On 07/31/2017 JONATHAN MEHRIAN filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against HASSAN ABDUH. 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.
****8912
07/31/2017
Pending - Other Pending
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
STEPHEN I. GOORVITCH
MEHRIAN JONATHAN
ABDUH HASSAAN
KHOURY JOSEPH
DOES 1 TO 50
ABDUH HASSAN
YAZDANPANAH HAMED ESQ.
FORRESTER PERRY
1/14/2019: Minute Order
1/15/2019: Proof of Service by Mail
2/5/2019: Demand for Jury Trial
2/5/2019: Answer
2/28/2019: Notice of Change of Firm Name
7/31/2017: CoverSheet
7/31/2017: Summons
7/31/2017: Complaint
Notice of Change of Firm Name; Filed by Hassaan Abduh (Defendant); Joseph Khoury (Defendant)
Answer; Filed by Hassaan Abduh (Defendant)
Demand for Jury Trial; Filed by Hassaan Abduh (Defendant)
at 08:30 AM in Department 5, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Jury Trial - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated
Proof of Service by Mail; Filed by Jonathan Mehrian (Plaintiff)
Declaration re: Due Diligence; Filed by Jonathan Mehrian (Plaintiff)
Declaration re: Due Diligence; Filed by Jonathan Mehrian (Plaintiff)
Proof of Service by Mail; Filed by Jonathan Mehrian (Plaintiff)
Proof of Service by Substituted Service; Filed by Jonathan Mehrian (Plaintiff)
Proof of Service by Substituted Service; Filed by Jonathan Mehrian (Plaintiff)
at 10:00 AM in Department 5, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Vacated by Court
Minute Order ((Final Status Conference)); Filed by Clerk
Complaint; Filed by Jonathan Mehrian (Plaintiff)
Summons; Filed by Jonathan Mehrian (Plaintiff)
Complaint
Case Number: BC668912 Hearing Date: January 24, 2020 Dept: 32
|
jonathan mehrian,
Plaintiff, v.
hassan abduh, et al.,
Defendants.
|
Case No.: BC668912
Hearing Date: January 24, 2020
[TENTATIVE] order RE: Motion To SET ASIDE default
|
Plaintiff Jonathan Mehrian filed this action against Defendants Hassan Abduh and Joseph Khoury (“Khoury”) (collectively “Defendants”) following a motor vehicle collision. Defendants move to set aside the default entered against Khoury on September 25, 2019. Plaintiff purportedly served Khoury on January 4, 2019 via substituted service. However, counsel for Defendants has advanced evidence that Khoury was deceased at that time. (See Declaration of Perry Forrester, Exhibit A.) If Khoury was deceased at the time Plaintiff purportedly served him, the default against Khoury is void. (See Peralta v. Heights Medical Center, Inc. (1988) 485 U.S. 80, 84.)
Plaintiff has stipulated to proceed against Khoury’s insurance policy, and to waive all damages not covered by the insurance policy. (See Prob. Code, § 554; Declaration of Perry Forrester, Exhibit B.) Accordingly, the motion to set aside default is granted. Plaintiff may proceed against Khoury’s insurance policy. Defendant shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.
DATED: January 24, 2020 ___________________________
Stephen I. Goorvitch
Judge of the Superior Court
Case Number: BC668912 Hearing Date: December 10, 2019 Dept: 5
|
jonathan mehrian,
Plaintiff, v.
hassan abduh, et al.,
Defendants. |
Case No.: BC668912
Hearing Date: December 10, 2019
[TENTATIVE] order RE: Motion To SET ASIDE default
|
Plaintiff Jonathan Mehrian sued Defendants Hassan Abduh and Joseph Khoury (“Khoury”) (collectively “Defendants”) based on injuries Plaintiff in a motor vehicle collision. Counsel for Defendants moves to set aside the default entered against Khoury on September 25, 2019. Counsel for Defendants served this motion on Plaintiff by mail on October 24, 2019. That was not sufficient notice. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1005, subd. (b).) As Plaintiff did not oppose the motion, he did not waive any objection to insufficient notice. Therefore, the Court continued the motion so counsel for Defendants could provide proper notice. The Court continued the hearing to December 10, 2019, and the Court ordered Defendants to “provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.” Defendants failed to do so. Therefore, this motion is denied without prejudice to Defendant re-filing and properly serving the motion sufficiently in advance of the hearing date.
DATED: December 10, 2019 ___________________________
Stephen I. Goorvitch
Judge of the Superior Court