Search

Attributes

This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 03/29/2021 at 04:22:44 (UTC).

PAMELA DE SOMOV VS BACK2HEALTH REHAB SERVICES INC ET AL

Case Summary

On 01/10/2018 PAMELA DE SOMOV filed a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury lawsuit against BACK2HEALTH REHAB SERVICES 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 ELAINE LU, STEPHEN I. GOORVITCH, SAMANTHA JESSNER, DAVID J. COWAN and MICHAEL E. WHITAKER. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****9550

  • Filing Date:

    01/10/2018

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

ELAINE LU

STEPHEN I. GOORVITCH

SAMANTHA JESSNER

DAVID J. COWAN

MICHAEL E. WHITAKER

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs, Petitioners and Cross Defendants

DE SOMOV PAMELA

NILES JOSEPH WESTON

Defendants, Respondents and Cross Defendants

DOES 1-50 INCLUSIVE

NILES JOSEPH WESTON

BACK2HEALTH REHAB SERVICES INC.

NOVOTNY IAN

SHUT VLADISLAV

BACK 2 HEALTH PHYSICAL THERAPY & AQUATIC REHABILITATION DBA BACK TO HEALTH PHYSICAL THERAPY

SHUT IRENA

Defendants and Cross Plaintiffs

NOVOTNY IAN

SHUT VLADISLAV

SHUT IRENA

BACK2 HEALTH PHYSICAL THERAPY INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

CARR JAMES P. ESQ.

MCELFISH RAYMOND DAVID

CUTTING STACEY RAE

Defendant and Cross Plaintiff Attorneys

MILLER DAVID SCOTT

DONAHOE TIMOTHY CULLUM

Plaintiff and Cross Defendant Attorney

MCELFISH RAYMOND DAVID

 

Court Documents

Notice of Ruling

2/18/2021: Notice of Ruling

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION TO DEEM REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS ADMITTED; HE...)

2/8/2021: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION TO DEEM REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS ADMITTED; HE...)

Substitution of Attorney

12/31/2020: Substitution of Attorney

Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF HEARING

11/13/2020: Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF HEARING

Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF RULING

11/19/2020: Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF RULING

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (HEARING ON MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER DISCOVERY RESPONSES TO AN...) OF 09/30/2020

9/30/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (HEARING ON MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER DISCOVERY RESPONSES TO AN...) OF 09/30/2020

Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion

8/19/2020: Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER) OF 06/08/2020

6/8/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER) OF 06/08/2020

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER)

6/8/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER)

Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses

6/8/2020: Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses

Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel

6/12/2020: Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel

Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE OF HEARINGS

6/17/2020: Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE OF HEARINGS

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (INFORMAL DISCOVERY CONFERENCE (IDC))

3/13/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (INFORMAL DISCOVERY CONFERENCE (IDC))

Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name)

9/24/2019: Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name)

Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name)

9/24/2019: Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name)

Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name)

9/24/2019: Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name)

Substitution of Attorney

6/25/2019: Substitution of Attorney

Summons -

1/10/2018: Summons -

51 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 09/21/2021
  • Hearing09/21/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department 32 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/02/2021
  • Hearing09/02/2021 at 10:00 AM in Department 32 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Final Status Conference

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/18/2021
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by Vladislav Shut (Defendant); Irena Shut (Defendant); Back 2 Health Physical Therapy & Aquatic Rehabilitation (Defendant) et al.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/08/2021
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 32, Michael E. Whitaker, Presiding; Trial Setting Conference - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/08/2021
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 32, Michael E. Whitaker, Presiding; Hearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery") - Held - Motion Granted

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/08/2021
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 32, Michael E. Whitaker, Presiding; Hearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery") - Held - Motion Granted

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/08/2021
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 32, Michael E. Whitaker, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Sanctions - Held - Motion Granted

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/08/2021
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 32, Michael E. Whitaker, Presiding; Hearing on Motion to Deem Request for Admissions Admitted - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/08/2021
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for ((Hearing on Motion to Deem Request for Admissions Admitted; He...) of 02/08/2021); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/08/2021
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Hearing on Motion to Deem Request for Admissions Admitted; He...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
81 More Docket Entries
  • 06/13/2018
  • DocketNotice; Filed by Pamela De Somov (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/13/2018
  • DocketNotice of Taking Notice of Motion and Motion to be Relieved as Counsel Off-Calendar

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/11/2018
  • DocketDeclaration; Filed by Pamela De Somov (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/11/2018
  • DocketMotion to Be Relieved as Counsel; Filed by Pamela De Somov (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/11/2018
  • DocketDeclaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/11/2018
  • DocketMotion to Be Relieved as Counsel

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/10/2018
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Pamela De Somov (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/10/2018
  • DocketSummons; Filed by Pamela De Somov (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/10/2018
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/10/2018
  • DocketComplaint

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC689550    Hearing Date: February 08, 2021    Dept: 32

PLEASE NOTE: Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at sscdept32@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org. If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar. If a party submits on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative. If the parties do not submit on the tentative, they should arrange to appear in-person or remotely.

PLEASE NOTE:  BELOW ARE 2 TENTATIVE RULINGS

FIRST - TENTATIVE RULING

DEPTARTMENT

32

HEARING DATE

February 8, 2021

CASE NUMBER

BC689550

MOTION

Motions to Compel Discovery Responses – Form Interrogatories and Requests for Admission

MOVING PARTY

Defendant Irena Shut

OPPOSING PARTY

None

MOTIONS

Defendant and Cross-Complainant Irena Shut (“Defendant”) moves to compel responses from Plaintiff and Cross-Defendant Pamela De Somov (“Plaintiff”) to Form Interrogatories, set one (“FROG”) and Requests for Admissions, set one (“RFA”). Defendant also moves for monetary sanctions against Plaintiff. Plaintiff has not filed oppositions to the Motions.

ANALYSIS

Defendant served the FROG on Plaintiff by email on July 3, 2020. Plaintiff’s responses were thus due by August 4, 2020. As of the filing date of these motions, Defendant has not received responses from Plaintiff. Accordingly, the motion to compel responses to the FROG is granted per Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.290. Plaintiff is ordered to serve responses to Defendant’s FROG, without objections, within 30 days of notice of this order.

Defendant also moves to compel Plaintiff to respond to the RFA. Where a party fails to respond to requests for admissions, the propounding party may move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted, as well as for a monetary sanction. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (b).) Accordingly, Defendant should have filed a motion to deem admitted matters specified in the RFA. The motion to compel Plaintiff to respond to the RFA is denied as procedurally defective.

Defendant seeks monetary sanctions against Plaintiff. The Court concludes that Plaintiff’s failure to respond to the FROG is an abuse of the discovery process. Under Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.290, subdivision (c), the Court awards monetary sanctions against Plaintiff, in the amount of $810, which represents three hours of attorney time to prepare the motion to compel responses to the FROG and attend the hearing at $250 per hour, plus the filing fee.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Therefore, the Court grants Defendant’s motion to compel responses to the FROG per Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.290. Plaintiff is ordered to serve verified responses, without objections, within 30 days of notice of this order. The Court further orders Plaintiff to pay monetary sanctions per Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.290 in the amount of $810 to Defendant, by and through counsel, within 30 days of notice of this order.

Defendant is ordered to provide notice of this order and file proof of service of such.

   

SECOND - TENTATIVE RULING

DEPARTMENT

32

HEARING DATE

February 8, 2021

CASE NUMBER

BC689550

MOTIONS

(1) Issue/Evidence Sanctions & Additional Monetary Sanctions for Failing to Comply with Court Order

(2) Order Establishing Admissions & Monetary Sanctions

MOVING PARTY:

Defendant Back2Health Physical Therapy, Inc.

OPPOSING PARTY:

Plaintiff Pamela De Somov

MOTIONS

Defendant Back2Health Physical Therapy, Inc. (“Defendant”) moves for issue and evidentiary sanctions and additional monetary sanctions against Plaintiff Pamela De Somov (“Plaintiff”) for failing to comply with the Court’s order of September 30. 2020. In addition, Defendant moves for an order deeming the matters in Requests for Admissions admitted and for monetary sanctions as Plaintiff failed to comply with the Court’s order of September 30. 2020.

ANALYSIS

In its order of September 30, 2020, the Court ordered Plaintiff to serve further responses to Requests for Production Nos. 1 through 6 and Requests for Admissions, Set One that Defendant served on Plaintiff. The Court’s clerk mailed notice to Plaintiff on the same date. Accordingly, Plaintiff had until November 4, 2020 to serve further responses in compliance with this Court’s order. As of the filing date of the motions, Plaintiff had not served further responses to the discovery in compliance with the Court’s order. After Defendant served these motions, Plaintiff served further responses to the discovery requests. Although Plaintiff belatedly complied with the Court’s order, the Court declines to impose issue and evidentiary sanctions and deems Defendant’s motion for an order deeming the matters in Requests for Admissions admitted as moot.

Moreover, with respect to Defendant’s requests for monetary sanctions in both motions, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s failure to timely comply with this Court’s order of September 30, 2020 was an abuse of the discovery process. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.010, subd. (g).) However, as set forth in the Declarations of Plaintiff and her counsel of record, Stacey R. Cutting, in opposition to the motions, the Court finds that the imposition of monetary sanctions would be unjust under the circumstances. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.020, subd. (a).)

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Accordingly, the Court denies Defendant’s motions for Issue, Evidence and Additional Monetary sanctions, and deems Defendant’s motion for an order deeming the matters in Requests for Admissions admitted as moot.

Defendant is ordered to provide notice of this order and file proof of service of such.

Case Number: BC689550    Hearing Date: September 30, 2020    Dept: 32

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 32

PAMELA DE SOMOV,

Plaintiff,

v.

BACK2HEALTH REHAB SERVICES, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: BC689550

Hearing Date: September 30, 2020

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

motions to compel FURTHER DISCOVERY RESPONSES

NOTICE

The Court posts this tentative two days before the hearing. Any party who does not appear at the hearing shall waive their right to be heard and shall submit to this tentative order. The Court authorizes the parties to appear remotely via LACourtConnect.

TENTATIVE ORDER

Plaintiff Pamela De Somov (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Back2Health Rehab Services, Inc., Vladislav Shut, Irena Shut, and Ian Novotny (“Defendants”), asserting causes of action for: (1) sexual battery, (2) false imprisonment, (3) gender violence, (4) intentional infliction of emotional distress, (5) negligent hiring, supervision, training and retention, and (6) violation of the Ralph Act. Defendants now seek to compel further responses to certain Requests for Production of Documents and Requests for Admission.

Defendants seek to compel further responses to Requests for Production #1 through #6. Plaintiff responded to each request as follows: “Plaintiff will comply with this request and will produce documents once documents become available.” That is not a code-compliant response. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 2031.220 and 2031.230, Plaintiff must provide a Statement of Compliance or a Statement of Inability to Comply. If the latter, Plaintiff must provide the information listed in section 2031.230. Therefore, Defendants’ motion is granted.

Defendants also seek to compel further responses to certain Requests for Admission. The Court overrules Plaintiff’s objections and orders Plaintiff to provide further responses in compliance with Code of Civil Procedure section 2033.220.

Defendants request sanctions in the total amount of $2,185. The Court finds that sanctions are warranted, as Plaintiff’s responses constitute an abuse of the discovery process. Therefore, the Court orders Plaintiff to pay sanctions to Defendants, through their counsel, in the amount of $ 1,370 based upon five hours of attorney time at a rate of $250 per hour plus two filing fees of $60 each.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Defendants’ motions to compel further responses are granted. Plaintiff shall provide further responses—with verifications and without objections—to the Requests for Production of Documents and Requests for Admission identified in Defendants’ motions within thirty (30) days of notice of this order. The Court orders Plaintiff to pay sanctions in the amount of $1,370 within thirty (30) days of notice of this order. Defendants shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.

DATED: September 30, 2020 ___________________________

Stephen I. Goorvitch

Judge of the Superior Court

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases represented by Lawyer MILLER DAVID SCOTT