Search

Attributes

This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 04/12/2021 at 17:34:24 (UTC).

GEOFFREY WALKER VS LEISLY MICHAEL CRUZ-GOMEZ, ET AL.

Case Summary

On 11/03/2020 GEOFFREY WALKER filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against LEISLY MICHAEL CRUZ-GOMEZ. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******2112

  • Filing Date:

    11/03/2020

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Spring Street Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

WALKER GEOFFREY

Defendants

DOES 1 TO 10

CRUZ-GOMEZ LEISLY MICHAEL

Not Classified By Court

LOYA CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY INC.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

WAECKER MARK

 

Court Documents

Motion for Leave - MOTION FOR LEAVE NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE, TO STAY DEFAULT AGAINST INSURED

2/18/2021: Motion for Leave - MOTION FOR LEAVE NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE, TO STAY DEFAULT AGAINST INSURED

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR [PI GENERAL ORDER]

12/2/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR [PI GENERAL ORDER]

PI General Order

12/2/2020: PI General Order

Proof of Personal Service

11/16/2020: Proof of Personal Service

Summons - SUMMONS ON COMPLAINT

11/3/2020: Summons - SUMMONS ON COMPLAINT

Civil Case Cover Sheet

11/3/2020: Civil Case Cover Sheet

Notice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case

11/3/2020: Notice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case

Complaint

11/3/2020: Complaint

 

Docket Entries

  • 10/31/2023
  • Hearing10/31/2023 at 08:30 AM in Department 31 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/03/2022
  • Hearing05/03/2022 at 08:30 AM in Department 31 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Non-Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/19/2022
  • Hearing04/19/2022 at 10:00 AM in Department 31 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Final Status Conference

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/22/2021
  • Hearing04/22/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department 31 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Hearing on Motion for Leave to Intervene

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/18/2021
  • DocketMotion for Leave (Notice of Motion and Motion for Leave to Intervene, to stay Default Against Insured); Filed by Leisly Michael Cruz-Gomez (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/02/2020
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for ([PI General Order]); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/02/2020
  • DocketPI General Order; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/16/2020
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by Geoffrey Walker (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/03/2020
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/03/2020
  • DocketSummons (on Complaint); Filed by Geoffrey Walker (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/03/2020
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by Geoffrey Walker (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/03/2020
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Geoffrey Walker (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Tentative Rulings - Main Menu     Home

Case Number: 20STCV42112    Hearing Date: April 22, 2021    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

GEOFFREY WALKER,

Plaintiff(s),

vs.

LEISLY MICHAEL CRUZ-GOMEZ, ET AL.,

Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 20STCV42112

[TENATATIVE] ORDER GRANTING INTERVENER’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE

Dept. 31

8:30 a.m.

April 22, 2021

Plaintiff, Geoffrey Walker (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendant, Leisly Michael Cruz-Gomez (“Defendant”) for damages arising out of an automobile accident.

At this time, Loya Casualty Insurance Company (“Intervenor”) moves for leave to intervene in the case, contending its insured, Defendant, cannot be located.

Per CCP §387(a), permissive intervention is proper if:

• The nonparty has a direct and immediate interest in the litigation; and

• The intervention will not enlarge the issues in the case; and

• The reasons for intervention outweigh any opposition by the existing parties.

A liability insurer normally cannot intervene in a tort action against its insured to contest whether the claim against the insured is covered under its policy. The judgment in the tort action collaterally estops the insurer only on issues necessarily adjudicated therein—i.e., the insured's liability and the amount of the injured party's damages. It does not bind the insurer on coverage issues. Western Heritage Ins. Co. v. Sup.Ct. (Parks) (2011) 199 CA4th 1196, 1212.

However, because a liability insurer agrees to pay any judgment obtained against its insured (see Ins.C. §11580(b)(2)), it has the right to intervene (not merely permissive) where an insured is barred from defending itself. In such cases, intervention is necessary to protect the insurer's own interests because it may be obligated to pay any judgment rendered against its insured (assuming no coverage defenses). Reliance Ins. Co. v. Sup.Ct. (Wells) (2000) 84 CA4th 383, 386–387.

In this case, the Court finds Intervenor adequately established a direct and immediate interest in the litigation, and the inability to locate its insured requires permission to intervene.

Plaintiff has not opposed the motion, and therefore the motion is granted. Intervenor Loya Casualty Insurance Company is ordered to file a separate copy of its answer-in-intervention within ten days.

Loya Casualty Insurance Company is ordered to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at sscdept31@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar. If a party submits on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative.

Dated this 22nd day of April, 2021

Hon. Thomas D. Long

Judge of the Superior Court

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where LOYA CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY is a litigant