This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 09/26/2020 at 12:14:07 (UTC).

RICO STOLL ET AL VS LAFONTAINE GLOBAL LLC ET AL

Case Summary

On 05/12/2017 RICO STOLL filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against LAFONTAINE GLOBAL LLC. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Van Nuys Courthouse East located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are HOLLY J. FUJIE, YOLANDA OROZCO, OWEN LEE KWONG, HUEY P. COTTON, AMY D. HOGUE and SHIRLEY K. WATKINS. The case status is Other.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****1002

  • Filing Date:

    05/12/2017

  • Case Status:

    Other

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Van Nuys Courthouse East

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

HOLLY J. FUJIE

YOLANDA OROZCO

OWEN LEE KWONG

HUEY P. COTTON

AMY D. HOGUE

SHIRLEY K. WATKINS

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs and Petitioners

BENDIG GERDA

STOLL RICO

Defendants, Respondents and Cross Defendants

LAFONTIANE GLOBAL LLC

LAFONTAINE GLOBAL VEHICLES INC

GOMEZ JAVIER

LAFONTAINE AUTOMOTIVE GROUP LLC

DOES 1 TO 50

WALBY KRISTOPHER ALAN

LAFONTAINE IMPORT MOTORS INC

GP STRATEGIES CORPORATION DBA GP SANDY A SUBDIVIDION OF GP STRATEGIES

LAFONTAINE GLOBAL VEHICLES LLC

VICTORY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP INC

CAPPO MANAGEMENT XXVIII INC. DBA MARIN COUNTY FORD

LAFONTAINE GLOBAL VEHICLES INC DBA LAFONTAINE GLOBAL VEHICLES LLC

GP STRATEGIES CORPORATION

LAFONTAINE GLOBAL LLC A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

CAPPO MANAGEMENT XXVIII INC. DBA MARIN COUNTY FORD DOE 4

LAFONTAINE VOLKSWAGEN INC.

LAFONTAINE VOLKSWAGEN INC. DOE 5

Defendants, Cross Plaintiffs and Cross Defendants

VICTORY AUTOMOTIVE GROUP INC

GP STRATEGIES CORPORATION

CAPPO MANAGEMENT XXVIII INC. DBA MARIN COUNTY FORD DOE 4

LAFONTAINE STANDBY LLC

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

PANISH SHEA & BOYLE LLP

STONEHOUSE CYNTHIA DIANE

Defendant, Respondent and Cross Plaintiff Attorneys

BROWN JAY D. ESQ.

GRGURIC SHERRY L. ESQ.

GOLDSTEIN ROY D.

FRIEDENTHAL DANIEL RAY ESQ.

GRGURIC SHERRY L.

GOLDSTEIN ROY DAVID

GRUPPIE GUY R

FRIEDENTHAL DANIEL RAY

FRESCH ELAINE KATHERINE

Defendant and Respondent Attorneys

BROWN JAY D. ESQ.

GRGURIC SHERRY L. ESQ.

Defendant and Cross Plaintiff Attorneys

GRGURIC SHERRY L.

GOLDSTEIN ROY DAVID

FRESCH ELAINE KATHERINE

Defendant, Cross Defendant and Cross Plaintiff Attorneys

GOLDSTEIN ROY DAVID

GRUPPIE GUY R

FRIEDENTHAL DANIEL RAY

FRESCH ELAINE KATHERINE

 

Court Documents

Memorandum of Points & Authorities

7/24/2020: Memorandum of Points & Authorities

Notice of Settlement

7/8/2020: Notice of Settlement

Order - ORDER COURT'S ORDER RE: DEFENDANT CAPPO MANAGEMENT XXVIII INC. DBA MARIN COUNTY FORD'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

1/23/2020: Order - ORDER COURT'S ORDER RE: DEFENDANT CAPPO MANAGEMENT XXVIII INC. DBA MARIN COUNTY FORD'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT)

1/23/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT)

Reply - REPLY EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS IN REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S EVIDENCE

9/20/2019: Reply - REPLY EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS IN REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S EVIDENCE

Order - ORDER RULING ON MSJ/MSAI

9/11/2019: Order - ORDER RULING ON MSJ/MSAI

Reply - REPLY EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS

8/30/2019: Reply - REPLY EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS

Notice of Lodging - NOTICE OF LODGING OF EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

7/10/2019: Notice of Lodging - NOTICE OF LODGING OF EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE)

5/30/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE)

Opposition - Opposition NON-PARTY GP STRATEGIES CORPORATION'S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES AND PRODUCE DOCUMENTS RESPONSIVE TO SUBPOENA AND OPPOSITION TO REQUEST FOR MO

2/26/2019: Opposition - Opposition NON-PARTY GP STRATEGIES CORPORATION'S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES AND PRODUCE DOCUMENTS RESPONSIVE TO SUBPOENA AND OPPOSITION TO REQUEST FOR MO

Reply - Reply SPECIALLY APPEARING DEFENDANT GP STRATEGIES CORPORATION'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT; DECLARATION OF SHERRY L. GRGURIC; DECLARATIO

2/20/2019: Reply - Reply SPECIALLY APPEARING DEFENDANT GP STRATEGIES CORPORATION'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT; DECLARATION OF SHERRY L. GRGURIC; DECLARATIO

Opposition - Opposition Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendant GP Strategies Corporation's Notice of Demurrer to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint; Memorandum of Points and Authorities

1/29/2019: Opposition - Opposition Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendant GP Strategies Corporation's Notice of Demurrer to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint; Memorandum of Points and Authorities

Declaration - Declaration Declaration of Cynthia D. Hafif-Stonehouse in Support of Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendant GP Strategies Corporation's Notice of Motion and Motion to Quash Service of Summo

1/29/2019: Declaration - Declaration Declaration of Cynthia D. Hafif-Stonehouse in Support of Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendant GP Strategies Corporation's Notice of Motion and Motion to Quash Service of Summo

Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

1/11/2019: Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

Request for Judicial Notice

12/31/2018: Request for Judicial Notice

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses)

11/9/2018: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Compel Further Discovery Responses)

PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1. NEGLIGENCE; ETC

8/15/2017: PLAINTIFF'S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1. NEGLIGENCE; ETC

291 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 09/21/2020
  • DocketRequest for Dismissal; Filed by Gerda Bendig (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/16/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department T, Shirley K. Watkins, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement (CCP 877.6) - Not Held - Vacated by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/16/2020
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department T, Shirley K. Watkins, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement) - Not Held - Vacated by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/14/2020
  • DocketDeclaration (DECLARATION OF CYNTHIA D. HAFIF-STONEHOUSE ON CASE STATUS RE OSC; REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTION HEARING); Filed by Gerda Bendig (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/08/2020
  • Docketat 10:00 AM in Department T, Shirley K. Watkins, Presiding; Jury Trial ((14-16 day est.)) - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/03/2020
  • DocketOrder (Re: Cappo Management XXVIII, Inc.?s Motion For Good Faith Settlement Determination); Filed by Cappo Management XXVIII, Inc. dba Marin County Ford (Doe 4) (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/02/2020
  • DocketMemorandum of Points & Authorities; Filed by LaFontaine Standby, LLC and dba LaFontaine Global Vehicles, LLC (Doe 2) (Defendant); GP Strategies Corporation and dba GP Sandy, a subdividion of GP Strategies (Doe 1) (Defendant); LaFontaine Global, LLC, a limited liability company (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/02/2020
  • DocketRequest for Dismissal; Filed by GP Strategies Corporation and dba GP Sandy, a subdividion of GP Strategies (Doe 1) (Cross-Complainant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/02/2020
  • DocketRequest for Dismissal; Filed by Gerda Bendig (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/31/2020
  • DocketRequest for Dismissal; Filed by Kristopher Alan Walby (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
400 More Docket Entries
  • 07/03/2017
  • DocketProof-Service/Summons; Filed by Gerda Bendig (Plaintiff); Rico Stoll (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/03/2017
  • DocketProof-Service/Summons; Filed by Gerda Bendig (Plaintiff); Rico Stoll (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/03/2017
  • DocketAFFIDAVIT OF DUE DILIGENCE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/03/2017
  • DocketProof-Service/Summons; Filed by Gerda Bendig (Plaintiff); Rico Stoll (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/03/2017
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS & COMPLAINT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/14/2017
  • DocketDECLARATION OF SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/14/2017
  • DocketDeclaration; Filed by Gerda Bendig (Plaintiff); Rico Stoll (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/12/2017
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Gerda Bendig (Plaintiff); Rico Stoll (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/12/2017
  • DocketSUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/12/2017
  • DocketCOMPLAINT FOR: 1) NEGLIGENCE MOTOR VEHICLE (WRONGFUL DEATH) ; ETC

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC661002    Hearing Date: August 06, 2020    Dept: T

THERE ARE THREE TENTATIVE RULINGS:

RICO STOLL, et. al.,

Plaintiff,

vs.

LAFONTAINE GLOBAL, LLC; et. al.

Defendants.

CASE NO: BC661002

Dept. T

8:30 a.m.

August 6, 2020

Cross-Complainant Cappo Management XXVIII dba Marin County Ford (“Cappo”) moves to amend their Cross-Complaint in order to add a claim for express indemnification against Cross-Defendant GP Strategies Corporation dba GP Sandy (“GP Sandy”).

As to the requirements of CRC 3.1324, at issue is whether the declaration of Cappo’s Counsel, Mikhail Mdinaradze (“Mdinaradze”) provided sufficient facts to show when the new facts were discovered and the reason why the request for amendment was not made earlier. Mr. Mdinaradze’s declaration attached to the motion and attached to the reply fail to present any testimony as to when the new fact was discovered – the new fact being the indemnification provision in the contract between GP Sandy and Cross-Defendant Lafontaine Standby LLC (“Lafontaine”) to indemnify Lafontaine’s “suppliers.” GP Sandy provides that the contract was produced to Cappo in June 2019. Cappo’s Reply does not dispute this contention. Assuming that Cappo discovered the indemnification provision, there is sufficient showing that the filing of this motion on June 16, 2020 – about a year after discovery of the indemnification provision – is delayed.

Further, it is noted that Cappo’s original cross-complaint alleged an indemnification cause of action and thus Cappo’s argument that they were required to wait for the express indemnification cause of action to ripen is contradicted by their own pleading.

As such, Mr. Mdinaradze’s declaration failed to present facts showing when the new facts were discovered and a reason why the request was not made earlier.

Unreasonable delay in bringing the motion is not sufficient grounds to deny the motion. GP Sandy must show prejudice. The chronology of events in this action shows that GP Sandy settled the claims against them in February 2020. GP Sandy filed their motion for determination of good faith settlement on March 11, 2020. GP Sandy filed the motion relying upon the theory that all claims, inclusive of those alleged in Cappo’s original cross-complaint would be barred upon a finding that the settlement was in good faith. Far West Fin'l Corp. v. D & S Co., Inc. (1988) 46 Cal. 3d 796, 815-816. However, due to the coronavirus pandemic, GP Sandy’s motion was not heard on April 7, 2020 and is now being heard. In the interim, Cappo filed the instant motion which would effectively thwart GP Sandy’s settlement and keep GP Sandy in the action. It is noted that claims for express indemnification are not barred by a finding of good faith settlement. Bay Develop., Ltd. v. Sup.Ct. (Home Capital Corp.) (1990) 50 Cal. 3d 1012, 1019. GP Sandy will be prejudiced in that the time, funds and efforts expended in obtaining the settlement and filing the concurrent good faith settlement motion would be negated if the instant motion to amend is granted. GP Sandy would be required to continue to defend this action despite having entered a settlement with Plaintiff which would effectively remove GP Sandy from the case. With the fact that Cappo’s motion was filed after GP Sandy settled the claims against and filed the good faith settlement motion, there is sufficient showing of prejudice against GP Sandy.

The motion for leave to amend is unpersuasive and is, therefore, denied.

2.  MOTION FOR GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT BY KRISTOPHER ALAN WALBY

No opposition has been received.  For the reasons as set forth in the moving papers:  GRANTED.

3.  MOTION FOR GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT BY LAFONTAINE STANDBY LLC AND GP STRATEGIES CORPORATION ALSO D/B/A GP SANDY, A DIVISION OF GP STRATEGIES

No opposition has been received.  For the reasons as set forth in the moving papers:  GRANTED.