This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 11/27/2020 at 07:22:16 (UTC).

JANINE MICHELLE YODER VS EDWARD D RAY III ET AL

Case Summary

On 02/21/2018 JANINE MICHELLE YODER filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against EDWARD D RAY III. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Chatsworth Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are GEORGINA T. RIZK, KRISTIN S. ESCALANTE, STEPHEN P. PFAHLER and MARK A. BORENSTEIN. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****4775

  • Filing Date:

    02/21/2018

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Chatsworth Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

GEORGINA T. RIZK

KRISTIN S. ESCALANTE

STEPHEN P. PFAHLER

MARK A. BORENSTEIN

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner

YODER JANINE MICHELLE

Defendants and Respondents

SUNRISE RENT-A-CAR

RAY EDWARD D. III

DOES 1 TO 100

RENT-A-CAR SUNRISE

AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS

SEDGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC.

INSURANCE COMPANY

AMERICAN RED CROSS LOS ANGELES REGION

OLD REPUBLIC INSURANCE COMPANY

AMERICAN RED CROSS CORPORATION

AMERICAN RED CROSS-NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS

OLD REPUBLIC GENERAL INSURANCE GROUP

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

THE BARNES FIRM

HENDIZADEH SALAR ESQ.

Defendant Attorneys

PANOSIAN SAVADA

PANOSIAN SAVADA ESQ..

MORRIS ASHLEY RAE

 

Court Documents

Status Report

10/28/2020: Status Report

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON DEMURRER - WITHOUT MOTION TO STRIKE TO SECOND AMEN...)

7/29/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON DEMURRER - WITHOUT MOTION TO STRIKE TO SECOND AMEN...)

Proof of Mailing (Substituted Service)

7/20/2020: Proof of Mailing (Substituted Service)

Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

4/27/2020: Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

3/25/2020: Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

3/25/2020: Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

Notice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment

2/14/2020: Notice of Rejection Default/Clerk's Judgment

Proof of Service by Substituted Service

1/16/2020: Proof of Service by Substituted Service

Complaint - (AMENDED)

1/16/2020: Complaint - (AMENDED)

Other - - OTHER - CAUSE OF ACTION-GENERAL NEGLIGENCE 2ND AMENDED

1/16/2020: Other - - OTHER - CAUSE OF ACTION-GENERAL NEGLIGENCE 2ND AMENDED

Case Management Statement

11/8/2019: Case Management Statement

Notice of Case Management Conference

9/25/2019: Notice of Case Management Conference

Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt

8/23/2019: Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt

Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt

8/23/2019: Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt

Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt

8/23/2019: Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt

Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt

8/23/2019: Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt

Other - - CAUSE OF ACTION- GENERAL NEGLEGENCE

8/7/2019: Other - - CAUSE OF ACTION- GENERAL NEGLEGENCE

Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel

5/2/2019: Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel

118 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 02/01/2021
  • Hearing02/01/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department F49 at 9425 Penfield Ave., Chatsworth, CA 91311; Case Management Conference

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/01/2021
  • Hearing02/01/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department F49 at 9425 Penfield Ave., Chatsworth, CA 91311; Order to Show Cause Re: Sanctions against the Defendant Edward Ray for Failure to Appear on 11/12/2020

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/01/2021
  • Hearing02/01/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department F49 at 9425 Penfield Ave., Chatsworth, CA 91311; Order to Show Cause Re: Sanctions for Plaintiff's Failure to File and Obtain Entry of Default As to All Remaining Defendant's

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/25/2021
  • Hearing01/25/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department F49 at 9425 Penfield Ave., Chatsworth, CA 91311; Hearing on Motion to Compel Response to Form Interrogatories

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/05/2021
  • Hearing01/05/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department F49 at 9425 Penfield Ave., Chatsworth, CA 91311; Hearing on Motion - Other for Default for Failure to Answer Deft. Edward D. Ray III

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/24/2020
  • DocketNotice (of Ruling and Proceedings and Date and Times Changes); Filed by Janine Michelle Yoder (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/19/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department F49, Stephen P. Pfahler, Presiding; Hearing on Motion - Other (for Default for Failure to Answer Deft Sunrise Rent-A-Car Corp.) - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/12/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department F49, Stephen P. Pfahler, Presiding; Case Management Conference - Held - Continued

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/12/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department F49, Stephen P. Pfahler, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: (Sanctions for Plaintiff's Failure to File and Obtain Entry of Default As to All Remaining Defendant's) - Held - Continued

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/12/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Case Management Conference; Order to Show Cause Re: Sanctions...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
134 More Docket Entries
  • 06/03/2019
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 2, Mark A. Borenstein, Presiding; Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel - Held - Motion Granted

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/03/2019
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Hearing on Motion of Attorney Salar Hendizadeh to be Relieved...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/03/2019
  • DocketOrder Granting Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil ((as Counsel for Plaintiff)); Filed by Salar Hendizadeh, Esq. (Attorney)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/02/2019
  • DocketDeclaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil; Filed by Janine Michelle Yoder (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/02/2019
  • DocketMotion to Be Relieved as Counsel (for Plaintiff Janine Michelle Yoder); Filed by Salar Hendizadeh, Esq. (Attorney)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/27/2019
  • DocketSubstitution of Attorney; Filed by Janine Michelle Yoder (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/21/2018
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by Janine Michelle Yoder (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/21/2018
  • DocketCOMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/21/2018
  • DocketSUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/21/2018
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Janine Michelle Yoder (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC694775    Hearing Date: July 29, 2020    Dept: F49

Dept. F-49

Calendar # 6

Date: 7-29-20

Case #BC694775

DEMURRER TO THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

MOVING PARTY: Defendant, American National Red Cross

RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff, Janine Yoder, Pro Per

RELIEF REQUESTED

Demurrer to the Second Amended Complaint

· 1st Cause of Action: Negligence

· 2nd Cause of Action: Motor Vehicle

Motion to Strike Punitive Damages

SUMMARY OF ACTION

On March 10, 2016, the rental car driven by Defendant Edward Ray collided into the rear of the vehicle of Plaintiff Janine Yoder. Ray was allegedly uninsured at the time of the collision. Plaintiff alleges she was acting as a volunteer and/or agent of Defendant American National Red Cross at the time of the collision, and therefore covered by insurance issued by Defendant Old Republic General Insurance, Inc. with claim adjustment service provided by Defendant Sedgwick Claims Services, Inc. Defendants denied the claim on grounds that no uninsured motorist policy coverage was issued to American National Red Cross.

On February 21, 2019, Plaintiff filed a complaint for negligence and motor vehicle. On June 3, 2019, the court granted the motion of Plaintiff’s counsel for leave to withdraw. On July 19, 2019, Plaintiff in pro per filed a first amended complaint. On September 20, 2019, the Personal Injury court assigned the action to Department 49.

On January 9, 2020, the court sustained the demurrer of American National Corporation to the first amended complaint. The court granted Plaintiff leave to file a second amended complaint for negligence and motor vehicle only. On January 16, 2020, Plaintiff in pro per filed a second amended complaint for Negligence and Motor Vehicle as two separate documents.

RULING

1st Cause of Action, Negligence: Overruled.

2nd Cause of Action: Motor Vehicle: Sustained without Leave to Amend.

The notice of demurrer and demurrer to the second amended complaint state that ONLY Defendant American National Red Cross brings this demurrer, though counsel represents other parties as well. Defendant American National Red Cross submits the subject demurrer on grounds that the second amended complaint lacks any alleged facts supporting the claims for negligence and motor vehicle against it. Defendant also contends that the complaint is barred by the statute of limitations, and that any claims are barred by the exclusive provisions of the Workers Compensation Act.

Plaintiff in opposition states that she was driving the vehicle as a volunteer for American National Red Cross, and that her supervisor insisted she handle a specific task, even after her complaints of fatigue. Plaintiff also contends she was entitled to insurance coverage from the vehicle insurer, non-moving defendants Old Republic Insurance Company and Sedgwick Claims Management Services, Inc. Plaintiff alleges Sedgwick is wrongfully withholding payment benefits for medical services rendered to Plaintiff following the collision.

On the second cause of action for Motor Vehicle, the second amended complaint lacks facts establishing a basis of liability against moving defendant for the operation of the vehicle by Defendant Ray. After three attempts the court finds Plaintiff cannot state a claim for motor vehicle against American National Red Cross and therefore sustains the demurrer without leave to amend on the subject cause of action.

As for the first cause of action for General Negligence, notwithstanding the car accident allegations, Plaintiff also alleges that Defendant American National Red Cross negligently breached its duty of care to protect her from harm by forcing her to make a vehicle trip even after complaining of fatigue. The second amended complaint therefore factually articulates a claim for general negligence against moving defendant American National Red Cross.

The arguments regarding relation back doctrine improperly reference the alleged conduct of the non-moving insurance defendants. The court declines to consider the allegations of the non-moving insurance defendants. The argument otherwise lacks any address regarding the general breach of duty allegation based on the direction of Plaintiff’s activities during her volunteer time with moving defendant. The arguments strictly delineating the circumstances of the vehicle collision are disposed of in the motor vehicle cause of action, and the court now focuses the case on volunteer/agent relationship alleged in the operative pleading. The court therefore overrules the demurrer on this ground.

Finally, on the Workers Compensation exclusivity discussion, the court also overrules the demurrer. Injury claims are subject to the exclusive provisions of the Workers’ Compensation statutory provisions, where the injury to the employee occurs as a result of a “service growing out of and incidental” to employment, and the employee is “acting within the course” of employment. (Lab. Code, §§ 3600(a)(2), 3602; Charles J. Vacanti, M.D., Inc. v. State Comp. Ins. Fund (2001) 24 Cal.4th 800, 813 Shoemaker v. Myers (1990) 52 Cal.3d 1, 16.) The injury must cause a disability and/or require medical attention. (Gomez v. Acquistapace (1996) 50 Cal.App.4th 740, 748.)

The argument lacks any specific legally supported argument regarding whether a volunteer relationship constitutes an employee for purposes of Workers Compensation Act preemption. The court declines to consider any further argument requiring inference beyond the operative pleading. The demurrer is therefore overruled on this ground.

Any attempted demurrer by the other defendants is no longer timely. Defendant may not raise this argument again with new defendants within the third amended complaint. “A party demurring to a pleading that has been amended after a demurrer to an earlier version of the pleading was sustained shall not demur to any portion of the amended complaint, cross-complaint, or answer on grounds that could have been raised by demurrer to the earlier version of the complaint, cross-complaint, or answer.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 430.41, subd. (b).)

The demurrer is therefore sustained without leave to amend on the motor vehicle cause of action only as American National Red Cross, and overruled as to the negligence cause of action as to American National Red Cross.

Defendant is ordered to answer the complaint within 10 days.

Defendant is ordered to provide notice.