This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 07/19/2019 at 01:16:01 (UTC).

JERRY MINTON VS TIME INC ET AL

Case Summary

On 05/25/2018 a Labor - Other Labor case was filed by JERRY MINTON against TIME INC in the jurisdiction of Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****7857

  • Filing Date:

    05/25/2018

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Dismissed

  • Case Type:

    Labor - Other Labor

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

SAMANTHA P. JESSNER

 

Party Details

Petitioner and Plaintiff

MINTON JERRY

Defendants and Respondents

DOES 1-10

DUNHAM ANDREA

TIME INC.

 

Court Documents

Stipulation and Order

3/14/2019: Stipulation and Order

Notice of Case Reassignment and Order for Plaintiff to Give Notice

12/21/2018: Notice of Case Reassignment and Order for Plaintiff to Give Notice

Notice

10/3/2018: Notice

CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER

9/24/2018: CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER

CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT

9/7/2018: CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT

CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT

9/7/2018: CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT

NOTICE OF OSC RE FAILURE TO FILE PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT

8/1/2018: NOTICE OF OSC RE FAILURE TO FILE PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE HEARING

7/23/2018: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE HEARING

NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

7/23/2018: NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL

7/16/2018: REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL

DEFENDANT TIME, INC.'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT

7/5/2018: DEFENDANT TIME, INC.'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT

PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS

6/20/2018: PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS

NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

6/25/2018: NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

NOTICE OF OSC RE FAILURE TO FILE PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT

6/25/2018: NOTICE OF OSC RE FAILURE TO FILE PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE HEARING

6/7/2018: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE HEARING

SUMMONS

5/25/2018: SUMMONS

12 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 06/27/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 31, Yolanda Orozco, Presiding; Status Conference - Not Held - Vacated by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/14/2019
  • Stipulation and Order (JOINT STIPULATION TO APPROVE SETTLEMENT AND DISMISS ACTION); Filed by Time, Inc. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/14/2019
  • Order ([PROPOSED ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AND DISMISSING ACTION); Filed by Time, Inc. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/07/2019
  • Notice (of Case Reassignment); Filed by Jerry Minton (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/21/2018
  • Notice of Case Reassignment and Order for Plaintiff to Give Notice; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/06/2018
  • Answer (to plaintiffs first amended compliant); Filed by Time, Inc. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/03/2018
  • Notice of FIiling First Amended Complaint; Filed by Jerry Minton (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/24/2018
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 31; Case Management Conference (Conference-Case Management; Trial Date Set) -

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/24/2018
  • Minute order entered: 2018-09-24 00:00:00; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/24/2018
  • Case Management Order; Filed by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
19 More Docket Entries
  • 06/20/2018
  • Proof-Service/Summons

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/13/2018
  • Proof-Service/Summons

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/13/2018
  • PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/07/2018
  • Notice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/07/2018
  • ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE HEARING

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/07/2018
  • NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/07/2018
  • OSC-Failure to File Proof of Serv; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/25/2018
  • COMPLAINT [POTENTIAL PAGA REPRESENTATIVE ACTION] 1. SECTION 203 OF THE CALIFORNIA LABOR CODE, CONTINUING WAGES ;ETC

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/25/2018
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/25/2018
  • Complaint; Filed by Jerry Minton (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC707857    Hearing Date: March 09, 2020    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

SAMER ABULUGHOD,

Plaintiff(s),

vs.

TOMMY SAEDI, ET AL.,

Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO: BC707847

[TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S UNOPPOSED MOTIONS FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS

Dept. 31

1:30 p.m.

March 9, 2020

Defendant, Blue Rose Café, Inc. dba Candle Café and Grill propounded supplemental interrogatories and supplemental RPDs on Plaintiff on 9/12/19. On 1/03/20, the Court granted Defendant’s motions to compel Plaintiff to respond to the supplemental interrogatories and RPDs, without objections, and ordered responses within ten days. The Court also imposed monetary sanctions. To date, Plaintiff has not complied with the order; at this time, Defendant seeks an order imposing terminating sanctions. Defendant filed two motions for terminating sanctions; one is directed at the failure to respond to supplemental interrogatories, and the other is directed at the failure to respond to supplemental RPDs. The motions are virtually identical, and the Court will rule on them together at this time.

Pursuant to Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 776, the Court should typically impose lesser sanctions prior to awarding terminating sanctions. However, there are circumstances where imposition of terminating sanctions is appropriate without first imposing issue and/or evidentiary sanctions. See Laguna Auto Body v. Farmers Ins. Exch. (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 481, 490-91.

Terminating sanctions are imposed for three reasons. First, the Court previously imposed monetary sanctions. Second, a brief review of the prior motions reveals that the discovery at issue goes to the “heart” of Plaintiff’s case, and therefore an issue or evidentiary sanction would be tantamount to a terminating sanction. Third, Plaintiff has not opposed this motion and appears to have abandoned the case.

Defendant also seeks monetary sanctions in connection with this motion. The request is denied. The Court finds imposition of terminating sanctions sufficient to meet the ends of justice at this time, and does not find imposition of additional monetary sanctions necessary.

Plaintiff’s case against Moving Defendant is dismissed. Defendant is ordered to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at sscdept3@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 9th day of March, 2020

Hon. Thomas D. Long

Judge of the Superior Court