This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 08/15/2019 at 09:41:32 (UTC).

SOCORRO COBARRUVIAS VS LOS ANGELES COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT ET

Case Summary

On 06/23/2017 SOCORRO COBARRUVIAS filed a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury lawsuit against LOS ANGELES COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT ET. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are HOLLY E. KENDIG, MARC D. GROSS and JON R. TAKASUGI. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****6357

  • Filing Date:

    06/23/2017

  • 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

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

HOLLY E. KENDIG

MARC D. GROSS

JON R. TAKASUGI

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner

COBARRRUVIAS SOCORRO

Defendants and Respondents

LOS ANGELES COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT

GANG FREE ORG

STEP UP

DOES 1 TO 25

ORG GANG FREE

CALIFORNIA CHARTER SCHOOLS JPA

UP STEP

GANG FREE.ORG STEP UP

Not Classified By Court

HARBOR AREA GANG ALTERNATIVE PROGRAM ERRONEOULY SUED HEREIN AS "GANG FREE.ORG STEP UP"

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

BALDWIN-KENNEDY RONDA

BALDWIN-KENNEDY RONDA NADINE ESQ.

Defendant Attorney

BEACH THOMAS E.

Not Classified By Court Attorney

HOTTINGER DARRYL

 

Court Documents

Minute Order

6/25/2019: Minute Order

Notice

7/8/2019: Notice

Minute Order

7/12/2019: Minute Order

Notice of Ruling

7/15/2019: Notice of Ruling

Answer

7/22/2019: Answer

SUMMONS

2/16/2018: SUMMONS

Amended Complaint

4/9/2019: Amended Complaint

Proof of Personal Service

5/8/2019: Proof of Personal Service

Request for Dismissal

5/22/2019: Request for Dismissal

Motion to Strike (not anti-SLAPP) - without Demurrer

6/6/2019: Motion to Strike (not anti-SLAPP) - without Demurrer

Minute Order

12/27/2017: Minute Order

EXPLANATION PER GUARDIANSHIP AD LITEM

9/27/2017: EXPLANATION PER GUARDIANSHIP AD LITEM

APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM-CIVIL

9/27/2017: APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM-CIVIL

PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO THE COURT'S ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR SANCTIONS

10/24/2017: PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO THE COURT'S ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR SANCTIONS

ORDER ON COURT FEE WAIVER

6/23/2017: ORDER ON COURT FEE WAIVER

COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

6/23/2017: COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE & OSC RE PROOF OF SERVICE

6/29/2017: NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE & OSC RE PROOF OF SERVICE

NOTICE OF REJECTION - APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM

7/26/2017: NOTICE OF REJECTION - APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM

10 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 04/09/2020
  • Hearingat 08:30 AM in Department 3 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/25/2020
  • Hearingat 10:00 AM in Department 3 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Final Status Conference

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/22/2019
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by Harbor Area Gang Alternatives Program erroneously sued herein as Gang Free.Org Step Up Erroneously Sued As Gang Free.Org Step Up (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/15/2019
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by Harbor Area Gang Alternatives Program erroneously sued herein as Gang Free.Org Step Up Erroneously Sued As Gang Free.Org Step Up (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/12/2019
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 3, Jon R. Takasugi, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: (Why This Action Should Not Be Dismissed for Delaying and Prosecuting the Action Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 583.410) - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/12/2019
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 3, Jon R. Takasugi, Presiding; Trial Setting Conference - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/12/2019
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 3, Jon R. Takasugi, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: (Why Plaintiffs and/or Plaintiffs' Counsel Should Not Be Sanctioned for Failure to Comply with California Rules of Court Section 3.110(b),) - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/12/2019
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 3, Jon R. Takasugi, Presiding; Hearing on Motion to Strike (not anti-SLAPP) - without Demurrer - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/12/2019
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Hearing on Motion to Strike (not anti-SLAPP) - without Demurr...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/08/2019
  • DocketNotice (DEFENDANT HARBOR AREA GANG ALTERNATIVES PROGRAM NOTICE OF NON-OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT MOTION TO STRIKE PORTIONS OF PLAINTIFF FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT); Filed by Harbor Area Gang Alternatives Program erroneously sued herein as Gang Free.Org Step Up Erroneously Sued As Gang Free.Org Step Up (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
26 More Docket Entries
  • 09/27/2017
  • DocketApplication ; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/27/2017
  • DocketMiscellaneous-Other; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/26/2017
  • DocketNOTICE OF REJECTION - APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/19/2017
  • DocketApplication ; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/19/2017
  • DocketAPPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM-CIVIL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/29/2017
  • DocketNotice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/29/2017
  • DocketNOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE & OSC RE PROOF OF SERVICE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/23/2017
  • DocketORDER ON COURT FEE WAIVER

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/23/2017
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Socorro Cobarrruvias (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/23/2017
  • DocketCOMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC666357    Hearing Date: March 17, 2020    Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

CHRISTOPHER COBARRUBIAS,

Plaintiff(s),

vs.

LOS ANGELES COUNTY SCHOOL DIST., ET AL.,

Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO: BC666357

[TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION IN PART AND DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION IN PART

Dept. 31

1:30 p.m.

March 17, 2020

  1. 1/13/20 Ruling on Motions to Compel

    The Court was scheduled to hear Defendant’s motions to compel on 1/13/20. Prior to the hearing, the Court issued a tentative ruling. There were no appearances at the hearing, and the Court adopted its tentative ruling. The ruling was as follows:

    Defendant, Harbor Area Gang Alternatives Program propounded form interrogatories, special interrogatories, RPDs and RFAs on Plaintiff on 8/26/19. To date, despite multiple attempts to meet and confer, Plaintiff has not served responses. Defendant therefore seeks an order compelling Plaintiff to respond, without objections, to the outstanding discovery and to pay sanctions.

    Notably, on 1/06/20, Defendant filed notices of non-opposition to the motions, but the same day it also filed notices of withdrawal of its notices of non-opposition. Opposition to the motions was due on or before 12/30/19. To date, the Court has not received opposition to the motions; it is not clear why Defendant withdrew the notices. If Plaintiff filed opposition to the motions, the parties must appear and explain the status of the discovery at issue.

    Assuming there is no opposition to the motions, Defendant’s motions are granted. Plaintiff is ordered to serve verified responses to form interrogatories, special interrogatories, and RPDs, without objections, within ten days. CCP §§2030.290(a),(b), 2031.300(a),(b). Defendant’s motion to deem RFAs admitted is also granted. CCP §2033.280(b).

    Sanctions are mandatory. §§2030.290(c), 2031.300(c), 2033.280(c). Defendant seeks sanctions in varying amounts in connection with each motion. The Court awards one hour to prepare each form discovery motion and three hours to appear at the hearing (Counsel is located in Oxnard and seeks 4.2 hours to appear, but the Court finds it unreasonable to require Plaintiff to pay for Defendant’s choice to retain an attorney outside of Los Angeles County); the Court therefore awards a total of six hours of attorney time at the requested rate of $215/hour, or $1290 in attorneys’ fees. The Court also awards three filing fees of $60 each, or $180 in costs.

    Sanctions are sought and imposed against Plaintiff and his attorney of record, jointly and severally; they are ordered to pay sanctions to Defendant, by and through counsel of record, in the total amount of $1470, within twenty days.

  2. Motion for Reconsideration

    On 1/31/20, Plaintiff filed this motion for reconsideration, setting it for hearing on 3/17/20. Plaintiff moves for reconsideration of the 1/13/20 order. Plaintiff moves for reconsideration on the ground that (a) Defendant noticed the motion for 2/13/20, not 1/13/20, and (b) Plaintiff provided responses on 1/09/20.

    The Court has reviewed the previously filed motions. There were three motions on calendar on 1/13/20 directed at Plaintiff (there was a fourth motion on calendar directed at a non-party, but Plaintiff is not seeking reconsideration of the order on that fourth motion). Two of the three bore the date “1/13/19” on the caption, and the third bore the date “2/13/19” on the caption. Because the motions were served in December of 2019, it was obvious that “19” was an inadvertent cut and paste error. Defendant also provides evidence, in opposition to the motion, that the correct hearing date was indicated in both the reservation receipts and an e-mail between Counsel. Any reply to the opposition was due on or before 3/10/20; to date, the Court has not received a reply. The motion for reconsideration on the ground that the motions were not properly noticed is therefore denied.

    More importantly, Plaintiff’s showing that he served responses on 1/09/20, more than four months after Defendant served the subject discovery, would not support a different ruling. Even if Plaintiff had filed timely and substantive opposition to the motions, the Court would have imposed sanctions. Plaintiff’s failure to timely respond necessitated the filing of the motions, which necessitated incurring attorneys’ fees and costs. Thus, there are no new or different facts, laws, or circumstances that support reconsideration, as required by CCP §1008.

    The Court notes that RFAs were deemed admitted. It is not clear whether or not Plaintiff seeks an order reconsidering the deemed admissions. The notice of motion indicates Plaintiff seeks reconsideration of the 1/13/20 order, but does not indicate which portion or the order Plaintiff seeks to have reconsidered. Plaintiff only substantively discusses the sanctions order in his points and authorities. The Court is concerned about a “deemed admitted” order under the circumstances. CCP §2033.280 precludes the Court from deeming RFAs admitted if responses are served prior to the hearing. It appears Plaintiff, in good faith, believed the motions were on calendar 2/13/20, not 1/13/20. Plaintiff served responses on 1/09/20. If the Court had been aware of the 1/09/20 responses when it ruled on the motions on 1/13/20, it would not have granted the motion to deem RFAs admitted. Again, Plaintiff’s motion for reconsideration is not express in this regard. However, because Plaintiff seeks reconsideration of the entire 1/13/20 order, the Court is inclined to grant reconsideration of the portion of its ruling deeming the RFAs admitted, and to vacate that portion of its order.

    Plaintiff is ordered to give notice.

    Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at sscdept31@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar. If a party submits on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative.

    Dated this 17th day of March, 2020

Hon. Thomas D. Long

Judge of the Superior Court

Case Number: BC666357    Hearing Date: January 13, 2020    Dept: 3

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

CHRISTOPHER COBARRUBIAS,

Plaintiff(s),

vs.

LOS ANGELES COUNTY SCHOOL DIST., ET AL.,

Defendant(s).

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO: BC666357

[TENTATIVE] ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S UNOPPOSED MOTIONS TO COMPEL RESPONSES FROM PLAINTIFF; DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL COMPLIANCE FROM LOS ANGELES COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT

Dept. 3

1:30 p.m.

January 13, 2019

1. Motions to Compel Directed at Plaintiff

Defendant, Harbor Area Gang Alternatives Program propounded form interrogatories, special interrogatories, RPDs and RFAs on Plaintiff on 8/26/19. To date, despite multiple attempts to meet and confer, Plaintiff has not served responses. Defendant therefore seeks an order compelling Plaintiff to respond, without objections, to the outstanding discovery and to pay sanctions.

Notably, on 1/06/20, Defendant filed notices of non-opposition to the motions, but the same day it also filed notices of withdrawal of its notices of non-opposition. Opposition to the motions was due on or before 12/30/19. To date, the Court has not received opposition to the motions; it is not clear why Defendant withdrew the notices. If Plaintiff filed opposition to the motions, the parties must appear and explain the status of the discovery at issue.

Assuming there is no opposition to the motions, Defendant’s motions are granted. Plaintiff is ordered to serve verified responses to form interrogatories, special interrogatories, and RPDs, without objections, within ten days. CCP §§2030.290(a),(b), 2031.300(a),(b). Defendant’s motion to deem RFAs admitted is also granted. CCP §2033.280(b).

Sanctions are mandatory. §§2030.290(c), 2031.300(c), 2033.280(c). Defendant seeks sanctions in varying amounts in connection with each motion. The Court awards one hour to prepare each form discovery motion and three hours to appear at the hearing (Counsel is located in Oxnard and seeks 4.2 hours to appear, but the Court finds it unreasonable to require Plaintiff to pay for Defendant’s choice to retain an attorney outside of Los Angeles County); the Court therefore awards a total of six hours of attorney time at the requested rate of $215/hour, or $1290 in attorneys’ fees. The Court also awards three filing fees of $60 each, or $180 in costs.

Sanctions are sought and imposed against Plaintiff and his attorney of record, jointly and severally; they are ordered to pay sanctions to Defendant, by and through counsel of record, in the total amount of $1470, within twenty days.

2. Motion to Compel Directed at Los Angeles County School District

Defendant, Harbor Area Gang Alternatives Program propounded a deposition subpoena for production of business records on non-party, LACSD, which has information about the incident that forms the basis of this complaint. LACSD asserted a privilege not to comply, and Defendant moves to compel compliance at this time.

The motion is denied without prejudice due to failure to file proof of personal service of the moving papers on LACSD. See CRC 3.1346, which provides that all moving papers must be personally served on a non-party deponent. Defendant filed proof of service of the moving papers on Plaintiff only, and did not file proof of service of the moving papers on LACSD by personal service.

Moving Defendant is ordered to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at sscdept3@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar. If a party submits on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative.