This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 04/02/2022 at 16:48:27 (UTC).

LOKISHA ELOIS BROWN, MS. VS JOSE W. BERMUDEZ GAITAN, ET AL.

Case Summary

On 12/15/2020 LOKISHA ELOIS BROWN, MS filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against JOSE W BERMUDEZ GAITAN. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are SERENA R. MURILLO and CHRISTOPHER K. LUI. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******7897

  • Filing Date:

    12/15/2020

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

SERENA R. MURILLO

CHRISTOPHER K. LUI

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs

BROWN LOKISHA ELOIS MS.

BROWN LOKISHA ELOIS

Defendants

GLOBAL PARATRANSIT INC.

BERMUDEZ GAITAN JOSE W.

ACCESS SERVICES

GAITAN BERMUDEZ JOSE W.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

SOOFER RAMIN

Defendant Attorneys

MOORE KENTON E

MOORE KENTON E.

 

Court Documents

Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

2/18/2022: Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

Answer

1/21/2022: Answer

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR [CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER]

1/19/2022: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR [CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER]

Order - CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER

1/19/2022: Order - CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND REQUEST FOR MONETA...)

1/19/2022: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND REQUEST FOR MONETA...)

Opposition - OPPOSITION PLAINTIFFS REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

1/10/2022: Opposition - OPPOSITION PLAINTIFFS REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

Proof of Personal Service

1/12/2022: Proof of Personal Service

Case Management Statement

1/4/2022: Case Management Statement

Opposition - OPPOSITION BY DEFENDANTS TO MOTION BY PLAINTIFF FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANTS AND THEIR COUNSEL; DECLARATION OF TIFFANY SCHNEIDER

1/5/2022: Opposition - OPPOSITION BY DEFENDANTS TO MOTION BY PLAINTIFF FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS AGAINST DEFENDANTS AND THEIR COUNSEL; DECLARATION OF TIFFANY SCHNEIDER

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (NUNC PRO TUNC ORDER) OF 12/07/2021

12/7/2021: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (NUNC PRO TUNC ORDER) OF 12/07/2021

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (NUNC PRO TUNC ORDER)

12/7/2021: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (NUNC PRO TUNC ORDER)

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE)

12/7/2021: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE)

Notice - NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

11/24/2021: Notice - NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Notice of Case Management Conference

11/2/2021: Notice of Case Management Conference

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (RULING ON SUBMITTED MATTER)

10/20/2021: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (RULING ON SUBMITTED MATTER)

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER RE TRANSFER AND REASSIGNMENT OF COMPLICATED PERSO...)

10/21/2021: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER RE TRANSFER AND REASSIGNMENT OF COMPLICATED PERSO...)

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER RE TRANSFER AND REASSIGNMENT OF COMPLICATED PERSO...) OF 10/21/2021

10/21/2021: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER RE TRANSFER AND REASSIGNMENT OF COMPLICATED PERSO...) OF 10/21/2021

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER DISCOVERY RESPONSES; HEAR...)

9/20/2021: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER DISCOVERY RESPONSES; HEAR...)

48 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 07/17/2023
  • Hearing07/17/2023 at 08:30 AM in Department 76 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/05/2023
  • Hearing07/05/2023 at 08:30 AM in Department 76 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Final Status Conference

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/18/2022
  • DocketNotice of Posting of Jury Fees; Filed by Lokisha Elois Brown (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/21/2022
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by Access Services (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/19/2022
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 76, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: (Why Defendants' Counsel should not be Sanctioned $500 for Failure to Appear at the Case Management Conference) - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/19/2022
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 76, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: (Proof of Service as to Defendant Access Service) - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/19/2022
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 76, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Case Management Conference - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/19/2022
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 76, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Protective Order (and Request for Monetary Sanctions as Against Defendants and their Counsel of Record, Kenton E. Moore [Res. ID# 968703024768]) - Held - Motion Denied

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/19/2022
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 29, Serena R. Murillo, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Protective Order (and Request for Monetary Sanctions as Against Defendants and their Counsel of Record, Kenton E. Moore [Res. ID# 968703024768]) - Not Held - Rescheduled by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/19/2022
  • DocketCase Management Order; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
71 More Docket Entries
  • 01/20/2021
  • DocketPI General Order; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/14/2021
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by Jose W. Gaitan Bermudez (Defendant); Global Paratransit, Inc. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/14/2021
  • DocketNotice of Posting of Jury Fees; Filed by Jose W. Gaitan Bermudez (Defendant); Global Paratransit, Inc. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/24/2020
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by Lokisha Elois Brown (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/24/2020
  • DocketProof of Service by Substituted Service; Filed by Lokisha Elois Brown (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/15/2020
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by Lokisha Elois Brown (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/15/2020
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by Lokisha Elois Brown (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/15/2020
  • DocketSummons (on Complaint); Filed by Lokisha Elois Brown (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/15/2020
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Lokisha Elois Brown (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/15/2020
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: *******7897 Hearing Date: January 19, 2022 Dept: 76

Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Gaitan Bermudez was negligently operating a vehicle owed by Defendant Global Paratransit, Inc., and collided with Plaintiff’s vehicle.

Plaintiff Lokisha Elois Brown moves for a protective order.

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff Lokisha Elois Brown’s motion for a protective order and request for sanctions is DENIED.

Pursuant to CCP 2025.420(h), Defendant’s counter-request for sanctions is GRANTED in the reduced amount of $500 against Plaintiff and her counsel, jointly and severally. Sanctions to be paid to Defendant’s counsel within 10 days.

ANALYSIS

Motion For Protective Order

Plaintiff Lokisha Elois Brown moves for a protective order as follows: (1) Requiring Defendant to produce the Smart Drive video of the incident before Plaintiff is required to sit for her deposition; (2) Imposing monetary sanctions for forcing this motion, for discovery misuse in the amount of $3,210 against Defendants and their counsel.

As Defendant points out, it is unclear upon which section of the Code of Civil Procedure Plaintiff relies in bringing this motion for a protective order. Regarding protective orders pertaining to depositions, CCP 2025.420 provides in pertinent part:

(a) Before, during, or after a deposition, any party, any deponent, or any other affected natural person or organization may promptly move for a protective order. The motion shall be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration under Section 2016.040.

(b) The court, for good cause shown, may make any order that justice requires to protect any party, deponent, or other natural person or organization from unwarranted annoyance, embarrassment, or oppression, or undue burden and expense. This protective order may include, but is not limited to, one or more of the following directions:

. . .

(5) That the deposition be taken only on certain specified terms and conditions.

. . .

(h) The court shall impose a monetary sanction under Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 2023.010) against any party, person, or attorney who unsuccessfully makes or opposes a motion for a protective order, unless it finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust.

(Code Civ. Proc., 2025.420(a), (b)(5) & (h).)

Plaintiff claims that Defendant failed to produce the Smart Drive video with document production (a link to the video was not provided), and Defendant has impermissibly conditioned production of the video on a “chain of custody” agreement which is really a confidentiality agreement. Plaintiff argues that she is entitled to production of the video to refresh her recollection of the incident prior to sitting for her deposition.

However, Plaintiff has failed to provide a copy of the “chain of custody” agreement, or to describe its terms, so that the Court can determine why it “is really a confidentiality agreement,” that is impermissible. Plaintiff has not demonstrated why signing such an agreement is objectionable. Absent such a showing, the Court does not find good cause for the issuance of a protective order which conditions Plaintiff’s deposition upon the production of the video beforehand.

Further, if Plaintiff desired a motion compelling production of the video pursuant to a request for production of documents, Plaintiff’s recourse is a motion to compel compliance pursuant to CCP 2031.320.

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion for a protective order and request for sanctions is DENIED.

Pursuant to CCP 2025.420(h), Defendant’s counter-request for sanctions is GRANTED in the reduced amount of $500 against Plaintiff and her counsel, jointly and severally. Sanctions to be paid to Defendant’s counsel within 10 days.


related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where GLOBAL PARATRANSIT INC. is a litigant

Latest cases where ACCESS SERVICES is a litigant