This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 06/17/2019 at 21:45:51 (UTC).

JONATHAN MEHRIAN VS HASSAN ABDUH ET AL

Case Summary

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.
Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****8912

  • Filing Date:

    07/31/2017

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

STEPHEN I. GOORVITCH

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner

MEHRIAN JONATHAN

Defendants and Respondents

ABDUH HASSAAN

KHOURY JOSEPH

DOES 1 TO 50

ABDUH HASSAN

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorney

YAZDANPANAH HAMED ESQ.

Defendant Attorney

FORRESTER PERRY

 

Court Documents

Complaint

7/31/2017: Complaint

Summons

7/31/2017: Summons

CoverSheet

7/31/2017: CoverSheet

Notice of Change of Firm Name

2/28/2019: Notice of Change of Firm Name

Answer

2/5/2019: Answer

Demand for Jury Trial

2/5/2019: Demand for Jury Trial

Proof of Service by Mail

1/15/2019: Proof of Service by Mail

Minute Order

1/14/2019: Minute Order

 

Docket Entries

  • 02/28/2019
  • DocketNotice of Change of Firm Name; Filed by Hassaan Abduh (Defendant); Joseph Khoury (Defendant)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 02/05/2019
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by Hassaan Abduh (Defendant)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 02/05/2019
  • DocketDemand for Jury Trial; Filed by Hassaan Abduh (Defendant)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 01/31/2019
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 5, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Jury Trial - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 01/15/2019
  • DocketProof of Service by Mail; Filed by Jonathan Mehrian (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 01/15/2019
  • DocketDeclaration re: Due Diligence; Filed by Jonathan Mehrian (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 01/15/2019
  • DocketDeclaration re: Due Diligence; Filed by Jonathan Mehrian (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 01/15/2019
  • DocketProof of Service by Mail; Filed by Jonathan Mehrian (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 01/15/2019
  • DocketProof of Service by Substituted Service; Filed by Jonathan Mehrian (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 01/15/2019
  • DocketProof of Service by Substituted Service; Filed by Jonathan Mehrian (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 01/14/2019
  • Docketat 10:00 AM in Department 5, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Vacated by Court

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 01/14/2019
  • DocketMinute Order ((Final Status Conference)); Filed by Clerk

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 07/31/2017
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Jonathan Mehrian (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 07/31/2017
  • DocketSummons; Filed by Jonathan Mehrian (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 07/31/2017
  • DocketComplaint

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: ****8912    Hearing Date: December 24, 2020    Dept: 32

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 32

jonathan mehrian,

Claimant,

v.

farmers insurance exchange,

Respondent.

Case No.: ****8912

Hearing Date: December 24, 2020

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

PETITION to compel arbitration

NOTICE

Department #32 will be dark for motions.  The parties are ordered to email the Court’s clerk at SSCDept32@lacourt.org to inform the clerk whether they are submitting on the Court’s tentative or whether they are requesting a hearing.  If any party requests a hearing, one will be scheduled.  If the parties do not email the Court’s clerk before the hearing time to request a hearing, they will waive the right to be heard and shall submit to this tentative order, which shall issue.

TENTATIVE ORDER

Claimant Jonathan Mehrian (“Claimant”) moves to compel under-insured motorist arbitration with Respondent Farmers Insurance Exchange (“Respondent”), and to appoint an arbitrator. Respondent does not dispute that the parties must arbitrate their dispute, so the motion is granted.

The Court notes that the parties have been unable to agree on an arbitrator. Per Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.6, “If the arbitration agreement provides a method of appointing an arbitrator, that method shall be followed. If the arbitration agreement does not provide a method for appointing an arbitrator, the parties to the agreement who seek arbitration and against whom arbitration is sought may agree on a method of appointing an arbitrator and that method shall be followed. In the absence of an agreed method, or if the agreed method fails or for any reason cannot be followed, or when an arbitrator appointed fails to act and his or her successor has not been appointed, the court, on petition of a party to the arbitration agreement, shall appoint the arbitrator.” (Code Civ. Proc., ; 1281.6.)

As the parties have been unable to agree on an arbitrator, the Court must appoint an arbitrator. Claimant and Respondent shall each file a proposed list containing up to five arbitrators. These lists shall be filed on or before December 31, 2020. Based upon these lists, the Court will propose five potential arbitrators. If the parties fail to select an arbitration within five days (plus five days because the notice will be mailed), the Court shall appoint an arbitrator. If the parties agree to an arbitrator at any point, they shall file a stipulation with the Court.

The Court sets an Order to Show Cause why the Court should not select an arbitrator for January 8, 2021, at 1:30 p.m. Claimant shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.

DATED: December 24, 2020 ___________________________

Stephen I. Goorvitch

Judge of the Superior Court



Case Number: ****8912    Hearing Date: January 24, 2020    Dept: 32

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 32

jonathan mehrian,

Plaintiff,

v.

hassan abduh, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: ****8912

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: ****8912    Hearing Date: December 10, 2019    Dept: 5

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 5

jonathan mehrian,

Plaintiff,

v.

hassan abduh, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: ****8912

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