On 03/02/2018 SAVANAH E BURSON filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against JENNIFER GRAY. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is LAURA A. SEIGLE. The case status is Other.
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
LAURA A. SEIGLE
BURSON SAVANAH E.
OHERN SHELBIE A.
DOES 1 TO 45
GRAY ALYSSA N.
GRAY ALYSSA N.
ANDERSON MARK A. ESQ.
ANDERSON MARK ALAN ESQ.
ANDERSON MARK ALAN
MAY CHARLES D. ESQ.
KNAPP PETERSEN & CLARKE LAW OFFICES OF
MAY CHARLES DUDLEY JR
BRUGGE ROBERT DOUGLAS
MAY CHARLES DUDLEY JR
4/30/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (NUNC PRO TUNC ORDER)
4/30/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER) OF 04/30/2020
3/11/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (NON-APPEARANCE CASE REVIEW) OF 03/11/2020
1/10/2020: Notice of Entry of Dismissal and Proof of Service
7/11/2019: Request for Refund / Order
7/29/2019: Request for Dismissal
10/31/2019: Opposition - OPPOSITION PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO OBTAIN ORTHPAEDIC EXAMINATION OF PLAINTIFF SHELBIE A. OHERN; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF MARK
11/14/2019: Notice of Entry of Dismissal and Proof of Service
12/13/2019: Ex Parte Application - EX PARTE APPLICATION BY DEFENDANT BALAZS TITKOS FOR DISMISSAL PURSUANT TO GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT OR ORDER ENFORCING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
12/16/2019: Motion to Enforce Settlement
7/17/2018: CROSS-DEFENDANTS' ANSWER TO CROSS-COMPLAINT
4/30/2018: DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
4/30/2018: CROSS-COMPLAINT FOR INDEMNITY, EQUITABLE APPORTIONMENT AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
4/30/2018: ANSWER TO COMPLAINT
5/8/2018: CIVIL DEPOSIT -
5/10/2018: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS -
3/2/2018: SUMMONS -
3/2/2018: COMPLAINT FOR NEGLIGENCE PERSONAL INJURIES
DocketRequest for Dismissal; Filed by Savanah E. Burson (Plaintiff); Shelbie A. Ohern (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Docketat 10:30 AM in Department 27, Laura A. Seigle, Presiding; Court OrderRead MoreRead Less
Docketat 12:00 PM in Department 27, Laura A. Seigle, Presiding; Nunc Pro Tunc OrderRead MoreRead Less
DocketMinute Order ( (Court Order)); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketCertificate of Mailing for ((Court Order) of 04/30/2020); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketMinute Order ( (Nunc Pro Tunc Order)); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 27, Laura A. Seigle, Presiding; Jury Trial - Not Held - Advanced and VacatedRead MoreRead Less
Docketat 10:00 AM in Department 27, Laura A. Seigle, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Advanced and VacatedRead MoreRead Less
Docketat 1:34 PM in Department 27, Laura A. Seigle, Presiding; Non-Appearance Case ReviewRead MoreRead Less
DocketCertificate of Mailing for ((Non-Appearance Case Review) of 03/11/2020); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
DocketSummons; Filed by Balazs Titkos (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
DocketSummons on Cross ComplaintRead MoreRead Less
DocketAnswer; Filed by Balazs Titkos (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
DocketCross-Complaint; Filed by Balazs Titkos (Cross-Complainant)Read MoreRead Less
DocketPROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONSRead MoreRead Less
DocketProof-Service/Summons; Filed by Savanah E. Burson (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
DocketSUMMONSRead MoreRead Less
DocketComplaint; Filed by Savanah E. Burson (Plaintiff); Shelbie A. Ohern (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
DocketSummons; Filed by Savanah E. Burson (Plaintiff); Shelbie A. Ohern (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
DocketCOMPLAINT FOR NEGLIGENCE PERSONAL INJURIESRead MoreRead Less
Case Number: BC696435 Hearing Date: November 14, 2019 Dept: 4B
[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: MOTION FOR LEAVE TO TAKE NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINATION; MOTION FOR LEAVE TO TAKE ORTHOPAEDIC EXAMINATION
On March 2, 2018, plaintiffs Savanah E. Burson (“Burson”) and Shelbie A. Ohern (“Ohern”) (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) filed this action against defendants Jennifer Gray (“Jennifer”), Alyssa N. Gray (“Alyssa”), Madison Gray, Balazs Titkos (“Titkos”), and Doe defendants for injuries arising from a motor vehicle versus motorcycle accident occurring on October 10, 2016. At the time of the accident, Defendant Alyssa was operating a Honda Civic and carrying three passengers, including Plaintiffs
Defendants Jennifer and Alyssa seek a mental examination and a second physical examination of Ohern. Plaintiff was previously examined by Barry I. Ludwig, M.D. (“Dr. Ludwig”), a neurosurgeon, who performed orthopedic, neurological, and psychological tests.
In any case in which a plaintiff is seeking recovery for personal injuries, any defendant may demand one physical examination of the plaintiff where: (1) the examination does not include any diagnostic test or procedure that is painful, protracted, or intrusive; and (2) the examination is conducted at a location within 75 miles of the residence of the examinee. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2032.220, subd. (a).) Where any party seeks to obtain discovery by a physical examination other than that described in Section 2032.220, or by a mental examination, the party shall obtain leave of the court. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2032.310, subd. (a).)
“The only statutorily authorized justification for ordering a mental examination is that the ‘mental condition’ of the examinee is ‘in controversy.’” (Doyle v. Superior Court (1996) 50 Cal.App.4th 1878, 1886.) In the absence of an allegation that plaintiff has any current mental injury as a result of defendant’s alleged conduct, her present mental condition is not directly relevant. (Ibid.)
Defendants seek a mental examination by neuropsychologist, Charles Furst, Ph.D. on December 3, 2019. Defendants argue a neuropsychological exam is appropriate because Ohern’s claimed injuries surpass a general claim for pain and suffering and amount to a claim of great mental pain and suffering because she claims she suffered a close head injury with post-traumatic concussion; headaches, ringing in ears, dizziness, blurred vision, fatigue, difficulty concentrating, nausea, irritability, and anxiety secondary to head injury; an exacerbation of her prior condition of Trigeminal Neuralgia; insomnia; short term memory loss; headaches; and PTSD. Defendants argue that her claimed injuries, coupled with her history of prior migraines, concussion, anxiety, and depression, justify the need for a mental examination.
Ohern argues she is not placing her mental state in controversy because she did not treat with nor was ever seen by a neuropsychiatrist relative to the case; is not pleading psychological trauma related to the subject accident; will not be calling any psychologist, psychiatrist or neuropsychiatrist as expert witnesses at trial; and is limiting her claim for pain and suffering to that normally suffered by victims of motor vehicle accidents.
The evidence submitted by Defendants in support of their argument is insufficient. Ohern’s responses to Form Interrogatories 6.1-6.7 do not indicate that she is seeking damages for pain and suffering that go beyond a general claim for pain and suffering. The claimed injuries are mostly physical with neurological effect. (See Zadoorian Decl., Ex. B., Responses to Form Interrogatory Nos. 6.1-6.2.) There is no evidence that Ohern treated with any psychologist or psychiatrist as a result of the accident. (See Response to Form Interrogatory No. 6.3.) That Ohern previously suffered from migraines, anxiety and depression does not transform her pain and suffering claim into relief warranting a mental examination. Defendants have not shown Plaintiff is claiming pain and suffering or emotional distress beyond that normally suffered by a car accident victim.
Defendants’ motion for leave to obtain a neuropsychological examination is DENIED without prejudice.
Defendants also seek leave to conduct an orthopaedic examination of Ohern by A.N. Shamie, M.D. Defendants argue that an orthopaedic examination is warranted because Ohern testified she still suffers from back pain and shooting pain in hips radiating into her legs from the subject incident. She also claims to continue to suffer from low back pain radiating into tailbone and bilateral legs and short-term memory loss/headaches as a result of the subject incident. Plaintiff also testified that she has undergone a steroid injection to her lumbar spine after the accident.
Ohern does not dispute that she claims injuries such as: blunt trauma to jaw; exacerbation of Trigeminal Neuralgia; disc space narrowing, L6-S1 with straightening of lumbar curvature; disc bulge, L4-5, with bilateral neuroforaminal narrowing and spondylolisthesis; herniated lubar disc, L2-3; lumbar radiculopathy with numberness, tingling, stiffness and spasms radiating to the right leg secondary, among other injuries. (Zadoorian, Ex. B, Response to Form Interrogatory 6.2.) Instead, she argues that an orthopedic examination is unnecessary because she was never treated by an orthopaedic doctor and has already undergone a physical examination with Dr. Ludwig who performed neurological, psychological, and orthopedic tests. Dr. Ludwig, a neurosurgeon, and Dr. Shamie, an orthopedic surgeon have different specialties. Therefore, Defendants’ motion for leave to conduct an orthopaedic examination of Ohern is GRANTED.
Moving party to give notice.
Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT4B@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.