendant. |
Case No.: BC672522
Hearing Date: June 29, 2020
[TENTATIVE] order RE: motion for terminating sanctions
|
Defendant Ethan John Whited (“Defendant”) moves to dismiss the complaint of Plaintiff Elmer R. Castellanos (“Plaintiff”) as a terminating sanction. The court has discretion to impose terminating sanction when a party willfully disobeys a discovery order. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2023.010, subd. (g), 2030.290, subd. (c).) The court may impose a terminating sanction by striking a party’s pleading. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.030, subd. (d)(1).)
In its order of November 15, 2019, the Court ordered Plaintiff to serve verified responses to special interrogatories and requests for production of documents that Defendant served on Plaintiff within 60 days of notice of the order. Defendant served Plaintiff with notice of the ruling by mail on November 18, 2019. Plaintiff thus had until January 22, 2020 to serve responses in compliance with this Court’s order. As of the filing date of these motions, Plaintiff has not served responses to the discovery. Plaintiff has thus disobeyed this Court’s order of November 15, 2019. Further, Plaintiff has not opposed the motions, and has waived the right to argue that terminating sanctions are unwarranted. (Sexton v. Superior Court (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 1403, 1410.) The Court has considered the option of lesser sanctions but finds that none would compel Plaintiff’s compliance with this Court’s orders and his discovery obligations. Therefore, the motion is granted. However, the Court concludes that monetary sanctions would be futile, and, in any event, terminating sanctions are sufficient.
CONCLUSION AND ORDER
Defendant’s motion for terminating sanctions is granted. Plaintiff’s complaint against Defendant is dismissed with prejudice. Defendant shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.
DATED: June 29, 2020 ___________________________
Stephen I. Goorvitch
Judge of the Superior Court
Case Number: BC672522 Hearing Date: November 15, 2019 Dept: 5
elmer r. castellanos, et al., Plaintiffs, v.
ethan john whited,
Defendant. |
Case No.: BC672522
Hearing Date: November 15, 2019
[TENTATIVE] order RE: MOTION TO BE RELIEVED
TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE
|
The Court’s tentative order is to grant Plaintiff’s counsel’s motion to be relieved. The Court’s tentative order is to advance and vacate the current final status conference and trial dates and set the following dates:
Final Status Conference: April 8, 2020, at 10:00 a.m.
Trial Date: April 22, 2020, at 8:30 a.m.
The Court’s tentative order is to set the discovery and motions cut-off based upon the new trial date. Any party who does not appear at the hearing shall waive their right to be heard and shall submit to these tentative orders.
elmer r. castellanos, et al., Plaintiffs, v.
ethan john whited,
Defendant. |
Case No.: BC672522
Hearing Date: November 15, 2019
[TENTATIVE] order RE: motions to compel discovery responses
|
Defendant Ethan John Whited (“Defendant”) moves to compel responses from Plaintiff Elmer R. Castellanos (“Plaintiff”) to: (1) Request for Production of Documents, Set Two (“RPD”); and (2) Special Interrogatories, Set Two (“SROG”). The motions are granted.
Defendant served the discovery at issue on Plaintiff by mail on July 17, 2019. Defendant granted Plaintiff multiple extensions of time to respond through September 9, 2019. As of the filing date of these motions, Defendant has not received responses from Plaintiff. Accordingly, the motions to compel responses to the RPD and SROG are granted per Code of Civil Procedure sections 2030.290 and 2031.300. Plaintiff is ordered to serve responses to Defendants’ RPD and SROG, without objections, within 60 days of notice of this order.
Defendants seek sanctions in connection with the motions. The Court concludes that Plaintiff’s failure to respond to the discovery is an abuse of the discovery process. The Court awards sanctions against Plaintiff (but not counsel-of-record) in the amount of $860, which represents four hours of attorney time to prepare the motions and attend the hearing at $185 per hour, plus two filing fees of $60 each.
CONCLUSION AND ORDER
Defendant’s motions to compel responses to the RPD and SROG are granted per Code of Civil Procedure sections 2030.290 and 2031.300. Plaintiff is ordered to serve verified responses, without objections, within sixty (60) days of notice of this order.
Plaintiff shall pay monetary sanctions in the amount of $860 to Defendant, by and through counsel, within sixty (60) days of notice of this order.
Defendant is ordered to provide notice of this order and file proof of service of such.
DATED: November 15, 2019 ___________________________
Stephen I. Goorvitch
Judge of the Superior Court
Case Number: BC672522 Hearing Date: November 08, 2019 Dept: 5
Elmer R. Castellanos, et al. v. Ethan John Whited
Case No. BC672522
Motion to be Relieved
The hearing on counsel's motion to be relieved is continued to November 15, 2019, at 1:30 p.m. Should the Court grant the motion, the Court intends to vacate the final status conference and trial dates and will hold a trial setting conference to select new dates. Any party who does not appear at the hearing shall waive their right to be heard and shall submit to any final status conference and trial dates the Court selects, as well as any decision the Court makes on the discovery and motions cut-off.