This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 06/04/2019 at 06:20:25 (UTC).

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ET AL VS DAVID EHL DC ET

Case Summary

On 08/22/2017 PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA filed an Other lawsuit against DAVID EHL DC ET. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is MICHAEL P. LINFIELD. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****3149

  • Filing Date:

    08/22/2017

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Other

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

MICHAEL P. LINFIELD

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs and Petitioners

EX REL: IL WU-PMA WELFARE PLAN

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

ILW PMA WELFARE PLAN

PLAN ILW PMA WELFARE

PLAN EX REL: IL WU-PMA WELFARE

Defendants and Respondents

OHANA WELLNESS CENTER LLC

ONE LIFE ACUPUNCTURE APC

DR EHL CHIROPRACTIC CORP

DAVID EHL DC

MOBILITY CHIROPRACTORS INC

DOES 1 TO 100

DR. EHL CHIROPRACTIC CORP.

OHANA MANAGEMENT CORPORATION

RAW MANAGEMENT INCORPORATED

MAILO MYRON

OHANA MANAGEMENT CORPORATION DOE 5

EHL DAVID D.C.

MOBILITY CHIROPRACTORS INC.

OHANA MEDICAL MANAGEMENT CORPORATION

TUAAU VAIMAGALO ANDRE

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

SEYFARTH SHAW LLP

KALLSTROM D. WARD

HWANG CHRISTINE S.

FRAYSSE THOMAS E.

Defendant and Respondent Attorneys

QUIGG VINCENT J. ESQ.

SHAVER DAVID N.

QUIGG VINCENT J.

KUSHNER MICHAEL B.

KELLEY GINGER R.

WILLIAMS CORBETT

 

Court Documents

Unknown

2/13/2018: Unknown

REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR RELIEF UNDER CCP ?473(B)

3/5/2018: REPLY BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR RELIEF UNDER CCP ?473(B)

Minute Order

4/11/2018: Minute Order

Minute Order

8/30/2018: Minute Order

PLAINTIFFS' SEPARATE STATEMENT OF ITEMS IN DISPUTE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT DAVID ETIL D.C.'S FURTHER RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE, AND FOR SANCTIONS

9/28/2018: PLAINTIFFS' SEPARATE STATEMENT OF ITEMS IN DISPUTE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT DAVID ETIL D.C.'S FURTHER RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE, AND FOR SANCTIONS

DECLARATION OF MAISIE C. SOKOLOVE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT MOBILITY CHIROPRACTORS, INC.'S FURTHER RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION, SET ONE, AND FOR SANCTIONS

10/1/2018: DECLARATION OF MAISIE C. SOKOLOVE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT MOBILITY CHIROPRACTORS, INC.'S FURTHER RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION, SET ONE, AND FOR SANCTIONS

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT DAVID EHL D,C.'S FURTHER RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE, AND FOR SANCTIONS

10/1/2018: MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT DAVID EHL D,C.'S FURTHER RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE, AND FOR SANCTIONS

PLAINTIFFS' SEPARATE STATEMENT OF ITEMS IN DISPUTE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT MOBIUTY CHIROPRACTORS, INC.'' FURTHER RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGAT0IU.ES, SET ONE, AND FOR SA

10/1/2018: PLAINTIFFS' SEPARATE STATEMENT OF ITEMS IN DISPUTE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT MOBIUTY CHIROPRACTORS, INC.'' FURTHER RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGAT0IU.ES, SET ONE, AND FOR SA

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT MOBILITY CHIROPRACTORS, INC'S RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE, AND FOR SANCTIONS

10/1/2018: MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT MOBILITY CHIROPRACTORS, INC'S RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE, AND FOR SANCTIONS

Notice

10/26/2018: Notice

Notice

10/26/2018: Notice

Minute Order

10/29/2018: Minute Order

Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name)

3/27/2019: Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name)

Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name)

3/27/2019: Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name)

Case Management Statement

5/30/2019: Case Management Statement

CROSS COMPLAINT - PERS. INJURY PROPERTY DAMAGE, WRONG DEATH (2 PAGES)

1/29/2018: CROSS COMPLAINT - PERS. INJURY PROPERTY DAMAGE, WRONG DEATH (2 PAGES)

NOTICE OF NON INTERVENTION

10/24/2017: NOTICE OF NON INTERVENTION

NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

1/8/2018: NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

83 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 05/31/2019
  • at 09:00 AM in Department 34; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Vacated by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/31/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 34; Trial Setting Conference (/Case Management Conference) - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/31/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Trial Setting Conference /Case Management Conference)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/30/2019
  • Case Management Statement; Filed by Ohana Wellness Center, LLC (Defendant); Myron Mailo (Defendant); Ohana Medical Management Corporation (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/29/2019
  • Case Management Statement; Filed by ILW PMA WELFARE PLAN (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/21/2019
  • Amendment to Complaint (Fictitious/Incorrect Name); Filed by People of the State of California (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/20/2019
  • Answer; Filed by Vaimagalo Andre Tuaau (Defendant); Raw Management, Incorporated (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/24/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 34; Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/22/2019
  • Notice (of Case Management Conference and Vacated Final Status Conference and Trial Dates); Filed by People of the State of California (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/16/2019
  • at 1:42 PM in Department 34; Ex-Parte Proceedings

    Read MoreRead Less
159 More Docket Entries
  • 10/24/2017
  • NOTICE OF NON INTERVENTION

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/24/2017
  • Order; Filed by People of the State of California (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/24/2017
  • Ex-Parte Application; Filed by EX REL: IL WU-PMA WELFARE PLAN (Plaintiff); ILW PMA WELFARE PLAN (Plaintiff); People of the State of California (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/24/2017
  • Minute order entered: 2017-10-24 00:00:00; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/24/2017
  • Declaration; Filed by EX REL: IL WU-PMA WELFARE PLAN (Plaintiff); ILW PMA WELFARE PLAN (Plaintiff); People of the State of California (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/24/2017
  • Notice; Filed by Commissioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/22/2017
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/22/2017
  • CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/22/2017
  • COMPLAINT FOR VIOLATION OF THE CALIFORNIA INSURANCE FRAUDS PREVENTION ACT, VIOLATION OF THE CALIFORNIA UNFAIR COMPETITION ACT; FRAUD AND DECEIT; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/22/2017
  • Complaint; Filed by EX REL: IL WU-PMA WELFARE PLAN (Plaintiff); ILW PMA WELFARE PLAN (Plaintiff); People of the State of California (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC673149    Hearing Date: June 24, 2020    Dept: 34

SUBJECT: (2) Motions to Be Relieved as Counsel

Moving Party: Corbett H. Williams, counsel for Andre Tuaau and Raw Management, Inc.

Resp. Party: None

The motions to be relieved as counsel are GRANTED.

BACKGROUND:

On August 22, 2017, Plaintiffs People of the State of California, ex rel. ILWU-PMA Welfare Plan and ILWU-PMA Welfare Plan commenced this action against Defendants David Ehl, D.C., Ohana Wellness Center, LLC, Dr. Ehl Chiropractic Corporation, One Life Acupuncture, APC, and Mobility Chiropractors, Inc. for (1) violation of the California Insurance Frauds Prevention Act; (2) violation of the California Unfair Competition Act; and (3) Fraud and Deceit.

This is an action by ILWU-PMA Welfare Plan and as qui tam realtor on behalf of the People of the State of California, to recover civil penalties, assessments, injunctive relief, costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees, arising out of a fraudulent scheme planned and carried out by Defendants. (Complaint, ¶ 1.)

On January 29, 2018, David Ehl, D.C. filed a cross-complaint against One Life Acupuncture, APC for (1) indemnification; (2) apportionment of fault; and (3) declaratory relief.

On March 12, 2018, the Court granted Plaintiffs’ motion for relief under Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (B).

On October 22, 2018, Plaintiffs filed an amendment to the complaint, substituting the true name one of the DOE Defendants as Myron Mailo.

On March 27, 2019, Plaintiffs filed amendments to the complaint, substituting the true names of three of the DOE Defendants as Vaimagalo Andre Tuaau, Ohana Medical Management Corporation, and Raw Management, Incorporated.

On May 21, 2019, Plaintiffs filed an amendment to the complaint, substituting the true name of one of the DOE Defendants as Ohana Management Corporation.

On October 7, 2019, the Court granted Michael Craig Lubin, counsel for Defendants Ohana Medical Management Corporation, Ohana Wellness Center, LLC, Myron Mailo, and Ohana Management Corporation’s motions to be relieved as counsel.

On November 13, 2019, the Court granted Plaintiffs’ motion to compel Defendant One Life Acupuncture to provide responses to their request for production of documents.

On November 22, 2019, Andre Tuaau & Raw Management, Inc. filed a notice of stay of proceedings due to a bankruptcy case filing.

On February 19, 2020, Plaintiffs filed a notice of termination of stay.

On February 27, 2020, Corbett H. Williams, counsel for Raw Management, Inc. and Andre Tuaau filed the instant motions to be relieved as counsel.

ANALYSIS:

An attorney moving to be relieved as counsel under California Code of Civil Procedure section 284(2) must meet the requirements set out in California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362. To comply with rule 3.1362, the moving party must submit the following forms: (1) Notice of Motion and Motion to be Relieved as Counsel; (2) Declaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to be Relieved as Counsel; and (3) Order Granting Attorney's Motion to be Relieved as Counsel. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(a), (c), (e).) The moving party must serve the aforementioned forms on the client and all other parties who have appeared in the case. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1362(d).) Further, when the client is served by mail, the attorney's declaration must show that the client's address was confirmed within the last 30 days and how it was confirmed. (Id.) Absent a showing of resulting prejudice, an attorney’s request for withdrawal should be granted. (People v. Prince (1968) 268 Cal.App.2d 398, 406.)

Counsel’s motions comply with all of the requirements of California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1362, in that Counsel provided two notices of motion and motions to be relieved as counsel; orders granting attorney’s motion to be relieved as counsel; and declarations in support of the motions to be relieved as counsel. Additionally, Counsel’s clients were notified by mailing the motion and supporting documents to their currently known address and by telephone. (See Declarations, No. 3(b)(1)(b).) Counsel also filed proofs of service demonstrating that she served all other parties who have appeared in the case. These motions have also not been opposed by any party to the case.

Accordingly, the motions to be relieved as counsel are GRANTED.

Case Number: BC673149    Hearing Date: November 13, 2019    Dept: 34

SUBJECT: Motion to Compel Responses to Requests for Production of Documents

Moving Party: Plaintiffs People of the State of California ex rel. ILWU-PMA Welfare Plan and ILWU-PMA Welfare Plan

Resp. Party: None

The motion to compel responses to request for production of documents is GRANTED.

The request for sanctions is GRANTED in the amount of $1,460.00 against Defendant One Life Acupuncture.

PRELIMINARY COMMENTS:

The Court is always surprised when a motion to compel is unopposed. If Defendant believed that the motion should have been denied, it should have filed an opposition. If Defendant agreed with the motion, it should have responded to discovery, saving this Court the time and effort of analyzing the motion, and saving defendant the cost of paying the sanctions.

BACKGROUND:

On August 22, 2017, Plaintiffs People of the State of California, ex rel. ILWU-PMA Welfare Plan and ILWU-PMA Welfare Plan commenced this action against Defendants David Ehl, D.C., Ohana Wellness Center, LLC, Dr. Ehl Chiropractic Corporation, One Life Acupuncture, APC, and Mobility Chiropractors, Inc. for (1) violation of the California Insurance Frauds Prevention Act; (2) violation of the California Unfair Competition Act; and (3) Fraud and Deceit.

This is an action by ILWU-PMA Welfare Plan and as qui tam realtor on behalf of the People of the State of California, to recover civil penalties, assessments, injunctive relief, costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees, arising out of a fraudulent scheme planned and carried out by Defendants. (Complaint, ¶ 1.)

On January 29, 2018, David Ehl, D.C. filed a cross-complaint against One Life Acupuncture, APC for (1) indemnification; (2) apportionment of fault; and (3) declaratory relief.

On March 12, 2018, the Court granted Plaintiffs’ motion for relief under Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (B).

On October 22, 2018, Plaintiffs filed an amendment to the complaint, substituting the true name one of the DOE Defendants as Myron Mailo.

On March 27, 2019, Plaintiffs filed amendments to the complaint, substituting the true names of three of the DOE Defendants as Vaimagalo Andre Tuaau, Ohana Medical Management Corporation, and Raw Management, Incorporated.

On May 21, 2019, Plaintiffs filed an amendment to the complaint, substituting the true name of one of the DOE Defendants as Ohana Management Corporation.

On October 7, 2019, the Court granted Michael Craig Lubin, counsel for Defendants Ohana Medical Management Corporation, Ohana Wellness Center, LLC, Myron Mailo, and Ohana Management Corporation’s motions to be relieved as counsel.

On October 17, 2019, Plaintiffs filed the instant motion to compel Defendant One Life Acupuncture’s responses to Plaintiffs’ requests for production of documents, set two, and request for sanctions.

ANALYSIS:

A. Relevant Law

California Code of Civil Procedure requires a response from the party to whom requests for production are propounded within 30 days after service of the requests. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.260(a).) If a party fails to serve timely responses, "the party making the demand may move for an order compelling response to the demand.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300(b).) By failing to respond, the offending party waives any objection to the demand. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300(a).)

For a motion to compel, all a propounding party must show is that it properly served its discovery requests, that the time to respond has expired, and that the party to whom the requests were directed failed to provide a timely response. (See Leach v. Superior Court (1980) 111 Cal.App.3d 902, 905 906.) Indeed, "[o]nce [a party] 'fail[ed] to serve a timely response,' the trial court had authority to grant [opposing party's] motion to compel responses." (Sinaiko Healthcare Counseling, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 405.)

Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.010(d) provides for sanctions for misuses of the discovery process, including failing to respond to or submit an authorized method of discovery. Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.030(a) provides:

“The court may impose a monetary sanction ordering that one engaging in the misuse of the discovery process, or any attorney advising that conduct, or both pay the reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, incurred by anyone as a result of that conduct. The court may also impose this sanction on one unsuccessfully asserting that another has engaged in the misuse of the discovery process, or on any attorney who advised that assertion, or on both. If a monetary sanction is authorized by any provision of this title, the court shall impose that sanction unless it finds that the one subject to the sanction acted with substantial justification or that other circumstances make the imposition of the sanction unjust.” (Code of Civ. Proc., § 2023.030(a).)

B. Discussion

Plaintiffs People of the State of California, ex rel., ILWU-PMA Welfare Plan and ILU-PMA Welfare Plan “move to compel Defendant One Life Acupuncture’s (‘One Life’) response to Plaintiffs’ Requests for Production of Documents, Set Two, and for sanctions.” (Notice of Motion, p. 2:2-6.)

1. Compelling Responses to Request for Production

Plaintiffs explain that “On July 9, 2019, Plaintiffs propounded RFPDs, Set Two on Defendant One Life.” (Memorandum, p. 2:13-16 [citing Nguyen Decl., ¶ 2, Exh. A].) Plaintiffs assert that they received no responses to the discovery. (Id. at p. 2:16.)

Plaintiffs state that “on or around August 29, 2019, Plaintiffs sent a meet-and-confer letter to counsel for One Life, advising that the deadline for production of the documents was August 13, 2019, that Defendant had not requested any extensions and none had been granted, and that Defendant’s failure to timely obje[c]t to the discovery resulted in a waiver of any objections thereto.” (Id. at p. 2:17-20 [citing Nguyen Decl., ¶ 3, Exh. B].) Plaintiffs explain that they “requested that responses to the discovery be produced, without objections, by Thursday September 5, 2019” but “as of the date of this motion, Plaintiffs have not received a response to their letter or the underlying discovery.” (Id. at p. 2:21-23 [citing Nguyen Decl., ¶¶ 3-4, Exh. B].)

This motion is unopposed. Plaintiffs are entitled to an order compelling compliance with their requests for production of documents because Defendant One Life Acupuncture has failed to respond to this discovery request.

The Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’ motion to compel responses to requests for production of documents, set two.

2. Sanctions

Plaintiffs request that the Court impose monetary sanctions in the amount of $2,260.00 against Defendant. (Memorandum, p. 4:14-15.) Plaintiffs’ counsel asserts that he “spent approximately two hours in the legal research, gathering of evidence, analysis, and preparation of the instant motion and supporting papers.” (Nguyen Decl., ¶ 5.) Plaintiffs’ counsel also states that he anticipates spending another two hours reviewing Defendant’s opposition and preparing a reply, and anticipates spending an additional 1.5 hours for the hearing. (Id.) Plaintiffs’ counsel states that Plaintiffs incurred $60.00 in filing fees, for a total of $2,260 in attorney's fees and litigation costs on this motion. (Id.)

Because this motion is unopposed, the Court reduces the number of hours sought in anticipation of reviewing an opposition and drafting a reply. The Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’ request for sanctions in the total amount of $1,460.00, for 3.5 hours of work, at a rate of $400.00 per hour, plus the $60.00 filing fee against Defendant One Life Acupuncture.