Search

Attributes

This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 07/15/2021 at 10:31:36 (UTC).

FALISHA PORTER VS PHARMAVITE, LLC

Case Summary

On 04/22/2020 FALISHA PORTER filed a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury lawsuit against PHARMAVITE, LLC. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Van Nuys Courthouse East located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are SHIRLEY K. WATKINS, SAMANTHA JESSNER, DANIEL M. CROWLEY, HUEY P. COTTON and DAVID J. COWAN. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******5471

  • Filing Date:

    04/22/2020

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Van Nuys Courthouse East

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

SHIRLEY K. WATKINS

SAMANTHA JESSNER

DANIEL M. CROWLEY

HUEY P. COTTON

DAVID J. COWAN

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

PORTER FALISHA

Defendant

PHARMAVITE LLC

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Defendant Attorney

KENNEDY TRACEY

 

Court Documents

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION TO COMPEL AN INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EVALUATION...)

7/9/2021: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION TO COMPEL AN INDEPENDENT MEDICAL EVALUATION...)

Declaration - DECLARATION OF ALLISON E. CHEFFER IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL INDEPENDENT MENTAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF FALISHA PORTER

6/10/2021: Declaration - DECLARATION OF ALLISON E. CHEFFER IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL INDEPENDENT MENTAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF FALISHA PORTER

Notice - NOTICE DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF CONTINUED CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

3/19/2021: Notice - NOTICE DEFENDANTS NOTICE OF CONTINUED CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Answer

12/15/2020: Answer

Order - ORDER PROPOSED ORDER ON MOTION TO QUASH

12/30/2020: Order - ORDER PROPOSED ORDER ON MOTION TO QUASH

Other - - OTHER - PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT

12/2/2020: Other - - OTHER - PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT

Notice - NOTICE OF PLAINTIFFS NONOPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT PHARMAVITE LLCS DEMURRER

11/30/2020: Notice - NOTICE OF PLAINTIFFS NONOPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT PHARMAVITE LLCS DEMURRER

Case Management Statement

10/15/2020: Case Management Statement

Request - REQUEST NOTION TO REQUEST FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT IN INDEXED AND ADDED TO LASC CASE

9/2/2020: Request - REQUEST NOTION TO REQUEST FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT IN INDEXED AND ADDED TO LASC CASE

Proof of Personal Service - PROOF OF PERSONAL SERVICE NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO QUASH (DIFFERENT DATES SERVED 08/27/20 - 08/28/20 - 08/30/20)

9/2/2020: Proof of Personal Service - PROOF OF PERSONAL SERVICE NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO QUASH (DIFFERENT DATES SERVED 08/27/20 - 08/28/20 - 08/30/20)

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON EX PARTE APPLICATION RE CONTINUANCE OF MOTION TO Q...)

9/9/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON EX PARTE APPLICATION RE CONTINUANCE OF MOTION TO Q...)

Case Management Statement

9/10/2020: Case Management Statement

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION TO TRANSFER)

8/19/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION TO TRANSFER)

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER RE: REASSIGNMENT TO AN INDEPENDENT CALENDAR COURT) OF 08/28/2020

8/28/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER RE: REASSIGNMENT TO AN INDEPENDENT CALENDAR COURT) OF 08/28/2020

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER (SETTING MOTION TO QUASH))

8/31/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER (SETTING MOTION TO QUASH))

Response - PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO TRANSFER CASE TO AN INDEPENDENT CALENDAR COURT AND ORDER

8/10/2020: Response - PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO TRANSFER CASE TO AN INDEPENDENT CALENDAR COURT AND ORDER

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR [PI GENERAL ORDER], STANDING ORDER RE PI PROCEDURES AND HEARING DATES

5/13/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR [PI GENERAL ORDER], STANDING ORDER RE PI PROCEDURES AND HEARING DATES

Civil Case Cover Sheet

4/22/2020: Civil Case Cover Sheet

70 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 09/17/2021
  • Hearing09/17/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department T at 6230 Sylmar Ave., Van Nuys, CA 91401; Case Management Conference

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/11/2021
  • Hearing08/11/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department T at 6230 Sylmar Ave., Van Nuys, CA 91401; Hearing on Motion to Compel an Independent Medical Evaluation

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/09/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department T, Shirley K. Watkins, Presiding; Hearing on Motion to Compel (an Independent Medical Evaluation) - Held - Continued

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/09/2021
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for ((Hearing on Motion to Compel an Independent Medical Evaluation...) of 07/09/2021); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/09/2021
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Hearing on Motion to Compel an Independent Medical Evaluation...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/07/2021
  • DocketDeclaration (DECLARATION OF ALLISON E. CHEFFER ISO REPLY ISO MOTION TO COMPEL MENTAL EXAM); Filed by Pharmavite, LLC (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/07/2021
  • DocketReply (DEFENDANT PHARMAVITE LLC REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL INDEPENDENT MENTAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF FALISHA PORTER); Filed by Pharmavite, LLC (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/29/2021
  • DocketDeclaration (Of Plaintiff Falisha Porter Regarding Request for 30 day extension due to defendants non-compliance with meet and confer requirements code of civil procedure 2016.040); Filed by Falisha Porter (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/24/2021
  • DocketSupplemental Declaration (SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF ALLISON E. CHEFFER IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL INDEPENDENT MENTAL EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF FALISHA PORTER); Filed by Pharmavite, LLC (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/23/2021
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department T, Shirley K. Watkins, Presiding; Informal Discovery Conference (IDC) - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
95 More Docket Entries
  • 08/10/2020
  • DocketPlaintiff's Response to Defendant's Motion to Transfer Case To An Independent Calendar Court and Order; Filed by Falisha Porter (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/14/2020
  • DocketMotion to Transfer; Filed by Pharmavite, LLC (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/13/2020
  • DocketPI General Order; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/13/2020
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for ([PI General Order], Standing Order re PI Procedures and Hearing Dates); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/12/2020
  • DocketSummons (on Amended Complaint (1st)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/22/2020
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Falisha Porter (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/22/2020
  • DocketComplaint ( (1st)); Filed by Falisha Porter (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/22/2020
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/22/2020
  • DocketOrder on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/22/2020
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by Falisha Porter (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

b"

Case Number: 20STCV15471 Hearing Date: July 9, 2021 Dept: T

TENTATIVE RULING

20STCV15471

Porter v Pharmavite

Defendant's motion to compel mental examination: GRANT. Good cause is shown for the mental exam as more fully set forth in the declaration of Dr. James Rosenberg. Plaintiff has placed in issue her mental and emotional condition at the time of her employment and after, including as an element of damages. Defendant seeks also to seek information by which it can defend itself as to whether the events happened.

Examination and testing will be allowed as follows: The examination will consist of a detailed interview, mental status examination, and appropriate, generally accepted standardized psychological testing and screening cognitive assessment. The testing will include, as time permits, the MMPI-2 or MMPI-2-RF, psychiatric defense examination, Personality Assessment Inventory, Mini-Mental State Examination, and Trauma Symptom Inventory-2. The exam and testing to take place over the course of 1 day between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. Plaintiff must be allowed to eat or drink or have bathroom breaks as needed. She is allowed to bring her own food and drink. There is a mandatory lunch break of 30 minutes at noon. Plaintiff is allowed to audio record the entire proceedings at her own expense. The doctor may also audio record the proceedings. Defense counsel may not be present. Plaintiff may not bring anyone with her during the exam and testing. Any persons assisting the doctor must be identified by full name to the plaintiff at the time of assistance. Dr. Rosenberg's report is to be provided to plaintiff upon completion.

Plaintiff's motion to continue the motion: DENY. The plaintiff was sent a letter and email on 3/5/2021 to enter into a stipulation for a mental exam. She did not respond. The plaintiff was sent another email on 3/16/2021. She did not respond. Between 3/16/2021 and when the motion was filed 6/10/2021, she made no effort to try to resolve the exam. No objections were filed. No protective order was sought. The exam was discussed at the IDC on 6/23/2021. She still has not responded to the defendant.

"

Case Number: 20STCV15471    Hearing Date: December 07, 2020    Dept: T

TENTATIVE RULING

PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS TO QUASH

12/7/2020

First Amended Complaint alleges:

In or around July 2018, defendant began psychological abuse against plaintiff

Plaintiff was exposed to conversations, sounds, dinging of a bell, lines of people

Plaintiff was a satisfactory employee with no reprimands

Plaintiff was exposed to hours a day of throat clearing

Plaintiff heard conversations about her personal life

Plaintiff was exposed to mimicking

Plaintiff was exposed to coordination of colors of clothes by co-workers to harassher

And other similar complaints result in constructive termination

Plaintiff asserts that she suffered from severe emotional distress and psychological abuse. She requests loss of income for the time period she was medically declared unable to work by her treating physicians.

Defendant has subpoenaed employment records on plaintiff from Target and from the City of Pasadena. Defendant states that plaintiff has disclosed in discovery that she worked for Target “during and immediately following her employment with Pharmavite.” No evidence of this was produced to the court. Defendant also seeks records of City of Pasadena. There is no information about when plaintiff worked for the City of Pasadena. For instance, was it 15 years ago or immediately before Pharmavite’s hire? Defendant does not claim that plaintiff was terminated for cause. Or that she was terminated at all. Also, it is unclear how employment with the City of Pasadena for some unspecified time prior to her employment with Pharmavite is relevant. It is defendant’s burden of establishing good cause for how these records relate to its specific defenses. Finally, the issue of whether every single page of her employment file should be open to discovery is also an issue. For instance, what if she had private conversations about health issues unrelated to the damages in this case. What if she was asked to be a witness in a claim against another co-employee? The court can envision many situations which are unrelated to issues of her damages in this case and her representations to this employer upon which it relied in hiring her. Further discussion is required.

As to the subpoena to Optum Health, by claiming emotional distress damages and inability to work for a period of time, plaintiff has waived the right to privacy with respect to records concerning her medical condition or diagnoses which prevented her from working and as to her emotional distress damages from this case.  However, the court will discuss whether records showing medical time off from other jobs is relevant or protected by privacy.

Case Number: 20STCV15471    Hearing Date: October 30, 2020    Dept: T

TENTATIVE RULING

PLAINTIFF'S MOTIONS TO QUASH

10/30/2020

First Amended Complaint alleges:

In or around July 2018, defendant began psychological abuse against plaintiff

Plaintiff was exposed to conversations, sounds, dinging of a bell, lines of people

Plaintiff was a satisfactory employee with no reprimands

Plaintiff was exposed to hours a day of throat clearing

Plaintiff heard conversations about her personal life

Plaintiff was exposed to mimicking

Plaintiff was exposed to coordination of colors of clothes by co-workers to harassher

And other similar complaints result in constructive termination

Plaintiff asserts that she suffered from severe emotional distress and psychological abuse. She requests loss of income for the time period she was medically declared unable to work by her treating physicians.

Defendant has subpoenaed employment records on plaintiff from Target and from the City of Pasadena. Defendant states that plaintiff has disclosed in discovery that she worked for Target “during and immediately following her employment with Pharmavite.” No evidence of this was produced to the court. Defendant also seeks records of City of Pasadena. There is no information about when plaintiff worked for the City of Pasadena. For instance, was it 15 years ago or immediately before Pharmavite’s hire? Defendant does not claim that plaintiff was terminated for cause. Or that she was terminated at all. Also, it is unclear how employment with the City of Pasadena for some unspecified time prior to her employment with Pharmavite is relevant. It is defendant’s burden of establishing good cause for how these records relate to its specific defenses. Finally, the issue of whether every single page of her employment file should be open to discovery is also an issue. For instance, what if she had private conversations about health issues unrelated to the damages in this case. What if she was asked to be a witness in a claim against another co-employee? The court can envision many situations which are unrelated to issues of her damages in this case and her representations to this employer upon which it relied in hiring her. Further discussion is required.

As to the subpoena to Optum Health, by claiming emotional distress damages and inability to work for a period of time, plaintiff has waived the right to privacy with respect to records concerning her medical condition or diagnoses which prevented her from working and as to her emotional distress damages from this case.  However, the court will discuss whether records showing medical time off from other jobs is relevant or protected by privacy.

Case Number: 20STCV15471    Hearing Date: August 19, 2020    Dept: 28

The court has read the motion and Plaintiff's response.  The court agrees that the case does not belong in the PI Hub and will cause it to be transferred to Dept. One for re-assignment.

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where PHARMAVITE LLC is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer KENNEDY TRACEY A.