On 06/28/2017 EM filed a Civil Right - Other Civil Right lawsuit against VISTA DEL MAR CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are MARC MARMARO and DAVID S. CUNNINGHAM III. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
Pending - Other Pending
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
DAVID S. CUNNINGHAM III
VISTA DEL MAR CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES
LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
DOES 1 TO 25
OLSON SONALI ESQ.
LOWARY MARK E. ESQ.
BERMAN BERMAN BERMAN SCHNEIDER ET AL. LLP
NORTON & MELNIK APC
LOWARY MARK ERIC
NORTON GEOFFREY PAUL
SEBASTIAN KRYSTA MONET ESQ.
PANNELL JONATHAN M. ESQ.
KEVIN S. CONLOGUE LAW OFFICE OF
JONATHAN M. PENNELL LAW OFFICE OF
CONLOGUE KEVIN S.
PENNELL JONATHAN M.
PENNELL JONATHAN M. ESQ.
CONLOGUE KEVIN S. ESQ.
11/21/2018: Other -
11/27/2018: Motion in Limine
12/3/2018: Exhibit List
8/14/2018: PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT VISTA DEL MAR CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES EX PARTE APPLICATION TO VACA1E TILE COURT'S RULING RE TRIAL PREFERENCE
8/21/2018: DEFENDANT VISTA DEL MAR CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES' NOTICE OF MOTION & MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND REQUEST FOR ADJUDICATION OF ISSUES; ETC.
8/21/2018: DECLARATION OF KRYSTA M. SEBASTIAN IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS VISTA DEL MAR CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT/ADJUDICATION
9/4/2018: NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE/MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
2/23/2018: Minute Order
3/13/2018: SEPARATE STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION
3/16/2018: PLAINTIFF'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS RESPONSIVE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (SET ONE) NUMBERS 1-2, 26-32, 34
12/22/2017: SEPARATE STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS RESPONSIVE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS (SET ONE) NUMBERS 1-2, 26-3 2, 34
11/14/2017: PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF POSTING JURY FEES
9/6/2017: NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
at 1:30 PM in Department 37; Court OrderRead MoreRead Less
Certificate of Mailing for (Minute Order (In Chambers Court Order) of 05/06/2019); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
Minute Order ( (In Chambers Court Order)); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
at 08:36 AM in Department 37; Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment - Not Held - Advanced and Continued - by CourtRead MoreRead Less
Notice of Case Reassignment and Order for Plaintiff to Give Notice; Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
Certificate of Mailing for ([Notice of Case Reassignment and Order for Plaintiff to Give Notice]); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
at 10:00 AM in Department 37; Jury Trial - Not Held - Clerical ErrorRead MoreRead Less
at 08:30 AM in Department 37; Jury Trial - Held - ContinuedRead MoreRead Less
at 08:30 AM in Department 37; Final Status Conference - Held - ContinuedRead MoreRead Less
Minute Order ((Final Status Conference; Jury Trial)); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONSRead MoreRead Less
PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONSRead MoreRead Less
Summons Issued; Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
Summons; Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
SUMMONSRead MoreRead Less
Ord Apptng Guardian Ad Litem; Filed by Plaintiff/PetitionerRead MoreRead Less
APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM - CIVILRead MoreRead Less
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES: (1) CIV. CODE 51, 52 ;ETCRead MoreRead Less
Application ; Filed by Plaintiff/PetitionerRead MoreRead Less
Complaint; Filed by Nika Carter (Legacy Party); E.M. (Legacy Party)Read MoreRead Less
Case Number: BC666709 Hearing Date: July 13, 2020 Dept: 37
HEARING DATE: July 13, 2020
CASE NUMBER: BC666709
CASE NAME: EM v. Vista Del Mar, et al.
PLAINTIFF’S PETITION TO APPROVE MINOR’S COMPROMISE WITH SPECIAL NEEDS TRUST
TENTATIVE: Plaintiff’s Petition to Approve Minor’s Compromise is CONTINUED for 60 days. Plaintiff is ordered to file within the next 30 days a Second Supplement which addresses the issues in the below probate notes.
On November 18, 2016, E.M. tripped and fell on playground equipment on the Fish Yard playground while at Vista Del Mar School that resulted in E.M. falling on her face with her lower front teeth becoming avulsed.
E.M. sustained injuries to her lower teeth, with #25 and #26 avulsed secondary to trauma at school. E.M. also suffered cuts on her lower lip due to the incident.
On the date of the incident, E.M. had her adult teeth #25 and #26 surgically removed, and in the subsequent weeks she was provided a dental bridge to provide space between her missing adult teeth until E.M. reaches about the age of 18. At the age of 18, E.M. will require two dental implants with crowns to replace her adult teeth #25 and #26
E.M. has recovered from her injuries, except that she will need two dental implants with crowns once she reaches 18 years of age. Should E.M. have any current issues with her current dental bridge that is a lingual arch retainer, a maryland bridge may be needed.
On January 14, 2020, Plaintiff’s Petition to Approve Minor’s Compromise first came on for hearing. At the hearing, the court discussed the status of Plaintiff’s supporting documents and ordered Plaintiff to file additional documentation in order to address the issues identified by the reviewing probate attorney.
On February 27, 2020, the court continued the hearing on Plaintiff’s Petition at Plaintiff’s request to April 1, 2020. On March 19, 2020, the court again continued the hearing based on current conditions including, but not limited to, the spread of Covid-19 to May 12, 2020. On April 22, 2020, the court again continued the hearing to June 22, 2020 based on current conditions.
On June 8, 2020, the June 22, 2020 hearing was continued to July 13, 2020 on the court’s own motion.
At the January 14, 2020 hearing the probate attorney identified numerous issues with Plaintiff’s petition and supporting trust documents. A Notice of Filing Supplement was filed on February 28, 2020 which addressed some of the issues previously identified. However, all of the following issues have not been addressed and, as such, a Second Supplement addressing open items below is required before the court can approve the instant petition.
Whether the Master Pooled Trust of Golden State Pooled Trust is the Best Choice: the Supplement does not sufficiently explain why the Golden State Pooled Trust is the best choice for this trust as previously requested. Instead, the Supplement simply states that the guardian ad litem directed the money to the Golden State Pooled Trust. The GAL’s preference without any reason is insufficient.
The Minor’s Condition: the probate notes previously required Plaintiff to describe the minor’s exact condition, what benefits she is currently receiving in connection with her disability and what benefits she planned to apply for. The Supplement describes the minor’s condition but does not sufficient describe the benefits she is receiving or, more importantly, is planning to apply for. The trial described the benefits being received, but not what they will be in the future.
Section 8.04: this section is not drafted in compliance with Los Angeles Superior Court rule 4.116a(2) and California Rules of Court, rule 7.903c(2).
Section 6.05, Beneficiary Advocate Section, Joinder Agreement, Fee Agreement, Advocate Acceptance of Duties: the probate notes previously indicated that Plaintiff did not justify why these sections and/or documents are in the petition. Although the supplement indicates that it has no objections with these sections being removed, these sections have not been removed. They should be.
Termination Agreement: this document remains incomplete.
Further, the proposed order regarding this petition should be revised as follows:
Judge’s signature line needs to be at end of order on last page of attachment 12.
Line 4 on 1st page of attachment 12 should say The Court further orders and determines as follows: not Judge determinations.
Note that the findings and part of the order is at the beginning of Attachment 7c(2)(b) and part of the order is on the last two pages of the order on attachment 12.
The findings and the order need to be together, either before the exhibits or at the end of the exhibits.
It is preferred that the findings and the order be at the end since the Judge has to sign on the last page of the order. Part of the order that is at the beginning of attachment 7c(2)(b) is incomplete and some of it is a duplicate of what is on attachment 12. Attachment 12 is the correct version.