This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 10/23/2020 at 11:19:46 (UTC).

JOSE JUAN CASTILLO VS JOHN ALLEN SMITH ET AL

Case Summary

On 05/02/2017 JOSE JUAN CASTILLO filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against JOHN ALLEN SMITH. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Norwalk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are PATRICIA D. NIETO, LISA K SEPE-WIESENFELD, GEORGINA T. RIZK, MARGARET MILLER BERNAL, KRISTIN S. ESCALANTE and MARK A. BORENSTEIN. The case status is Other.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****9853

  • Filing Date:

    05/02/2017

  • Case Status:

    Other

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Norwalk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

PATRICIA D. NIETO

LISA K SEPE-WIESENFELD

GEORGINA T. RIZK

MARGARET MILLER BERNAL

KRISTIN S. ESCALANTE

MARK A. BORENSTEIN

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner

CASTILLO JOSE JUAN

Defendants and Respondents

SHAWNAN CORPORATION

PETERSON TIMOTHY ALAN

KETERITE CORPORATION

SMITH JOHN ALLEN

DOES 1 TO 100

ERNESTO LEMUS JULIO

KELTERITE CORPORATION

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

MGDESYAN GEORGE G. ESQ.

BAGDASARYAN HRIPSIME ANI

MGDESYAN GEORGE GEVORK ESQ.

BOYADZHYAN ARAKSYA ANI ESQ.

Defendant and Respondent Attorneys

NANETTE M. BEAUMONT

BEAUMONT NANETTE M.

BEAUMONT NANETTE MARIE ESQ.

CHAPPEL GREGORY M

CHAPPEL GREGORY MAURICE ESQ.

 

Court Documents

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE; ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL R...)

3/25/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE; ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL R...)

Request for Dismissal - REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE AS TO ENTIRE ACTION OF ALL PARTIES AND ALL CAUSES OF ACTION

2/26/2020: Request for Dismissal - REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE AS TO ENTIRE ACTION OF ALL PARTIES AND ALL CAUSES OF ACTION

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE OF SUMMONS ON FIRST AMENDE...)

11/19/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE OF SUMMONS ON FIRST AMENDE...)

Brief - BRIEF COURT'S ORDER REGARDING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE;TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

9/20/2019: Brief - BRIEF COURT'S ORDER REGARDING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE;TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

Brief - COURT'S ORDER REGARDING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE

8/12/2019: Brief - COURT'S ORDER REGARDING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE AND TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE

Declaration - DECLARATION OF NANETTE M BEAUMONT IN SUPPORT OF ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR PLAINTIFF'S FAILURE TO APPEAR; AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT

7/23/2019: Declaration - DECLARATION OF NANETTE M BEAUMONT IN SUPPORT OF ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY CASE SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED FOR PLAINTIFF'S FAILURE TO APPEAR; AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER SETTING CASE FOR CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE/TRIAL...)

6/11/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER SETTING CASE FOR CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE/TRIAL...)

Notice of Ruling

3/20/2019: Notice of Ruling

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (- FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE; - HEARING ON PLAINTIFF'S EX PART...)

3/18/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (- FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE; - HEARING ON PLAINTIFF'S EX PART...)

Ex Parte Application - Ex Parte Application to continue trial date

10/16/2018: Ex Parte Application - Ex Parte Application to continue trial date

Minute Order - (Plaintiff's ex parte application to continue trial and Final ...)

10/16/2018: Minute Order - (Plaintiff's ex parte application to continue trial and Final ...)

CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT -

10/1/2018: CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT -

NOTICE OF RULING RE DEMURRER AND MOTION TO STRIKE

11/27/2017: NOTICE OF RULING RE DEMURRER AND MOTION TO STRIKE

RULING RE: DEMURRER AND MOTION TO STRIKE

11/16/2017: RULING RE: DEMURRER AND MOTION TO STRIKE

REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO KELTERITE CORPORATION'S DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT

11/8/2017: REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO KELTERITE CORPORATION'S DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT

ORDER ON COURT FEE WAIVER -

9/20/2017: ORDER ON COURT FEE WAIVER -

DECLARATION OF DEMURRING PARTY IN SUPPORT OF AUTOMATIC EXTENSION

9/19/2017: DECLARATION OF DEMURRING PARTY IN SUPPORT OF AUTOMATIC EXTENSION

PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS -

8/25/2017: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS -

67 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 05/04/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 2, Mark A. Borenstein, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/25/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department F; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (regarding answer/responsive pleading to the operative complaint by Timothy Peterson; Kelterite Corporation; John Allen Smith) - Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/25/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department F; Trial Setting Conference - Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/25/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Trial Setting Conference; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal r...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/27/2020
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department C; Hearing on Demurrer - without Motion to Strike (of Kelterite Corporation to First Amended Complatin of Jose Juan Castillo) - Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/27/2020
  • DocketNotice of Entry of Dismissal and Proof of Service; Filed by Kelterite Corporation (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/27/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Hearing on Demurrer - without Motion to Strike of Kelterite C...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/26/2020
  • DocketRequest for Dismissal (With Prejudice as to Entire Action of All Parties and All Causes of Action); Filed by Jose Juan Castillo (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/20/2020
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department C; Hearing on Demurrer - without Motion to Strike (of Kelterite Corporation to First Amended Complatin of Jose Juan Castillo) - Not Held - Rescheduled by Party

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/09/2019
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by Kelterite Corporation (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
113 More Docket Entries
  • 09/20/2017
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by Lemus Julio Ernesto (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/19/2017
  • DocketDeclaration; Filed by Keterite Corporation (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/19/2017
  • DocketDECLARATION OF DEMURRING PARTY IN SUPPORT OF AUTOMATIC EXTENSION

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/25/2017
  • DocketProof-Service/Summons; Filed by Jose Juan Castillo (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/25/2017
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/22/2017
  • DocketProof-Service/Summons; Filed by Jose Juan Castillo (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/22/2017
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/02/2017
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Jose Juan Castillo (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/02/2017
  • DocketCOMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES BASED ON: 1. MOTOR VEHICLE NEGLIGENCE, ETC

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/02/2017
  • DocketSUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC659853    Hearing Date: February 27, 2020    Dept: SEC

CASTILLO v. SMITH

CASE NO.: BC659853

HEARING: 02/27/2020

JUDGE: OLIVIA ROSALES

#6

TENTATIVE RULING

Defendant KELTERITE CORPORATION’s Demurrer to Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint is OVERRULED.

Moving Party to give Notice.

No Opposition filed as of February 25, 2020.

This personal injury action was filed by Plaintiff on May 2, 2017. On November 16, 2017, the Court OVERRULED Defendant Kelterite’s demurrer to the second cause of action for negligence, third cause of action for negligent hiring, training, supervision, and retention, and fourth cause of action for vicarious liability in Plaintiff’s Complaint, and GRANTED Kelterite’s Motion to Strike punitive damages in Plaintiff’s Complaint. Plaintiff was given 15 days to file an amended complaint in accordance with the Court’s ruling on the Motion to Strike.

On February 1, 2019, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint asserting the following causes of action: (1) Motor Vehicle Negligence; (2) Negligence; (3) Negligent Hiring, Training, Supervision, and Retention of Employees; and (4) Vicarious Liability.

Kelterite now demurs to Plaintiff’s second, third, and fourth causes of action pursuant to CCP §430.10(e).

As indicated above, the Court previously overruled demurrers to the second, third, and fourth causes of action. Kelterite is not permitted to again demur to those causes of action. Its only attack would have been by way of a timely motion for reconsideration. (Bennett v. Suncloud (1999) 56 Cal.App.4th 91, 96.) The demurrer to the second, third, and fourth causes of action is overruled.

Case Number: BC659853    Hearing Date: December 04, 2019    Dept: SEC

CASTILLO v. SMITH, et al.

CASE NO.:  BC659853

HEARING 12/4/19

#9

TENTATIVE ORDER

Specially appearing Defendant Timothy Peterson’s motion to quash service of summons on first amended complaint is GRANTED.

Moving Party to give NOTICE.

Specially appearing Defendant Timothy Peterson moves to quash service of summons pursuant to CCP 415,20 and 418.10.

“In lieu of personal delivery of a copy of the summons and complaint to the person to be served as specified in Section 416.10, 416.20, 416.30, 416.40, or 416.50, a summons may be served by leaving a copy of the summons and complaint during usual office hours in his or her office or, if no physical address is known, at his or her usual mailing address, other than a United States Postal Service post office box, with· the person who is apparently in charge thereof, and by thereafter mailing a copy of the summons and complaint by first-class mail, postage prepaid to the person to be served at the place where a copy of the summons and complaint were left. When service is effected by leaving a copy of the summons and complaint at a mailing address, it shall be left with a person at least 18 years of age, who shall be informed of the contents thereof.” (CCP 415.20(a).)

At the 11/19/19 hearing on this motion, Plaintiff advised the court that an Opposition was filed in May 2019, and requests the court to consider the Opposition.

As an initial matter, the court thanks the parties for their patience during this e-filing transition process. Although the Opposition appears on the court’s docket, the system sometimes does not “relate” all documents to the actual hearing. Therefore, this court was not able to review the Opposition prior to the hearing.

Having now reviewed the opposition, the ruling remains the same.

Here, Timothy Peterson rebutted the presumption of valid service by submitting the declaration of Cindy Padillo, who declares that she is a receptionist at Sialic Contractors Corporation, located at 12240 Woodruff Avenue, Downey, CA. (Padillo Decl., ¶ 1.) Timothy Peterson was sub-served at Sialic Contractors Corporation, and Peterson is not an employee, nor does he work for Sialic in any capacity whatsoever. (Id. at ¶ 6.) Once the process server left, Padillo realized that the address of place of service incorrectly said it was 12231 Pangborn Avenue, Downey, CA. (Id. at ¶ 8.)

Plaintiff’s opposition merely insists that 12231 Pangborn Avenue is Defendant’s place of business, but does not properly address Padillo’s declaration, stating that the documents were received at a completely different address, and that Timothy Peterson does not work at that address.

Accordingly, sub-service upon Timothy Peterson was improper. The motion is GRANTED.

Case Number: BC659853    Hearing Date: November 19, 2019    Dept: SEC

CASTILLO v. SMITH, et al.

CASE NO.:  BC659853

HEARING 11/19/19

JUDGE: MARGARET M. BERNAL

#5

TENTATIVE ORDER

Specially appearing Defendant Timothy Peterson’s unopposed motion to quash service of summons on first amended complaint is GRANTED.

Moving Party to give NOTICE.

Specially appearing Defendant Timothy Peterson moves to quash service of summons pursuant to CCP 415,20 and 418.10.

“In lieu of personal delivery of a copy of the summons and complaint to the person to be served as specified in Section 416.10, 416.20, 416.30, 416.40, or 416.50, a summons may be served by leaving a copy of the summons and complaint during usual office hours in his or her office or, if no physical address is known, at his or her usual mailing address, other than a United States Postal Service post office box, with· the person who is apparently in charge thereof, and by thereafter mailing a copy of the summons and complaint by first-class mail, postage prepaid to the person to be served at the place where a copy of the summons and complaint were left. When service is effected by leaving a copy of the summons and complaint at a mailing address, it shall be left with a person at least 18 years of age, who shall be informed of the contents thereof.” (CCP 415.20(a).)

Here, Timothy Peterson was sub-served at Sialic Contractors Corporation. Cindy Padillo declares that Timothy Peterson is not an employee, nor does he work for Sialic in any capacity whatsoever. (Padillo Decl., Par. 6.)

Accordingly, sub-service upon Timothy Peterson was improper. The motion is GRANTED.