This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 07/13/2019 at 02:34:54 (UTC).

HAGOP OGANIAN VS ZABEL OGANIAN

Case Summary

On 01/16/2018 HAGOP OGANIAN filed a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury lawsuit against ZABEL OGANIAN. 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:

    ****9855

  • Filing Date:

    01/16/2018

  • 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

Plaintiffs and Petitioners

OGANIAN ZABEL

OGANIAN HAGOP

Defendants and Respondents

LOS ANGELES CITY OF

DOES 1 TO 50

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

MANOUKIAN NIGOL. ESQ.

CARTER BRIAN S

 

Court Documents

CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET

1/31/2018: CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1. NEGLIGENCE 2. NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

1/31/2018: FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1. NEGLIGENCE 2. NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

SUMMONS

1/31/2018: SUMMONS

SUMMONS

1/16/2018: SUMMONS

COMPLAINT FOR NEGLIGENCE

1/16/2018: COMPLAINT FOR NEGLIGENCE

 

Docket Entries

  • 07/02/2019
  • at 10:00 AM in Department 5, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Held - Continued

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/02/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Final Status Conference)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/22/2019
  • Substitution of Attorney; Filed by Hagop Oganian (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/31/2018
  • First Amended Complaint; Filed by Hagop Oganian (Plaintiff); Zabel Oganian (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/31/2018
  • FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1. NEGLIGENCE 2. NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/31/2018
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/31/2018
  • CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/31/2018
  • Miscellaneous-Other; Filed by Hagop Oganian (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/31/2018
  • Summons; Filed by Hagop Oganian (Plaintiff); Zabel Oganian (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/16/2018
  • Complaint; Filed by Hagop Oganian (Plaintiff); Zabel Oganian (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/16/2018
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/16/2018
  • COMPLAINT FOR NEGLIGENCE

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC689855    Hearing Date: February 11, 2020    Dept: 32

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 32

HAGOP OGANIAN, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

city of los angeles, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: BC689855

Hearing Date: February 11, 2020

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

motionS to compel responses to discovery

Defendant County of Los Angeles (“Defendant”) moves to compel responses from Plaintiffs Hakop Oganian and Zabel Oganian (“Plaintiffs”) to Defendant’s Special Interrogatories, Set One (“SROG”); Requests for Production of Documents, Set One (“RPD”); and Requests for Admissions, Set One (“RFA”). Defendant served the discovery at issue on Plaintiffs by mail on August 20, 2019, meaning that the responses were due on or before Tuesday, September 24, 2019. Plaintiffs served objections to Defendant’s discovery on September 27, 2019. By serving untimely responses, Plaintiff waived all objections. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, subd. (a), 2031.300, subd. (a), 2033.280, subd. (a).) Accordingly, the motions to compel responses to the SROG, RPD, and RFA are granted per Code of Civil Procedure sections 2030.290, 2031.300, and 2033.290. Plaintiffs are ordered to serve responses to Defendant’s SROG, RPD, and RFA, without objections, within 30 days of service of this order.

Defendant seeks sanctions against Plaintiffs in connection with these motions. Defendant was required to schedule an informal discovery conference before filing motions to compel further responses. Had Defendant done so, the motions likely would not have been necessary. Therefore, the Court finds good cause to impose no sanctions against Plaintiffs in this case.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Defendant’s motions to compel responses to the SROG, RPD, and RFA are granted per Code of Civil Procedure sections 2030.290, 2031.300, and 2033.290. Plaintiffs are ordered to serve verified responses, without objections, within 30 days of notice of this order. The Court declines to impose sanctions. Defendant is ordered to provide notice of this order and file proof of service of such.

DATED: February 11, 2020 ___________________________

Stephen I. Goorvitch

Judge of the Superior Court