This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 05/28/2019 at 00:53:42 (UTC).

JAIME FARIAS VS GUILERMO CUERVO RAMIREZ ET AL

Case Summary

On 03/29/2017 JAIME FARIAS filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against GUILERMO CUERVO RAMIREZ. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is GREGORY KEOSIAN. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****6254

  • Filing Date:

    03/29/2017

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

GREGORY KEOSIAN

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs and Petitioners

FARIAS JAIME

JF MOTORS

Defendants and Respondents

CUERVO MOTORS

BONILLA JOSE MIGUEL

DOES 1 TO 10

UPEQUIE VALENTINA ESCAMILLA

RAMIREZ GUILLERMO CUERVO

CUERVO ANDRES

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorney

HUMPHREY J. SCOTT

Defendant and Respondent Attorneys

BRENDON BARTON

BARTON BRENDON KAY

SKLAR JULIA

 

Court Documents

STIPULATION SHORTENING NOTICE PERIOD REQUIRED FOR MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BROUGHT BY DEFENDANT ANDRES CUERVO; ORDER

9/7/2018: STIPULATION SHORTENING NOTICE PERIOD REQUIRED FOR MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT BROUGHT BY DEFENDANT ANDRES CUERVO; ORDER

Substitution of Attorney

11/28/2018: Substitution of Attorney

Notice of Ruling

12/3/2018: Notice of Ruling

Stipulation and Order

12/18/2018: Stipulation and Order

REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT OF COURT JUDGMENT

11/13/2017: REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT OF COURT JUDGMENT

REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT OF COURT JUDGMENT

11/13/2017: REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT OF COURT JUDGMENT

PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

12/8/2017: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

SUMMONS

3/29/2017: SUMMONS

PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

5/22/2017: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

5/22/2017: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

5/22/2017: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

5/22/2017: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

POINT AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT DEFENDANT'S DEMURRER AND NOTICE OF DEMURRER AND GENERAL AND SPECIAL DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT

6/1/2017: POINT AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT DEFENDANT'S DEMURRER AND NOTICE OF DEMURRER AND GENERAL AND SPECIAL DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFFS' COMPLAINT

Unknown

6/1/2017: Unknown

DEFENDANT ANDRES CUERVO'S ANSWER TO UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT

6/21/2017: DEFENDANT ANDRES CUERVO'S ANSWER TO UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT

Unknown

6/23/2017: Unknown

OPPOSITION TO DEMURRER

8/18/2017: OPPOSITION TO DEMURRER

Minute Order

9/6/2017: Minute Order

36 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 01/24/2019
  • Request for Refund / Order; Filed by Guillermo Cuervo Ramirez (Defendant); Valentina Escamilla Upequie (Defendant); Jose Miguel Bonilla (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/15/2019
  • at 09:00 AM in Department 61; Jury Trial - Not Held - Continued - Stipulation

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/07/2019
  • at 09:00 AM in Department 61; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Continued - Stipulation

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/02/2019
  • at 3:00 PM in Department 61; Court Order

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/02/2019
  • Order (Order Approving the Stipulation for Continuance of the Date Set for Trial); Filed by Guillermo Cuervo Ramirez (Defendant); Valentina Escamilla Upequie (Defendant); Jose Miguel Bonilla (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/02/2019
  • Minute Order ((Court Order)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/18/2018
  • Stipulation and Order (for Continuance of the Date set for Trial); Filed by Guillermo Cuervo Ramirez (Defendant); Valentina Escamilla Upequie (Defendant); Jose Miguel Bonilla (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/03/2018
  • at 09:00 AM in Department 61; Hearing on Motion to Deem Request for Admissions Admitted - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/03/2018
  • Notice of Ruling (Ruling Re Defendant Andres Cuervo's Motion for Order Deeming Admitted Truth of Matters Specified in First Set of Requests for Admission Served on Plaintiff Jaime Farias); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/03/2018
  • Minute Order ((Hearing on Defendant Andres Cuervo's Motion for Order Deeming...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
61 More Docket Entries
  • 05/22/2017
  • PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/22/2017
  • PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/22/2017
  • PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/12/2017
  • ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE HEARING

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/12/2017
  • NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/12/2017
  • Notice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/12/2017
  • OSC-Failure to File Proof of Serv; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/29/2017
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/29/2017
  • Complaint; Filed by Jaime Farias (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/29/2017
  • COMPLAINT: 1) FRAUD ;ETC

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC656254    Hearing Date: December 10, 2019    Dept: 61

Defendants Ramirez and Jose Miguel Bonilla’s Motions to Compel Responses to Special Interrogatories and Requests for Production, Set One, form Plaintiff Jaime Farias are GRANTED. Sanctions are awarded against Farias and his counsel in the amount of $1,240.

  1. MOTIONS TO COMPEL

A propounding party may demand a responding party to produce documents that are in their possession, custody or control. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.010.) A party may likewise conduct discovery by propounding interrogatories to another party to be answered under oath. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.010, subd. (a).) The responding party must respond to the production demand either by complying, by representing that the party lacks the ability to comply, or by objecting to the demand. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.210.) The responding party must respond to the interrogatories by answering or objecting. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2030.210, subd. (a).) If the responding party fails to serve timely responses, the propounding party may move for an order compelling responses to the production demand and interrogatories. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, 2031.300.)

A party who fails to serve a timely response to interrogatories or a demand for inspection waives any objection to the demand. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2030.290, 2031.300.)

Ramirez and Bonilla argue that they served Special Interrogatories and Requests for Production upon Farias on May 7, 2019, and that despite their efforts to secure responses, no responses have been served. (Sklar Decl. ¶¶ 3–5.)

In opposition, Farias contends that he will provide responses before hearing in this matter. (Opposition at p. 2.)

If code-compliant and objection-free responses are not provided by the hearing on this motion, the motions will be GRANTED.

  1. SANCTIONS

The prevailing party on a motion to compel is generally entitled to monetary sanctions, unless the court “finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust.” (Code Civ. Proc. §§ 2030.290, 2031.300.) Sanctions are also mandatory against a party whose failure to serve responses to requests for admission makes the motion necessary. (Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.280, subd. (c).)

Ramirez and Bonilla ask for $1,560.00 in sanctions with each motion, representing six hours of work at $250 per hour plus a $60 filing fee for each motion, or a total request of $6,240.00. The court awards $1,240 in sanctions against Farias and his counsel.

Defendants to provide notice.