This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 06/19/2019 at 00:51:51 (UTC).

GUADALUPE HERNANDEZ VS. SANDRA WELLINGTON

Case Summary

On 10/12/2017 GUADALUPE HERNANDEZ filed a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury lawsuit against SANDRA WELLINGTON. 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.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****8996

  • Filing Date:

    10/12/2017

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

STEPHEN I. GOORVITCH

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner

HERNANDEZ GUADALUPE

Defendants and Respondents

WELLINGTON SANDRA

DOES 1-20 INCLUSIVE

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorney

SARABI MOHAMMAD

 

Court Documents

GENERAL DENIAL

1/11/2018: GENERAL DENIAL

Unknown

1/11/2018: Unknown

Proof of Service by Substituted Service

1/17/2018: Proof of Service by Substituted Service

CoverSheet

10/12/2017: CoverSheet

Civil Case Cover Sheet

10/12/2017: Civil Case Cover Sheet

Summons

10/12/2017: Summons

Complaint

10/12/2017: Complaint

 

Docket Entries

  • 04/12/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 5, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Jury Trial - Not Held - Continued - Stipulation

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/28/2019
  • at 10:00 AM in Department 5, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Continued - Stipulation

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/21/2019
  • [Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC (and Related Motion/Discovery Dates) Personal Injury Courts Only (Central District) (- FSC: 09-26-19 Trial: 10-11-19); Filed by Guadalupe Hernandez (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/29/2018
  • Notice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/16/2018
  • Statement of Damages (Personal Injury or Wrongful Death); Filed by Guadalupe Hernandez (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/16/2018
  • Request for Entry of Default / Judgment; Filed by Guadalupe Hernandez (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/17/2018
  • Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint); Filed by Guadalupe Hernandez (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/17/2018
  • Proof of Service by Substituted Service

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/11/2018
  • Order; Filed by Sandra Wellington (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/11/2018
  • ORDER ON COURT FEE WAIVER

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/11/2018
  • General Denial; Filed by Sandra Wellington (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/11/2018
  • GENERAL DENIAL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/11/2018
  • General Denial; Filed by Sandra Wellington (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/12/2017
  • Summons; Filed by Guadalupe Hernandez (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/12/2017
  • Complaint; Filed by Guadalupe Hernandez (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/12/2017
  • Complaint

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/12/2017
  • Civil Case Cover Sheet

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC678996    Hearing Date: March 10, 2020    Dept: 32

ORDER #1 of 2

guadalupe hernandez,

Plaintiff,

v.

sandra wellington,

Defendant.

Case No.: BC678996

Hearing Date: March 10, 2020

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

motion to deem admitted

Plaintiff Guadalupe Hernandez (“Plaintiff”) moves to deem admitted matters specified in Requests for Admissions, Set One (“RFAs”). Plaintiff served the RFAs on Defendant by mail on September 18, 2019, meaning that she had until October 23, 2019 to respond. After the January 15, 2020 hearing on this motion, Defendant served responses on Plaintiff and filed those responses with the Court. Accordingly, the motion is moot except as to sanctions.

Plaintiff seeks sanctions in connection with this motion. The Court concludes that Defendant’s failure to timely respond to the discovery is an abuse of the discovery process, and awards sanctions. The Court imposes sanctions against Defendant in the amount of $1,810, based upon seven hours of attorney time at $250 per hour plus the filing fee of $60.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Plaintiff’s motion to deem admitted is moot except as to sanctions. Defendant (but not Defendant’s counsel) is ordered to pay $1,810 to Plaintiff, by and through counsel, within thirty (30) days of notice of this order. Plaintiff shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.

 

ORDER #2 of 2

guadalupe hernandez,

Plaintiff,

v.

Sandra Wellington, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: BC678996

Hearing Date: March 10, 2020

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

DEFENDANT’s motion to Vacate DEFAULT

Plaintiff Guadalupe Hernandez (“Plaintiff”) filed this action after she was attacked by a dog owned by Defendant Rodney Wellington (“Defendant”). Defendant moves to set aside the judgment Plaintiff took against Defendant. Plaintiff filed her initial complaint on October 12, 2017. On September 18, 2019, Plaintiff named Defendant via Doe amendment. Plaintiff took Defendant’s default on November 19, 2019.

Per Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (b), a court may “relieve a party or his or her legal representative from a judgment, dismissal, order, or other proceeding taken against him or her through his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 473, subd. (b).) The party must seek such relief “within a reasonable time, in no case exceeding six months, after the judgment, dismissal, order, or proceeding was taken.” (Ibid.)

Defendant contends he was not served with the summons and complaint. Plaintiff served Defendant via a registered process server. (See Proof of Service, filed November 19, 2019. A proof of service containing a declaration from a registered process server invokes a presumption of valid service.  (American Express Centurion Bank v. Zara, 199 Cal.App.4th 383, 390; see also Evid. Code, § 647.)  In light of this presumption, Defendant was “required to produce evidence that he was not served.” (American Express Centurion Bank v. Zara (2011) 199 Cal.App.4th 383, 390.) Defendant has not advanced a declaration or any other admissible evidence to show that he was not served. Therefore, the motion is denied without prejudice. The Court’s clerk shall provide notice.

Case Number: BC678996    Hearing Date: January 15, 2020    Dept: 5

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 5

guadalupe hernandez,

Plaintiff,

v.

sandra wellington,

Defendant.

Case No.: BC678996

Hearing Date: December 17, 2019

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

motion to deem admitted

The Court posts the following tentative order. Any party who does not appear at the hearing shall waive their right to be heard and shall submit to this tentative order:

TENTATIVE ORDER

Plaintiff Guadalupe Hernandez (“Plaintiff”) moves to deem admitted matters specified in Requests for Admissions, Set One (“RFAs”). The RFAs were served by mail on September 18, 2019, meaning that Defendant had until October 23, 2019 to respond. As of the filing date of this motion, Plaintiff had not received responses from Defendant.

Where a party fails to respond to requests for admissions, the propounding party may move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted, as well as for a monetary sanction. (Code of Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (b).) The Court “shall” grant a motion to deem admitted the matters specified in the requests for admissions, “unless it finds that the party to whom the requests for admission have been directed has served, before the hearing on the motion, a proposed response to the requests for admission that is in substantial compliance with Section 2033.220.” (Code of Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (c).) Defendant has not opposed the motion, and there is nothing in the record to suggest that Defendant has complied with her discovery obligations. Therefore, the motion is granted.

Plaintiff seeks sanctions in connection with this motion. The Court concludes that Defendant’s failure to timely respond to the discovery is an abuse of the discovery process, and awards sanctions. The Court imposes sanctions against Defendant in the amount of $1,060, which represents four hours of attorney time at $250 per hour, plus the filing fee of $60.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Plaintiff’s motion to deem admitted is granted. Defendant is deemed to have admitted the matters specified in the RFAs as of this date.

Defendant shall pay monetary sanctions in the amount of $1,060 to Plaintiff, by and through counsel, within 30 days of notice of this order.

Plaintiff shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.

DATED: January 15, 2020 ___________________________

Stephen I. Goorvitch

Judge of the Superior Court

Case Number: BC678996    Hearing Date: December 17, 2019    Dept: 5

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 5

guadalupe hernandez,

Plaintiff,

v.

sandra wellington,

Defendant.

Case No.: BC678996

Hearing Date: December 17, 2019

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

motion to deem admitted

Plaintiff Guadalupe Hernandez (“Plaintiff”) moves to deem admitted matters specified in Requests for Admissions, Set One (“RFAs”). The RFAs were served by mail on September 18, 2019, meaning that Defendant had until October 23, 2019 to respond. As of the filing date of this motion, Plaintiff had not received responses from Defendant.

Where a party fails to respond to requests for admissions, the propounding party may move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted, as well as for a monetary sanction. (Code of Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (b).) The Court “shall” grant a motion to deem admitted the matters specified in the requests for admissions, “unless it finds that the party to whom the requests for admission have been directed has served, before the hearing on the motion, a proposed response to the requests for admission that is in substantial compliance with Section 2033.220.” (Code of Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (c).) Defendant has not opposed the motion, and there is nothing in the record to suggest that Defendant has complied with her discovery obligations. Therefore, the motion is granted.

Plaintiff seeks sanctions in connection with this motion. The Court concludes that Defendant’s failure to timely respond to the discovery is an abuse of the discovery process, and awards sanctions. The Court imposes sanctions against Defendant in the amount of $810, which represents three hours of attorney time at $250 per hour, plus the filing fee of $60.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Plaintiff’s motion to deem admitted is granted. Defendant is deemed to have admitted the matters specified in the RFAs as of this date.

Defendant shall pay monetary sanctions in the amount of $810 to Plaintiff, by and through counsel, within 30 days of notice of this order.

Plaintiff shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.

DATED: December 17, 2019 ___________________________

Stephen I. Goorvitch

Judge of the Superior Court