Search

Attributes

This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 05/31/2019 at 03:22:45 (UTC).

MARC SKIPWITH VS ALPINE INTERIORS CORPORATION, ET AT.,

Case Summary

On 09/15/2017 MARC SKIPWITH filed a Contract - Business Governance lawsuit against ALPINE INTERIORS CORPORATION, ET AT . This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are NANCY L. NEWMAN and MITCHELL L. BECKLOFF. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****8107

  • Filing Date:

    09/15/2017

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Business Governance

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

NANCY L. NEWMAN

MITCHELL L. BECKLOFF

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Cross Defendant

SKIPWITH MARC

Defendants and Cross Plaintiffs

IRELAND JOHANNES VAN

ALPINE INTERIORS CORPORATION

ADLI LAW GROUP PC

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

VOSS JR. DAVID C.

Defendant Attorneys

SHERMAN DREW H.

SHERMAN DREW HARRIS

ADLI DARIUSH GHAFFAR

Cross Defendant Attorney

VOSS DAVID CRAIN JR

 

Court Documents

Summons

9/15/2017: Summons

Unknown

2/6/2018: Unknown

Minute Order

2/7/2018: Minute Order

Unknown

3/23/2018: Unknown

Minute Order

3/29/2018: Minute Order

Unknown

5/30/2018: Unknown

Unknown

5/30/2018: Unknown

Unknown

6/14/2018: Unknown

Minute Order

6/14/2018: Minute Order

Unknown

6/14/2018: Unknown

Unknown

6/15/2018: Unknown

Unknown

6/26/2018: Unknown

Proof of Personal Service

9/13/2018: Proof of Personal Service

Minute Order

9/27/2018: Minute Order

Unknown

10/2/2018: Unknown

Minute Order

1/16/2019: Minute Order

Unknown

1/31/2019: Unknown

Answer

1/31/2019: Answer

51 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 03/08/2019
  • Demurrer - without Motion to Strike; Filed by ALPINE INTERIORS CORPORATION (Defendant); JOHANNES VAN IRELAND (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/31/2019
  • Answer; Filed by MARC SKIPWITH (Cross-Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/31/2019
  • Amended Complaint; Filed by MARC SKIPWITH (Plaintiff); MARC SKIPWITH (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/16/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department M; Hearing on Demurrer - without Motion to Strike - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/16/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department M; Case Management Conference - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/16/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department M; Hearing on Demurrer - with Motion to Strike (CCP 430.10) - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/16/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Hearing on Demurrer - without Motion to Strike; Case Manageme...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/16/2019
  • Certificate of Mailing for (Minute Order (Hearing on Demurrer - without Motion to Strike; Case Manageme...) of 01/16/2019); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/09/2019
  • Reply to Cross-Complainant's Opposition to Demurrer to First Amended Cross-Complaint; Filed by MARC SKIPWITH (Cross-Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/03/2019
  • Opposition (ALPINE INTERIORS OPPOSITION TO CROSS-DEFENDANTS DEMURRER TO FIRST AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT); Filed by ALPINE INTERIORS CORPORATION (Cross-Complainant)

    Read MoreRead Less
117 More Docket Entries
  • 01/16/2018
  • Minute order entered: 2018-01-16 00:00:00; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/09/2018
  • Case Management Statement; Filed by MARC SKIPWITH (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/09/2018
  • Statement-Case Management; Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/21/2017
  • Declaration; Filed by ALPINE INTERIORS CORPORATION (Defendant); JOHANNES VAN IRELAND (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/21/2017
  • Declaration (OF DEMURRING PARTY IN SUPPORT OF AUTOMATIC EXTENSION ); Filed by Attorney for Defendant

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/15/2017
  • Summons; Filed by Plaintiff

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/15/2017
  • Complaint; Filed by MARC SKIPWITH (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/15/2017
  • Civil Case Cover Sheet

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/15/2017
  • Complaint Filed

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/15/2017
  • Summons Filed; Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: SC128107    Hearing Date: October 05, 2020    Dept: M

CASE NAME: Marc Skipwith v. Alpine Interiors Corp., et al.

CASE NO.: SC128107

MOTION: Defendants’ Motion to Continue Trial and All Pre-trial Dates

HEARING DATE: 10/5/2020

DISCOVERY C/O: 9/13/2020

ORIGINAL TRIAL: 10/13/2020

BACKGROUND

In September 2018, Plaintiff Marc Skipwith, (“Plaintiff”) filed a verified third amended complaint against Defendant Alpine Interior Corporation, Johannes Van Ierland, and Does 1 -10 for (1) involuntary dissolution of corporation, (2) open book account, and (3) fraud. The original trial date was set for October 13, 2020. On August 6, 2020, Defendants filed a motion seeking a continuance of the trial date and all associated pretrial dates to at least 90 days from the dates set. This motion is unopposed.

On August 12, 2020, the Court, on its own motion, vacated the Jury Trial scheduled for October 13, 2020 and set the matter for a trial setting conference.

LEGAL STANDARD

Granting or denying a continuance is within the Court’s discretion. (Schlothan v. Rusalem, (1953) 41 Cal.2d 414, 417.) Each request for a continuance is considered on its own merits. (CRC Rule 3.1332(c).) However, “there is no right to a continuance as a matter of law.” (Fisher v. Larsen, (1982) 138 Cal.App.3d 627, 648.) The Court will only grant a continuance when the moving party has affirmatively established that good cause exists. (Ibid.)

The general discovery deadline is 30 days before the trial date. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2024.020.) The expert witness discovery deadline is 15 days before the trial date. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2024.030.)

ANALYSIS

Defendants argue that good cause exists to continue all pretrial dates. Circumstances that may indicate good cause include, “(6) A party's excused inability to obtain essential testimony, documents, or other material evidence despite diligent efforts; or (7) A significant, unanticipated change in the status of the case as a result of which the case is not ready for trial.” (CRC Rule 1332(c) (6) & (7).). Defendants request a continuance of at all associated pretrial dates to at least 90 days from the dates set.

All pretrial deadlines were computed based on the October 13, 2020 trial date. Defendants request a continuance to complete discovery. Defendants argue that they have been unable to respond to discovery because Johannes Van Ierland was stuck in Germany caring for his ill mother due the coronavirus pandemic. Under CRC Rule 3.1332(c)(6), there is good cause to continue trial when a party makes an affirmative showing that there has been an excused inability to obtain essential testimony, documents, or other material evidence despite diligent efforts. Defendants argue that the earliest date that Van Ierland would be able to return was August 17, 2020. Sherman, Defendants’ counsel, explains that he has had limited communication with Van Ierland after Van Ierland left to take care of his mother. Sherman also notes that responsive documents to Plaintiff’s requests for production are in a secure location that can only be accessed by Van Ierland. (See Sherman Decl. ¶¶ 8-12.)

The Court finds that Defendants have made an affirmative showing of good cause to issue a continuance of all pretrial dates.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Continue Trial and all Related Dates is GRANTED. The new trial date will be set at the TSC. All pretrial discovery dates will follow the new trial date.

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where ADLI LAW GROUP P.C. is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer VOSS DAVID CRAIN