This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 04/11/2020 at 09:35:22 (UTC).

MEHDI SHALVIRI VS SOBER LIVING BY THE SEA INC. ET AL

Case Summary

On 02/08/2018 MEHDI SHALVIRI filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against SOBER LIVING BY THE SEA INC. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are GEORGINA T. RIZK, KRISTIN S. ESCALANTE and MARK A. BORENSTEIN. The case status is Other.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****3387

  • Filing Date:

    02/08/2018

  • Case Status:

    Other

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

GEORGINA T. RIZK

KRISTIN S. ESCALANTE

MARK A. BORENSTEIN

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner

SHALVIRI MEHDI

Defendants and Respondents

SOBER LIVING BY THE SEA INC

DOES 1 TO 10

NEWTON RANDY WAYNE

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

AMINPOUR A. KING

AMINPOUR A. KING ESQ.

KHASHAYAR DARYOOSH ESQ.

Defendant and Respondent Attorneys

GORDON REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI LLP

WILLIAMSON IAN GARTH ESQ.

FOX DANA ALDEN

 

Court Documents

Reply - REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION IN LIMINE # 4

3/2/2020: Reply - REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION IN LIMINE # 4

Reply - REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION IN LIMINE # 2

3/2/2020: Reply - REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION IN LIMINE # 2

Declaration - DECLARATION OF DARYOOSH KHASHAYAR IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO EX PARTE

2/25/2020: Declaration - DECLARATION OF DARYOOSH KHASHAYAR IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO EX PARTE

Witness List

2/5/2020: Witness List

Jury Instructions

2/5/2020: Jury Instructions

Motion in Limine - MOTION IN LIMINE (1 OF 8) PLAINTIFFS NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE AND ARGUMENT REGARDING UNRELATED MEDICAL HISTORY AND MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORI

1/2/2020: Motion in Limine - MOTION IN LIMINE (1 OF 8) PLAINTIFFS NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE AND ARGUMENT REGARDING UNRELATED MEDICAL HISTORY AND MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORI

Motion in Limine - MOTION IN LIMINE (5 OF 8) PLAINTIFFS NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE OPINION TESTIMONY BY DEFENDANTS EXPERT WITNESS KEVIN TRIGGS, M.D. ON THE TOPIC OF PLAINTIFFS

1/2/2020: Motion in Limine - MOTION IN LIMINE (5 OF 8) PLAINTIFFS NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE OPINION TESTIMONY BY DEFENDANTS EXPERT WITNESS KEVIN TRIGGS, M.D. ON THE TOPIC OF PLAINTIFFS

Opposition - OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 8

1/17/2020: Opposition - OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 8

Opposition - OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION IN LIMINHE NO. 4

1/17/2020: Opposition - OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION IN LIMINHE NO. 4

Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

1/17/2020: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

Opposition - OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION IN LIMINE #6

1/21/2020: Opposition - OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION IN LIMINE #6

Exhibit List

1/30/2020: Exhibit List

Motion in Limine - MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 6 TO LIMIT TESTIMONY OF KEN LOBO

12/27/2019: Motion in Limine - MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 6 TO LIMIT TESTIMONY OF KEN LOBO

Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

12/27/2019: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

Motion in Limine - MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 2 TO PRECLUDE PLAINTIFFS UNDESIGNATED EXPERTS AND IMPROPERLY NOTICED NON-RETAINED PROVIDERS FROM OFFERING EXPERT CAUSATION OPINIONS

12/27/2019: Motion in Limine - MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 2 TO PRECLUDE PLAINTIFFS UNDESIGNATED EXPERTS AND IMPROPERLY NOTICED NON-RETAINED PROVIDERS FROM OFFERING EXPERT CAUSATION OPINIONS

Declaration - DECLARATION OF DARYOOSH KHASHAYAR IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM "SURPRISE" AND "MISTAKE" AND ORDER GRANTING CONTINUANCE OF DISCOVERY CUT-OFF

11/12/2019: Declaration - DECLARATION OF DARYOOSH KHASHAYAR IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM "SURPRISE" AND "MISTAKE" AND ORDER GRANTING CONTINUANCE OF DISCOVERY CUT-OFF

Opposition - OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF DISCOVERY CUT-OFF

11/13/2019: Opposition - OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF DISCOVERY CUT-OFF

Declaration - DECLARATION ISO DEFENDANTS' OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL

11/14/2019: Declaration - DECLARATION ISO DEFENDANTS' OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL

128 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 04/07/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 29, Kristin S. Escalante, Presiding; Jury Trial - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/07/2020
  • DocketProof of Service by Mail; Filed by Mehdi Shalviri (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/07/2020
  • DocketRequest for Dismissal; Filed by Mehdi Shalviri (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/24/2020
  • Docketat 10:00 AM in Department 29, Kristin S. Escalante, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/18/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 29, Kristin S. Escalante, Presiding; Court Order

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/18/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Court Order Re: COVID-19;)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/18/2020
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for ((Court Order Re: COVID-19;) of 03/18/2020); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/04/2020
  • DocketMotion in Limine (MOTION IN LIMINE 10); Filed by Sober Living By The Sea Inc (Defendant); Randy Wayne Newton (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/04/2020
  • DocketMotion in Limine (MOTION IN LIMINE 9); Filed by Sober Living By The Sea Inc (Defendant); Randy Wayne Newton (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/03/2020
  • DocketProof of Service by Mail; Filed by Mehdi Shalviri (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
145 More Docket Entries
  • 03/22/2018
  • DocketDEFENDANTS SOBER LIVING BY THE SEA, INC. AND RANDY WAYNE NEWTON'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/08/2018
  • DocketProof-Service/Summons; Filed by Mehdi Shalviri (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/08/2018
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/08/2018
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/08/2018
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/08/2018
  • DocketProof-Service/Summons; Filed by Mehdi Shalviri (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/08/2018
  • DocketProof-Service/Summons; Filed by Mehdi Shalviri (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/08/2018
  • DocketCOMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/08/2018
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Mehdi Shalviri (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/08/2018
  • DocketSUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC693387    Hearing Date: December 12, 2019    Dept: 2

Shalviri v. Sober Living by the Sea, Inc. et al.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Further Discovery Reponses/ Motion for Order Compelling Further Responses to Discovery Request; Request for Monetary Sanctions ismotio DENIED for procedural defects.

First, Plaintiff has failed to provide any evidentiary support for the motion and has not provided the Court with the discovery responses at issue. Nor has Plaintiff filed a separate statement or a declaration of counsel. Although the caption for the notice of motion references a separate statement and a declaration of counsel, no such documents were attached. Plaintiff’s papers also reference a “Notice of Lodgment of Documents” but the Court file does not reflect that any such document was filed or lodged. Without the text of the responses and without evidentiary support for the assertions made in the memorandum of points and authorities, the Court has no basis for ruling on the motion.

Second, Plaintiff was required to comply with the procedures for motions to compel further responses in bringing this motion but failed to do so. As the Court has previously informed Plaintiff in prior orders, a party seeking to compel further responses to discovery requests in a case pending in the personal injury courts is required to first participate in an Informal Discovery Conference with the court. Standing Order Re Personal Injury Procedures, Central District, ¶¶ 12-13, effective 9/26/18. The court’s file does not indicate that the parties participated in an IDC with respect to the discovery requests at issue in this motion.

Finally, the hearing on the motion to compel was set for a date after the motion cut off and is thus untimely. Discovery motions must be heard 15 days before the initial trial date, unless the court expressly orders that the motion cut off will be calculated by virtue of the new trial date. The motion and discovery cut offs were not continued on the date of the last continuance. Indeed, the written stipulation that the parties filed expressly stated that the motion cut-off date will not be based on the new trial date.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.

Case Number: BC693387    Hearing Date: December 04, 2019    Dept: 2

BC693387 Shalviri v. Sober Living by the Sea

On the court’s own motion, the hearing on the Motion to Compel Discovery Responses and Production of Documents set for 12/4/19 is continued to 12/12/19 at 1:30 p.m. in Department SS-2. The due date for the opposition and reply is based on the original hearing date.

Case Number: BC693387    Hearing Date: November 27, 2019    Dept: 2

Shalviri v. Sober Living by the Sea, Inc. et al.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Defendant Randy Wayne Newton to Appear at his Deposition and Respond to Questions filed on 11/12/19 is DENIED for procedural defects.

First, Plaintiff did not give sufficient notice of motion. The proof of service indicates that Plaintiff personally served the motion on 11/11/19 and filed it on 11/12/19. The motion was required to be filed and served on 11/4/19 to allow for 16 court days of notice. Cal Code Civil Procedure § 1005(b).

Second, Plaintiff was required to comply with the procedures for motions to compel further responses in bringing this motion but failed to do so. Plaintiff’s motion is based on Defendant’s refusal to answer certain questions at his deposition. Where a deponent fails to answer any question, the party seeking discovery may move the court for an order compelling that answer. Cal Code Civil Procedure § 2025.480.(a). But motions that require a further response to questions require that the parties first participate in an Informal Discovery Conference with the court. Standing Order Re Personal Injury Procedures, Central District, ¶¶ 12-13, effective 9/26/18. The court’s file does not indicate that the parties participated in an IDC with respect to the questions precluded at Defendant’s deposition. The (The court also notes, for future reference, that a motion to compel further responses must be accompanied by a separate statement, but none was filed here. The court does not deny the request on this basis.)

Finally, the hearing on the motion to compel was set for a date after the motion cut off and is thus untimely. Discovery motions must be heard 15 days before the trial date. Even if the motion cut off had been continued when the trial date was previously continued (which it was not), the trial date was still untimely.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.