This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 12/10/2020 at 03:01:08 (UTC).

NATASA SULLIVAN ET AL VS LABEL 27 ET AL

Case Summary

On 06/12/2017 NATASA SULLIVAN filed a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury lawsuit against LABEL 27. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is DANIEL M. CROWLEY. The case status is Disposed - Dismissed.
Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****4797

  • Filing Date:

    06/12/2017

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Dismissed

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

DANIEL M. CROWLEY

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs

SULLIVAN NATASA

SULLIVAN DAVE

Defendants, Cross Defendants and Cross Plaintiffs

TOPANGA COMMUNITY CLUB

XPERT PREMIER PROTECTIVE SERVICES INC

SALAZAR MAXIMILLION JR. [DOE 1] AKA MAXIMILLIAN SALAZAR JR. AKA MAX SALAZAR JR. AKA MAX SALAZAR

LABEL 27 AKA LABEL27

AMIT GILAD DBA LABEL 27 AKA LABEL 27

SALAZAR JR . MAXIMILLON

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorneys

GOLDMAN BARRY IRWIN

SWEETS DANIELLE ERIN

Defendant Attorney

BEAVERS ROBERT WESLEY

Cross Plaintiff Attorneys

MARICONDA KENT GERARD ESQ.

OLSON SONALI

 

Court Documents

Request for Dismissal - REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL (NOT ENTERED)

11/5/2020: Request for Dismissal - REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL (NOT ENTERED)

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL (SETTLEMENT) (CONDITIONAL))

12/7/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL (SETTLEMENT) (CONDITIONAL))

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (NUNC PRO TUNC ORDER)

12/7/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (NUNC PRO TUNC ORDER)

Order - Dismissal

12/7/2020: Order - Dismissal

Notice - NOTICE OF RULING ON OSC RE DISMISSAL

12/7/2020: Notice - NOTICE OF RULING ON OSC RE DISMISSAL

Request for Dismissal

11/2/2020: Request for Dismissal

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL (SETTLEMENT) (CONDITIONAL))

11/6/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL (SETTLEMENT) (CONDITIONAL))

Request for Dismissal - REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL - NOT ENTERED

7/14/2020: Request for Dismissal - REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL - NOT ENTERED

Request for Dismissal

6/10/2020: Request for Dismissal

Request for Dismissal

6/26/2020: Request for Dismissal

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER)

4/20/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER)

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR [MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER)]

4/21/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR [MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER)]

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (NON-APPEARANCE CASE REVIEW RE NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT)

2/6/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (NON-APPEARANCE CASE REVIEW RE NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT)

Notice of Settlement

2/6/2020: Notice of Settlement

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (NON-APPEARANCE CASE REVIEW RE NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT) OF 02/06/2020

2/6/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (NON-APPEARANCE CASE REVIEW RE NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT) OF 02/06/2020

Motion to Continue Trial Date

12/11/2019: Motion to Continue Trial Date

Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

1/2/2020: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

Opposition - OPPOSITION PLAINTIFF NATASA SULLIVAN'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO CONTINUE MANDATORY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE AND TRIAL; DECLARATION OF DANIELLE E. SWEETS IN SUPPORT THEREOF

1/2/2020: Opposition - OPPOSITION PLAINTIFF NATASA SULLIVAN'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO CONTINUE MANDATORY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE AND TRIAL; DECLARATION OF DANIELLE E. SWEETS IN SUPPORT THEREOF

68 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 12/07/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 28, Daniel M. Crowley, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement) ((conditional)) - Held

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/07/2020
  • Docketat 2:17 PM in Department 28, Daniel M. Crowley, Presiding; Nunc Pro Tunc Order

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/07/2020
  • DocketNotice (OF RULING ON OSC RE DISMISSAL); Filed by Topanga Community Club (Cross-Complainant)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/07/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement) (conditional))); Filed by Clerk

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/07/2020
  • DocketOrder - Dismissal; Filed by Court

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/07/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Nunc Pro Tunc Order)); Filed by Clerk

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/06/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 28, Daniel M. Crowley, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement) ((conditional)) - Held - Continued

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/06/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement) (conditional))); Filed by Clerk

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/05/2020
  • DocketRequest for Dismissal ((not entered)); Filed by Topanga Community Club (Cross-Complainant)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/02/2020
  • DocketRequest for Dismissal; Filed by Xpert Premier Protective Services Inc (Cross-Complainant)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
106 More Docket Entries
  • 09/08/2017
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/08/2017
  • DocketProof of Service (not Summons and Complaint); Filed by Dave Sullivan (Plaintiff); Natasa Sullivan (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 08/21/2017
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 08/21/2017
  • DocketProof-Service/Summons

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 08/21/2017
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 08/14/2017
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by Topanga Community Club (Defendant)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 08/14/2017
  • DocketDEFENDANT'S ANSWER TO COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 06/12/2017
  • DocketSUMMONS

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 06/12/2017
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Dave Sullivan (Plaintiff); Natasa Sullivan (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 06/12/2017
  • DocketCOMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1. NEGLIGENT INFLICTION OF PERSONAL INJURY: PREMISES LIABILITY; ETC

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: ****4797    Hearing Date: January 15, 2020    Dept: 28

Motion to Continue MSC, Trial and Related Dates

Having considered the moving, opposing, and reply papers, the Court rules as follows.

BACKGROUND

On June 12, 2017, Plaintiffs Natasa Sullivan and Dave Sullivan filed a complaint against Defendants Amit Gilad dba Label 27 aka Label27, Topanga Community Club, and Xpert Premier Protective Services Inc.  The complaint alleges negligence, negligent hiring and retention, and loss of consortium for Doe Defendants climbing a fence and falling on Plaintiff Natasa Sullivan on July 24, 2016.

On October 6, 2017, the Court dismissed Plaintiff Dave Sullivan.

On August 16, 2018, Defendant/Cross-Complainant Xpert Premier Protective Services Inc. filed a cross-complaint against Defendants/Cross-Defendants Amit Gilad dba Label 27 aka Label27 and Topanga Community Club and Cross-Defendant Maximillion Salazar, Jr.  This cross-complaint seeks indemnification, apportionment, and declaratory relief.

On August 24, 2018, Defendant/Cross-Complainant Xpert Premier Protective Services Inc. filed a first amended cross-complaint.

On August 29, 2018, Defendant/Cross-Defendant/Cross-Complainant Topanga Community Club filed a cross-complaint against Defendant/Cross-Defendant Amit Gilad dba Label 27 aka Label27 and Defendant/Cross-Complainant/Cross-Defendant Xpert Premier Protective Services Inc.  This cross-complaint seeks indemnification, apportionment, declaratory relief, and contribution.

On September 7, 2018, Defendant/Cross-Defendant/Cross-Complainant Amit Gilad dba Label 27 aka Label27 filed a cross-complaint against Defendant/Cross-Complainant/Cross-Defendant Xpert Premier Protective Services Inc and Defendant/Cross-Defendant/Cross-Complainant Topanga Community ClubThis cross-complaint seeks contribution, indemnification, injunctive relief, and declaratory relief.

On September 20, 2018, Plaitniff Natasa Sullivan filed an amendment to her complaint renaming Doe 1 as Defendant Maximillion Salazar, Jr., aka Maximillian Salazar, Jr., Max Salazar, Jr., and Max Salazar.

On December 11, 2019, Defendant/Cross-Defendant/Cross-Complainant Topanga Community Club filed a motion to continue the mandatory settlement conference, trial and related dates pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1332 and California Code of Civil Procedure section 2024.050.

Trial is set for February 24, 2020.

PARTYS REQUEST

Defendant/Cross-Defendant/Cross-Complainant Topanga Community Club (“Moving Party”) asks the Court to continue a mandatory settlement conference, trial and related dates for three months so Moving Party’s motion for summary judgment may be heard.

LEGAL STANDARD

Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1332, subdivision (a), “[t]o ensure the prompt disposition of civil cases, the dates assigned for a trial are firm. All parties and their counsel must regard the date set for trial as certain.” Under California Rules of Court, rule 3.1332, subdivision (b), “[a] party seeking a continuance of the date set for trial, whether contested or uncontested or stipulated to by the parties, must make the request for a continuance by a noticed motion or an ex parte application under the rules in chapter 4 of this division, with supporting declarations. The party must make the motion or application as soon as reasonably practical once the necessity for the continuance is discovered.”

California Rules of Court, rule 3.1332, subdivision (c) states that “[a]lthough continuances of trials are disfavored, each request for a continuance must be considered on its own merits. The court may grant a continuance only on an affirmative showing of good cause requiring the continuance.”  California Rules of Court, rule 3.1332, subdivision (d) sets forth factors that are relevant in determining whether to grant a continuance.

California Code of Civil Procedure section 2024.050 allows a court to grant leave to complete discovery proceedings.  In doing so, a court shall consider matters relevant to the leave requested, including, but not limited to: (1) the necessity of the discovery, (2) the diligence in seeking the discovery or discovery motion, (3) the likelihood of interference with the trial calendar or prejudice to a party, and (4) the length of time that has elapsed between previous trial dates.  (Code Civ. Proc. ; 2024.050.)

DISCUSSION

Moving Party argues there is good cause to continue trialMoving Party argues that April 27, 2020 was the earliest date it could obtain for a hearing on a motion for summary judgment.  (Siepler Decl., ¶ 8, Motion, p. 4:4-4:11.)  Trial has been four times.  (Sweets Decl., 6.)  The first continuance was because Plaintiff’s counsel had undergone surgery due to a medical complication.  (Siepler Reply Decl., 3.)  The second continuance was because “continuing discovery issues.”  (Siepler Reply Decl., ¶ 4.)  The third continuance was because of difficulties in obtaining Maximillion Salazar’s deposition.  (Siepler Reply Decl., ¶ 5.)  And the fourth continuance was for Plaintiff to depose Mr. Salazar and for the parties to participate in mediation.

The Court finds it in the interest of justice to continue trial.  The continuances were largely because of discovery issues.  Such discovery issues must be alleviated before filing a motion for summary judgment.  The Court finds the importance of Moving Party’s motion for summary judgment outweighs any prejudice caused by a short three-month continuance.  This case is not even three years old.  As such, the motion is properly granted.

The Court notes that there is no scheduled mandatory settlement conference, despite what the moving papers state.  As such, there is no mandatory settlement conference to continue.

CONCLUSION

The motion is GRANTED.

The Court orders trial shall be continued to May 28, 2020 at 8:30 a.m.  The Court also orders the final status conference date shall be continued to May 14, 2020 at 10:00 a.m.  Both hearings are to be held in Department 28 of the Spring Street Courthouse, 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012. to remain in relation to the May 28, 2020 trial date.

Moving Party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.



related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where TOPANGA COMMUNITY CLUB is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer GOLDMAN BARRY I.

Latest cases represented by Lawyer SWEETS DANIELLE E.