On 08/18/2017 RAUL HERNANDEZ MEDINA filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against MARCOS RAMIREZ CONTRERAS. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are LAURA A. SEIGLE and EDWARD B. MORETON. The case status is Other.
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
LAURA A. SEIGLE
EDWARD B. MORETON
MEDINA RAUL HERNANDEZ
CONTRERAS MARCOS RAMIREZ
DOES 1 THROUGH 20
INJURY LEGAL CENTER P.C.
GIBSON ROBERT B. ESQ.
LAROCCA LAWRENCE JAMES
GIBSON ROBERT BENTLEY ESQ.
LEOS RORY D. ESQ.
BARMASSE JASON MICHAEL
11/12/2020: Request for Dismissal
2/11/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT)
8/6/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE)
11/27/2019: Motion for Summary Judgment
11/27/2019: Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF ERRATA RE DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
11/27/2019: Declaration - DECLARATION DECLARATION OF JASON M BARMASSE RE NOTICE OF ERRATA RE MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
11/27/2019: Declaration - DECLARATION DECLARATION OF JASON M BARMASSE IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATI
12/5/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON EX PARTE APPLICATION REQUESTING AN ORDER CONTINUIN...)
12/5/2019: Ex Parte Application - EX PARTE APPLICATION REQUESTING AN ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL AND RELATED DISCOVERY CUT OFF DATES
12/6/2019: Notice of Ruling
8/1/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF FINAL STAT...)
8/1/2019: Ex Parte Application - EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE ANDL TRIAL
2/5/2019: Notice of Ruling
2/13/2018: NOTICE OF ASSOCIATION OF ATTORNEY
2/28/2018: NOTICE OF FIRM NAME CHANGE AND NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD
4/6/2018: NOTICE OF AUTOMATIC STAY AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION BARRING CLAIMS PURSUANT TO CAL. INS. CODE SECTION 1063.6
4/17/2018: NOTICE OF STAY OF PROCEEDINGS
8/18/2017: COMPLAINT FOR PERSONAL INJURIES AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 1. CAUSE OF ACLION FOR NEGLIGENCE;
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 27, Edward B. Moreton, Presiding; Status Conference (ReUninsured Motorist Claim) - Not Held - Vacated by CourtRead MoreRead Less
DocketMinute Order ( (Status Conference Re: Uninsured Motorist Claim)); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketRequest for Dismissal; Filed by Raul Hernandez Medina (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 27, Edward B. Moreton, Presiding; Jury Trial - Not Held - Advanced and VacatedRead MoreRead Less
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 4B; (OSC RE Dismissal) - Not Held - Vacated by CourtRead MoreRead Less
Docketat 10:00 AM in Department 27, Edward B. Moreton, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Advanced and VacatedRead MoreRead Less
DocketMinute Order ( (Final Status Conference)); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 4B; Jury Trial - Not Held - Continued - Party's MotionRead MoreRead Less
Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 27, Edward B. Moreton, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment - Held - Motion DeniedRead MoreRead Less
DocketMinute Order ( (Hearing on Motion for Summary Judgment)); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketNotice of Stay of Proceedings (Bankruptcy); Filed by Defendant/RespondentRead MoreRead Less
DocketNotice of Change of Firm Name; Filed by Marcos Ramirez Contreras (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
DocketNOTICE OF FIRM NAME CHANGE AND NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORDRead MoreRead Less
DocketNOTICE OF ASSOCIATION OF ATTORNEYRead MoreRead Less
DocketAssociation of Attorney; Filed by Raul Hernandez Medina (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
DocketASWFR OF MARCOS RAMLREZ CONTRERAS TO COMPLAINTRead MoreRead Less
DocketAnswer; Filed by Marcos Ramirez Contreras (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
DocketCOMPLAINT FOR PERSONAL INJURIES AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 1. CAUSE OF ACLION FOR NEGLIGENCE;Read MoreRead Less
DocketSUMMONSRead MoreRead Less
DocketComplaint; Filed by Raul Hernandez Medina (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Case Number: BC672637 Hearing Date: February 11, 2020 Dept: 27
[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: DEEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
On August 18, 2017, plaintiff Raul Hernandez Medina filed this action against defendant Marcos Ramirez Contreras for negligence arising from a two-vehicle automobile collision. The collision occurred on October 13, 2016. At the time of the collision, Defendant was insured through Access General Insurance Company (“Access General”). However, a liquidation order for Access General was filed by the Texas Department of Insurance on March 13, 2018, causing California Insurance Guarantee Association (“CIGA”) to take over defense for Defendant in this action.
Defendant moved for summary adjudication, arguing that Plaintiff was insured at the time of the accident and his insurance policy through Farmers Specialty Insurance Company (“Farmers”) provides uninsured motorist coverage which must be exhausted before CIGA is responsible for paying claims. Defendant seeks a ruling that this action is not a covered claim and that Farmers breached its duty to Plaintiff.
“A party may move for summary adjudication as to one or more causes of action within an action, one or more affirmative defenses, one or more claims for damages, or one or more issues of duty, if that party contends that the cause of action has no merit or that there is no affirmative defense thereto, or that there is no merit to an affirmative defense as to any cause of action, or both, or that there is no merit to a claim for damages . . . or that one or more defendants either owed or did not owe a duty to the plaintiff or plaintiffs. A motion for summary adjudication shall be granted only if it completely disposes of a cause of action, an affirmative defense, a claim for damages, or an issue of duty.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (f)(1).) A motion for summary adjudication shall proceed in all procedural respects as a motion for summary judgment. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (f)(2).)
Defendant cites no law holding that the Court can decide on summary adjudication the issue whether Plaintiff’s claim is considered a covered claim under the Insurance Code. Defendant tries to frame it as a question of whether CIGA has a duty to cover Plaintiff’s claim, but CIGA is not a defendant here. Code of Civil Procedure section 437c, subdivision (f)(1) allows summary adjudication if the moving party contends “that one or more defendants either owed or did not owe a duty to the plaintiff or plaintiffs.” Defendant’s motion does not seek a determination that he did not owe a duty to Plaintiff. Therefore, this motion is improper under section 437c, subdivision (f)(1).
Defendant also argues that the Court should find that Plaintiff’s insurance carrier, Farmers, should not have denied uninsured motorist coverage to Plaintiff and in fact breached its duty to Plaintiff by coverage. Farmers is not a party to this lawsuit. The Court cannot make an order finding a non-parties who has not been given notice and is not subject to the Court’s personal jurisdiction (because it was not served with a complaint and summons) liable for a breach of duty. Such a holding would violate Farmers’ fundamental due process rights. The proper remedy, if Plaintiff believes Farmers is not acting in good faith and had no basis for denying Plaintiff’s uninsured motorist claim, is for Plaintiff to pursue litigation against Farmers. (See, e.g., Romano v. Mercury Ins. Co. (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 1333, 1336.)
Further, Defendant’s argument that the accident is covered by Plaintiff’s uninsured motorist insurance through Farmers is not supported by the evidence. Undisputed Material Fact No. 7 contends that the Farmers policy lists Plaintiff as an additional insured and refers to the personal auto declaration attached to the Declaration of Jonathan Barmasse. But the attached Farmers’ Personal Auto Declaration does not identify Plaintiff as an additional insured driver. It lists Mirna Garcia, Valentin Rosario, and Veronica Alvarez as “Named Insured,” and Felix Hernandez and Carla Garcia as “Additional Drivers on Policy.”
In light of the foregoing, the motion for summary adjudication is DENIED.
Moving party to give notice.
Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative.