This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 04/18/2022 at 05:23:13 (UTC).

EVOLVE MEDIA LLC VS ALLEN R MASON ET AL

Case Summary

On 12/12/2017 EVOLVE MEDIA LLC filed a Contract - Business lawsuit against ALLEN R MASON. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is MICHELLE WILLIAMS COURT. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****6086

  • Filing Date:

    12/12/2017

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Business

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

MICHELLE WILLIAMS COURT

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

EVOLVE MEDIA LLC

Defendants

PAYMENT ACCELARATION PARTNERS LLC

KOVACOGLU EMRAH

MASON ALLEN

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorneys

CHAVEZ RICARDO

HARFORD DAVID

KLEIN KEITH DOUGLAS

KLEIN KEITH DOUGLAS ESQ.

VAN HOOK JOHN

Defendant Attorneys

COLE WILLIAM

KHATIBI PAYMON A.

SUGDEN DAVID RICHARD

 

Court Documents

Application to be Admitted Pro Hac Vice

4/9/2021: Application to be Admitted Pro Hac Vice

Notice of Appearance - NOTICE OF APPEARANCE NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF JOHN A. VAN HOOK AS COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF EVOLVE MEDIA, LLC

2/16/2021: Notice of Appearance - NOTICE OF APPEARANCE NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF JOHN A. VAN HOOK AS COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF EVOLVE MEDIA, LLC

Request for Dismissal

5/7/2021: Request for Dismissal

Supplemental Declaration - (Amended)

10/3/2018: Supplemental Declaration - (Amended)

Declaration - (Amended)

10/3/2018: Declaration - (Amended)

PLAINTIFF EVOLVE MEDIA, LLC'S MOTION FOR KRRORNEYS' FEES PURSUANT TO CCP ? 128.5

7/2/2018: PLAINTIFF EVOLVE MEDIA, LLC'S MOTION FOR KRRORNEYS' FEES PURSUANT TO CCP ? 128.5

CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT -

6/21/2018: CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT -

ALLEN R. MASON AND PAYMENT ACCELERATION PARTNERS, LLC'S ANSWER

5/11/2018: ALLEN R. MASON AND PAYMENT ACCELERATION PARTNERS, LLC'S ANSWER

NOTICE OF ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO SPECIALLY SET HEARING DATE ON DEFENDANTS' SPECIAL MOTION TO STRIKE

2/22/2018: NOTICE OF ORDER ON PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION TO SPECIALLY SET HEARING DATE ON DEFENDANTS' SPECIAL MOTION TO STRIKE

Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information

8/17/2020: Notice of Change of Address or Other Contact Information

Ex Parte Application - EX PARTE APPLICATION JOINT EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL DATE AND RELATED CUT-OFF DATES BASED UPON STIPULATION OF ALL THE PARTIES; DECLARATION FOR RICARDO A

9/10/2020: Ex Parte Application - EX PARTE APPLICATION JOINT EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL DATE AND RELATED CUT-OFF DATES BASED UPON STIPULATION OF ALL THE PARTIES; DECLARATION FOR RICARDO A

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL...)

9/14/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL...)

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION TO BE ADMITTED PRO HAC VICE)

5/3/2021: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION TO BE ADMITTED PRO HAC VICE)

Complaint

10/16/2018: Complaint

Order Appointing Court Approved Reporter as Official Reporter Pro Tempore

6/7/2019: Order Appointing Court Approved Reporter as Official Reporter Pro Tempore

Substitution of Attorney

7/5/2019: Substitution of Attorney

Stipulation and Order - STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE

7/8/2019: Stipulation and Order - STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER)

7/9/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER)

207 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 10/13/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 74, Michelle Williams Court, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment - Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Party

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/08/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 74, Michelle Williams Court, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment - Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Party

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/06/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 74, Michelle Williams Court, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment - Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Party

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 08/06/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 74, Michelle Williams Court, Presiding; Hearing on Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses - Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Party

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 08/06/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 74, Michelle Williams Court, Presiding; Hearing on Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses - Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Party

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 07/16/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 74, Michelle Williams Court, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment - Not Held - Rescheduled by Party

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 07/14/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 74, Michelle Williams Court, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment - Not Held - Rescheduled by Party

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 07/09/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 74, Michelle Williams Court, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment - Not Held - Rescheduled by Party

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 06/08/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 74, Michelle Williams Court, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Sanctions - Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Party

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 06/07/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 74, Michelle Williams Court, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Sanctions - Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Party

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
380 More Docket Entries
  • 01/11/2018
  • DocketNotice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 01/11/2018
  • DocketNOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/26/2017
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/26/2017
  • DocketProof-Service/Summons; Filed by Evolve Media, LLC (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/26/2017
  • DocketProof-Service/Summons; Filed by Evolve Media, LLC (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/26/2017
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/14/2017
  • DocketSummons; Filed by Evolve Media, LLC (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/14/2017
  • DocketSUMMONS

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/12/2017
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Evolve Media, LLC (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/12/2017
  • DocketCOMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF 1. MISAPPROPRIATION OF TRADE SECRETS (CIV. CODE 3426 ET SEQ); ETC

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: ****6086    Hearing Date: February 03, 2020    Dept: 74

****6086 EVOLVE MEDIA LLC VS ALLEN R MASON ET AL

Defendant’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Special Interrogatories and for Sanctions

TENTATIVE RULING: The motion is granted in part. Plaintiff is to provide further responses as stated below within 30 days and to pay defendant Kovacoglu sanctions of $1653.75.

Interrogatory responses must be (1) the information sought, (2) an exercise of a valid option to produce writings, or (3) an objection. (Hernandez v. Sup. Ct. (2003) 112 Cal. App. 4th 285, 293.)

An interrogatory response must be as complete and straightforward as reasonably available information permits. (Code Civ. Proc., ; 2030.220, subds. (a), (b).) If a respondent does not have personal knowledge for a full response, the party shall so state and make a reasonable and good faith effort to obtain the information by inquiries. (Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal. App. 4th 390, 406; Regency Health Services, Inc. v. Sup. Ct. (1998) 64 Cal.App.4th 1496, 1504.) A response must “represent the interrogated party's present best and complete answer.” (Fuss v. Sup. Ct. (1969) 273 Cal. App. 2d 807, 816.)

When a party objects to discovery requests and also provides complete responses to the requests, nothing is left to address in a motion to compel. (American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees v. Metropolitan Water Dist. (2005) 126 Cal. App. 4th 247, 269.) Substantive responses were provided for interrogatory numbers 3, 9. No further response is required.

Interrogatory number 4 requests witnesses. Number 3 stated the libelous statements were made to Spil Games and referenced emails, which would include recipients of the emails. The response to number 4 fails to include names of these witnesses, or their contact information in response to number 5. Further response is ordered.

In response to number 6 requesting identification of documents, plaintiff failed to identify those documents in its possession, which is required even if it obtained those documents from defendants. Further response is ordered. A full response is also required for numbers 7 and 8.

It is improper for a response to merely cite to the response to a different interrogatory. Further response is ordered for number 10, 11.

No further response is ordered as to number 12, however plaintiff is cautioned that it is unlikely to be able to submit evidence regarding any publisher who was not named in discovery.

Further response is ordered as to numbers 13, 14, 15, 16 as the responses state only “some publishers” without identifying those publishers.

The response to number 17, requesting amounts past due to every publisher who demanded acceleration, the response that a spreadsheet from which information can be obtained is insufficient. At the least, a description of where on the spreadsheet the publisher and amount owed can be located is necessary. Further response is ordered.

Further response is also ordered as to number 18, 19, 20, requesting identification of publishers demanding other concessions and identification of the concessions.

Plaintiff is required to identify potential witnesses and relevant documents. A further response is ordered to number 21, 22, 23.

Sanctions

Plaintiff is to pay defendant Kovacoglu sanctions of $1653.75.



Case Number: ****6086    Hearing Date: January 31, 2020    Dept: 74

****6086 EVOLVE MEDIA LLC vs ALLEN R MASON

Defendant Kovacoglu’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Request for Production and for Sanctions

TENTATIVE RULING: The motion is GRANTED IN PART. Plaintiff is to provide further verified, code compliant responses as stated below within 30 days and to pay defendant Kovacoglu sanctions of $1747.50.

Plaintiff is not required to produce privileged documents, or documents which would reveal a trade secret. The exception is a document which contains a trade secret, but which plaintiff will use at trial. This includes communications with persons where disclosure of the communication would reveal a trade secret, like a person or company is on the trade secret list.

To the extent plaintiff claims a privilege or asserts a right to privacy over any of the responsive documents or information, plaintiff shall simultaneously serve a privilege log with the document production that, at a minimum, identifies each document for which a privilege or privacy right is claimed, its author, recipients, date of preparation, and the specific privilege or privacy right claimed.

Further responses are ordered as to request numbers 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 23, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42, 43, 44, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 76, 77, 78, 80, 81, 82, 83, 85. The responses are to be without objections except those based on privilege or trade secret.

A further response is required for numbers 46, 48, 49, 50, but the response need only identify the publishers by name who will be used at trial to support damages. Names and identifying information may be redacted as to other publishers.

To the extent that documents have already been produced, they need not be produced again but plaintiff is to identify each document responsive to each request, such as by Bates number.

No further response is required for request numbers 40, 62, 63, 84 and 86.



Case Number: ****6086    Hearing Date: January 29, 2020    Dept: 74

****6086 EVOLVE MEDIA LLC vs ALLEN R MASON ET AL

Defendant Allen Mason’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Special Interrogatories and for Sanctions and Motion to Compel Further Responses to Request for Production and for Sanctions

TENTATIVE RULING: The motions are DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to a motion for issue, evidentiary and/or terminating sanctions for failure to comply with a court order. Moving party is ordered to give notice.

The court is not inclined to issue a second order to plaintiff to comply with the court’s original order. Plaintiff has had a eighteen months to comply with the order. If defendant Mason is not satisfied there has been compliance, the remedy is not more court orders, but sanctions.

The motions are denied without prejudice to a motion for issue, evidentiary and/or terminating sanctions for failure to comply with a court order.

Sanctions

The issue of monetary sanctions is deferred pending a motion for issue, evidentiary and/or terminating sanctions.



related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where EVOLVE MEDIA LLC A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABLITY COMPANY is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer KHATIBI PAYMON A.

Latest cases represented by Lawyer SUGDEN DAVID R.