This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 04/17/2022 at 11:00:03 (UTC).

ORLANDO CUARTO VS PACIFIC PALMS RESORT, ET AL.

Case Summary

On 02/11/2021 ORLANDO CUARTO filed a Personal Injury - Uninsured Motor Vehicle lawsuit against PACIFIC PALMS RESORT. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is AUDRA MORI. The case status is Disposed - Dismissed.
Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******5563

  • Filing Date:

    02/11/2021

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Dismissed

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Uninsured Motor Vehicle

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

AUDRA MORI

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

CUARTO ORLANDO

Defendants

PACIFIC PALMS GOLF

PACIFIC PALMS RESORT

INDUSTRY HILLS GOLF CLUB

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Defendant Attorney

LEWIS ROSEMARIE SUAZO

Other Attorneys

SHAH AMEER

 

Court Documents

Motion for Terminating Sanctions

1/4/2022: Motion for Terminating Sanctions

Reply - NOTICE OF AND REPLY TO NON-OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS AGAINST ORLANDO CUARTO PURSUANT TO CCP 2023.030, 2030.290, AND 2031.320; AND REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL MONETARY SANCTI

2/7/2022: Reply - NOTICE OF AND REPLY TO NON-OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS AGAINST ORLANDO CUARTO PURSUANT TO CCP 2023.030, 2030.290, AND 2031.320; AND REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL MONETARY SANCTI

Order - Dismissal

2/15/2022: Order - Dismissal

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS)

2/15/2022: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS)

Notice of Ruling

2/24/2022: Notice of Ruling

Notice of Entry of Dismissal and Proof of Service

2/28/2022: Notice of Entry of Dismissal and Proof of Service

Notice - NOTICE OF ENTRY OF ORDERS RE MOTIONS TO COMPEL

12/13/2021: Notice - NOTICE OF ENTRY OF ORDERS RE MOTIONS TO COMPEL

Reply - REPLY NOTICE OF AND REPLY TO NON-OPPOSITION TO MTC PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO SP ROGS #1

11/24/2021: Reply - REPLY NOTICE OF AND REPLY TO NON-OPPOSITION TO MTC PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO SP ROGS #1

Reply - REPLY NOTICE OF AND REPLY TO NON-OPPOSITION TO MTC PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO RQP #1

11/24/2021: Reply - REPLY NOTICE OF AND REPLY TO NON-OPPOSITION TO MTC PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO RQP #1

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION TO COMPEL MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES FOR FO...)

11/29/2021: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION TO COMPEL MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES FOR FO...)

Notice of Ruling

11/29/2021: Notice of Ruling

Notice of Ruling

12/3/2021: Notice of Ruling

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION TO COMPEL MOTION TO COMPEL (MOTION TO COMPE...)

12/3/2021: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION TO COMPEL MOTION TO COMPEL (MOTION TO COMPE...)

Reply - REPLY NOTICE OF AND REPLY TO NON-OPPOSITION TO MTC PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO JCFR #1

11/19/2021: Reply - REPLY NOTICE OF AND REPLY TO NON-OPPOSITION TO MTC PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO JCFR #1

Motion to Compel - MOTION TO COMPEL MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, SET ONE; REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS

7/20/2021: Motion to Compel - MOTION TO COMPEL MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, SET ONE; REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS

Motion to Compel - MOTION TO COMPEL MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO JUDICIAL COUNCIL FORM INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE, REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS

7/20/2021: Motion to Compel - MOTION TO COMPEL MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO JUDICIAL COUNCIL FORM INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE, REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS

Motion to Compel - MOTION TO COMPEL MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE; REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS

7/20/2021: Motion to Compel - MOTION TO COMPEL MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE; REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS

Answer

4/7/2021: Answer

16 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 02/28/2022
  • DocketNotice of Entry of Dismissal and Proof of Service; Filed by Pacific Palms Resort (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/24/2022
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by Pacific Palms Resort (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/15/2022
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 31, Audra Mori, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Terminating Sanctions - Held - Motion Granted

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/15/2022
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Hearing on Motion for Terminating Sanctions)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/15/2022
  • DocketOrder - Dismissal; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/07/2022
  • DocketNOTICE OF AND REPLY TO NON-OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS AGAINST ORLANDO CUARTO PURSUANT TO CCP 2023.030, 2030.290, AND 2031.320; AND REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL MONETARY SANCTIONS OF $2,059.80 AGAINST PLAINTIFF AND/OR HIS COUNSEL; Filed by Pacific Palms Resort (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/04/2022
  • DocketMotion for Terminating Sanctions (AGAINST ORLANDO CUARTO PURSUANT TO CCP 2023.030, 2030.290, AND 2031.320; AND REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL MONETARY SANCTIONS OF $2,059.80); Filed by Pacific Palms Resort (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/13/2021
  • DocketNOTICE OF ENTRY OF ORDERS RE MOTIONS TO COMPEL; Filed by Pacific Palms Resort (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/03/2021
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 31, Audra Mori, Presiding; Hearing on Motion to Compel (Motion to Compel (Motion to Compel (Motion to Compel Responses for Form Interrogatories, Request for Production of Documents, Special Interrogatories))) - Held - Motion Granted

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/03/2021
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 31, Audra Mori, Presiding; Hearing on Motion to Compel (Motion to Compel (Motion to Compel Responses for Form Interrogatories, Request for Production of Documents, Special Interrogatories)) - Held - Motion Granted

    Read MoreRead Less
12 More Docket Entries
  • 03/17/2021
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by Orlando Cuarto (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/17/2021
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by Orlando Cuarto (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/17/2021
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by Orlando Cuarto (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/03/2021
  • DocketPI General Order; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/03/2021
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for ([PI General Order], Standing Order re PI Procedures and Hearing Date); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/11/2021
  • DocketSummons (on Complaint); Filed by Orlando Cuarto (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/11/2021
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by Orlando Cuarto (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/11/2021
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/11/2021
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Orlando Cuarto (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/11/2021
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by Orlando Cuarto (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: *******5563 Hearing Date: February 15, 2022 Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

ORLANDO CUARTO,

Plaintiff(s),

vs.

PACIFIC PALMS RESORT, ET AL.,

Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO: *******5563

[TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS

Dept. 31

1:30 p.m.

February 15, 2022

1. Background

Plaintiff Orlando Cuarto (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendant Pacific Palms Resort (“Defendant”) for injuries Plaintiff sustained for a slip and fall at Defendant’s golf course.

Defendant moves for terminating sanctions against Plaintiff dismissing Plaintiff’s complaint because of Plaintiff’s misuse of the discovery process by failing to serve responses to initial discovery and failing to comply with the court’s November 29, 2021 and December 3, 2021, Orders pertaining to Defendant’s motion to compel initial responses to the subject discovery. Defendant further requests monetary sanctions of $964.95 against Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s counsel. Alternatively, Defendant requests evidentiary or issue sanctions against Plaintiff.

Any opposition to the motion was due on or before February 2, 2022. On February 7, 2022, Defendant filed a Notice of Non-Opposition; no opposition has been received by the court.

2. Motion for Terminating Sanctions

Code of Civil Procedure 2023.030 gives the court the discretion to impose sanctions against anyone engaging in a misuse of the discovery process. A court may impose terminating sanctions by striking pleadings of the party engaged in misuse of discovery, dismissing their case, or entering default judgment. (Code Civ. Proc., 2023.030(d).) A violation of a discovery order is sufficient for the imposition of terminating sanctions. (Collison & Kaplan v. Hartunian (1994) 21 Cal.App.4th 1611, 1620.) Terminating sanctions are appropriate when a party persists in disobeying the court's orders. (Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 795-796.)

A terminating sanction is a "drastic measure which should be employed with caution." (Deyo, 84 Cal.App.3d at 793.) "A decision to order terminating sanctions should not be made lightly. But where a violation is willful, preceded by a history of abuse, and the evidence shows that less severe sanctions would not produce compliance with the discovery rules, the trial court is justified in imposing the ultimate sanction." (Mileikowsky v. Tenet Healthsystem (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 262, 279-280.) While the court has discretion to impose terminating sanctions, these sanctions "should be appropriate to the dereliction and should not exceed that which is required to protect the interests of the party entitled to but denied discovery." (Deyo, 84 Cal.App.3d at 793.) "[A] court is empowered to apply the ultimate sanction against a litigant who persists in the outright refusal to comply with his discovery obligations." (Ibid.) Discovery sanctions are not to be imposed for punishment, but instead are used to encourage fair disclosure of discovery to prevent unfairness resulting for the lack of information. (See Midwife v. Bernal (1988) 203 Cal.App.3d 57, 64 [superseded on other grounds as stated in Kohan v. Cohan (1991) 229 Cal.App.3d 967, 971].)

Here, Defendant submits evidence showing Plaintiff has failed to comply with the discovery requests, and Plaintiff failed to comply with the court’s November 30, 2021 and December 3, 2021, Orders compelling Plaintiff to respond to the relevant discovery within 10 days. Moreover, a brief review of the prior motion reveals that the discovery at issue goes to the crux of Plaintiff’s claim, and therefore an issue or evidentiary sanction would be tantamount to a terminating sanction. Further, Plaintiff does not oppose this motion and appears to have abandoned the case.

Based on the foregoing, terminating sanctions are imposed at this time, and Plaintiff’s case is dismissed.

Defendant also seeks monetary sanctions in connection with this motion pursuant to CCP 2023.030(a), which provides the court may impose a monetary sanction against the one engaging in the misuse of the discovery process. Misuse of the discovery process includes failing to respond to authorized methods of discovery and disobeying a court order to provide discovery. (CCP 2023.010(d), (g).) Moreover, the imposition of terminating sanctions does not make the imposition of monetary sanctions unjust. (See Kwan Software Engineering, Inc. v. Hennings (2020) 58 Cal.App.5th 57, 76-78.)

Here, the court awards Defendant one hour for preparing the motion at the reasonable rate of $200 per hour, for a total of $200 in attorney’s fees. Further, the court awards Defendant motion filing fees of $64.95 as costs.

Sanctions are sought and imposed against Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s attorney of record, jointly and severally. Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s counsel are ordered to pay sanctions to Defendant, by and through counsel of record, in the total amount of $264.95, within twenty days.

Defendant is ordered to give notice.

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE:

Dated this 15th day of February 2022

Hon. Audra Mori

Judge of the Superior Court



b'

Case Number: *******5563 Hearing Date: December 3, 2021 Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

ORLANDO CUARTO,

Plaintiff(s),

vs.

PACIFIC PALMS RESORT, ET AL.,

Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO: *******5563

[TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL

Dept. 31

1:30 p.m.

December 3, 2021

Defendant, Pacific Palms Resort (“Defendant”) propounded special interrogatories, set one, and request for production of documents (“RPDs”), set one, on Plaintiff, Orlando Cuarto (“Plaintiff”) on April 7, 2021. To date, despite an extension of time to respond and an attempt to meet and confer, Plaintiff has not served responses. Defendant therefore seeks an order compelling Plaintiff to respond, without objections, to the outstanding discovery and to pay sanctions.

Defendant’s motions are unopposed and granted. Plaintiff is ordered to serve verified responses to special interrogatories, set one, and RPDs, set one, without objections, within ten days. (CCP ;; 2030.290(a),(b), 2031.300(a),(b).)

Sanctions are mandatory. (CCP ;; 2030.290(c), 2031.300(c).) Defendant seeks sanctions in the amount of $874.95 for each motion. Given the motions are unopposed, the court awards Defendant one hour for preparing each form motion to compel [two hours total] and one hour to appear at the hearing all at the requested rate $180 per hour, for a total of $540 in attorney’s fees. Further, the court awards Defendant two motion filing fees of $64.95, or $129.90 total, as costs.

Defendant seeks sanctions against Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s attorney of record. Defendant does not describe any conduct warranting sanctions against Plaintiff personally. Sanctions are imposed against Plaintiff’s attorney of record. Plaintiff’s counsel is ordered to pay sanctions to Defendant, by and through counsel of record, in the total amount of $669.90, within twenty days.

Moving Defendant is ordered to give notice.

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE:

Dated this 3rd day of December, 2021

Hon. Audra Mori

Judge of the Superior Court

'


b'

Case Number: *******5563 Hearing Date: November 29, 2021 Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

ORLANDO CUARTO,

Plaintiff(s),

vs.

PACIFIC PALMS RESORT, ET AL.,

Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO: *******5563

[TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL

Dept. 31

1:30 p.m.

November 29, 2021

Defendant, Pacific Palms Resort (“Defendant”) propounded form interrogatories, set one, on Plaintiff, Orlando Cuarto (“Plaintiff”) on April 7, 2021. To date, despite an extension of time to respond and an attempt to meet and confer, Plaintiff has not served responses. Defendant therefore seeks an order compelling Plaintiff to respond, without objections, to the outstanding discovery and to pay sanctions.

Defendant’s motion is unopposed and granted. Plaintiff is ordered to serve verified responses to form interrogatories, set one, without objections, within ten days. (CCP ; 2030.290(a), (b).)

Sanctions are mandatory. (CCP ;; 2030.290(c), 2031.300(c).) Defendant seeks sanctions in the amount of $874.95 for the motion. The court awards Defendant one hour for preparing the form motion to compel and one hour to appear at the hearing all at the requested rate $180 per hour, for a total of $360 in attorney’s fees. Further, the court awards Defendant the motion filing fees of $64.95 as costs.

Defendant seeks sanctions against Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s attorney of record. Defendant does not describe any conduct warranting sanctions against Plaintiff personally. Sanctions are imposed against Plaintiff’s attorney of record. Plaintiff’s counsel is ordered to pay sanctions to Defendant, by and through counsel of record, in the total amount of $424.95, within twenty days.

Moving Defendant is ordered to give notice.

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE:

Dated this 29th day of November, 2021

Hon. Audra Mori

Judge of the Superior Court

'


related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where PACIFIC PALMS RESORT is a litigant