This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 07/02/2019 at 01:33:54 (UTC).

ROBERT DUDLEY VS STATE OF CALIFORNIA ET AL

Case Summary

On 05/08/2018 a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury case was filed by ROBERT DUDLEY against STATE OF CALIFORNIA in the jurisdiction of Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****5465

  • Filing Date:

    05/08/2018

  • 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

 

Party Details

Petitioner and Plaintiff

DUDLEY ROBERT

Respondents and Defendants

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

CITY OF LOS ANGELES

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

DOES 1 TO 100

 

Court Documents

Proof of Service of Summons and Complaint

7/26/2018: Proof of Service of Summons and Complaint

Proof of Service of Summons and Complaint

7/26/2018: Proof of Service of Summons and Complaint

Proof of Service of Summons and Complaint

7/26/2018: Proof of Service of Summons and Complaint

NOTICE OF DEMURRER AND DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES BY DEFENDANT THE PEOPLE OF THE TATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACTNG BY AND IFHROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSP9RTATION (ERRONEOUSLY SUED AS ?STA

8/20/2018: NOTICE OF DEMURRER AND DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES BY DEFENDANT THE PEOPLE OF THE TATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACTNG BY AND IFHROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSP9RTATION (ERRONEOUSLY SUED AS ?STA

Summons on Cross Complaint

8/22/2018: Summons on Cross Complaint

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

8/22/2018: CROSS COMPLAINT - PERS. INJURY PROPERTY DAMAGE, WRONG DEATH (2 PAGES)

ANSWER OF DEFENDANT COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TO COMPLAINT

8/22/2018: ANSWER OF DEFENDANT COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES TO COMPLAINT

ANSWER OF THE DEFENDANT CITY OF LOS ANGELES TO PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

8/22/2018: ANSWER OF THE DEFENDANT CITY OF LOS ANGELES TO PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

CIVIL DEPOSIT

8/28/2018: CIVIL DEPOSIT

CIVIL DEPOSIT

9/6/2018: CIVIL DEPOSIT

PLAINTIFFS NOTICE OF POSTING JURY FEES

9/6/2018: PLAINTIFFS NOTICE OF POSTING JURY FEES

FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES STATUTORY LIABILITY, ETC

9/7/2018: FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES STATUTORY LIABILITY, ETC

Minute Order

9/17/2018: Minute Order

NOTICE OF RULING ON DEFENDANT THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ACTING BY AND THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIONS;AND ETC.

10/2/2018: NOTICE OF RULING ON DEFENDANT THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ACTING BY AND THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIONS;AND ETC.

Answer

10/5/2018: Answer

Request for Dismissal

10/12/2018: Request for Dismissal

Request for Dismissal

11/2/2018: Request for Dismissal

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES, STATUTORY LIABILITY; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

5/8/2018: COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES, STATUTORY LIABILITY; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

7 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 11/02/2018
  • Request for Dismissal; Filed by Robert Dudley (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/12/2018
  • Request for Dismissal (as to Defendant State of California only); Filed by Robert Dudley (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/05/2018
  • answer of the defendant city of los angeles to plaintiff's first amended complaint

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/02/2018
  • Notice of Ruling (on Defendant The People of the State of California, Acting by and through the Department of Transportation's (Erroneously sued as "State of California")Demurrer to Plaintiff's Complaint for Damages); Filed by State of California (Legacy Party)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/02/2018
  • NOTICE OF RULING ON DEFENDANT THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ACTING BY AND THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATIONS;AND ETC.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/17/2018
  • at 1:30 PM in Department 7; Hearing on Demurrer - without Motion to Strike (Hearing on Demurrer; Sustained) -

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/17/2018
  • Minute order entered: 2018-09-17 00:00:00; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/17/2018
  • Order; Filed by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/17/2018
  • Minute Order

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/07/2018
  • FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES STATUTORY LIABILITY, ETC

    Read MoreRead Less
13 More Docket Entries
  • 08/20/2018
  • NOTICE OF DEMURRER AND DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFF'S COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES BY DEFENDANT THE PEOPLE OF THE TATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACTNG BY AND IFHROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSP9RTATION (ERRONEOUSLY SUED AS STATE OF CALIFORNIA ); DECLARITION OF MICHELLE L. HAN

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/26/2018
  • Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by Robert Dudley (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/26/2018
  • Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by Robert Dudley (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/26/2018
  • Proof of Service of Summons and Complaint

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/26/2018
  • Proof of Service of Summons and Complaint

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/26/2018
  • Proof of Service of Summons and Complaint

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/26/2018
  • Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by Robert Dudley (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/08/2018
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/08/2018
  • COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES, STATUTORY LIABILITY; DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/08/2018
  • Complaint; Filed by Robert Dudley (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC705465    Hearing Date: January 24, 2020    Dept: 27

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: MOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT’S RESPONSES TO WRITTEN DISCOVERY

On May 8, 2018, plaintiff Robert Dudley (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendants State of California, City of Los Angeles (“Defendant”), and County of Los Angeles for premises liability relating to a trip and fall. On December 27, 2019, Plaintiff filed three motions to compel Defendant’s responses to Form Interrogatories, Special Interrogatories, and Request for Production. Defendant did not oppose the motions but filed a response on January 10, 2020 challenging the amount of sanctions Plaintiff requested in his moving papers. Defendant served discovery responses to these three sets of discovery on January 10, 2020. Accordingly, the motions are MOOT.

The court may award sanctions under the Discovery Act in favor of a party who files a motion to compel discovery, even where the requested discovery was provided to the moving party after the motion was filed. (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1348(a).) Accordingly, Plaintiff’s request for monetary sanction is GRANTED. However, Plaintiff’s counsel’s request for sanctions based on 17 hours of work is unreasonable. For example, counsel states she spent four hours writing reply briefs, but filed only one reply brief containing six sentences, which should have taken no more than 15 or 20 minutes to write. Each motion was only 2 pages long consisting largely of basic legal statements and attaching a 1.5 page long declaration. The motions and declarations were substantially the same, with only the references to the type of discovery and the specific statutes differing. Ten hours to write three nearly identical short motions is unreasonable.

The Court therefore imposes sanctions against Defendant and counsel of record, jointly and severally, in the amount of $1,000 to be paid within 20 days of the date of this order.

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.

Case Number: BC705465    Hearing Date: January 21, 2020    Dept: 27

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE CROSS-COMPLAINT

On May 8, 2018, plaintiff Robert Dudley filed this action against defendant City of Los Angeles (“Defendant”) relating to a trip and fall on a public sidewalk. On August 22, 2018, Defendant filed an answer and a cross-complaint against The State of California Department of Transportation. Defendant answered Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint on October 5, 2018. Defendant seeks an order granting leave to file a cross-complaint against Los Angeles Unified School District (“LAUSD”) for apportionment of fault, indemnification and declaratory relief.

A party shall file a cross-complaint against any of the parties who filed the complaint or cross-complaint against him or her before or at the same time as the answer to the complaint or cross-complaint. (Code Civ. Proc. § 428.50, subd. (a).) Any other cross-complaint may be filed at any time before the court has set a date for trial. (Code Civ. Proc., § 428.50, subd. (b).) A party shall obtain leave of court to file any cross-complaint except one filed within the time specified in subdivision (a) or (b). Leave may be granted in the interest of justice at any time during the course of the action. (Code Civ. Proc., § 428.50, subd. (c).)

Defendant’s cross-complaint arises from the same transaction as Plaintiff’s claim because LAUSD allegedly owned and managed the property where the incident occurred. Trial is currently set for March 9, 2020. Defense counsel states he received the case on October 30, 2019 and was unable to review it until after a trial concluded on November 26, 2019, and that he could not identify the location of the accident until December 20, 2019 because Plaintiff’s description and photographs were insufficient. After counsel determined the location, he saw that the uplift was caused by a tree root. He then reviewed the County Assessor’s records and determined that LAUSD was the owner of the property on which the tree grew.

In the interest of justice, leave to file a cross-complaint would encourage the resolution of all issues in one action. Accordingly, the motion is GRANTED. Defendant is to file the cross-complaint within 10 days of the date of this order.

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.