This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 06/08/2019 at 04:48:04 (UTC).

STEPHANIE KUKUEZKA ET AL VS LYNN LOVE MKRTICHYAN

Case Summary

On 02/22/2017 STEPHANIE KUKUEZKA filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against LYNN LOVE MKRTICHYAN. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is CHRISTOPHER K. LUI. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****1466

  • Filing Date:

    02/22/2017

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

CHRISTOPHER K. LUI

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs and Petitioners

KUKUEZKA MICHAEL

KUKUEZKA STEPHANIE

KUKUCZKA MICHAEL JR.

Defendants and Respondents

MKRTICHYAN LYNN LOVE

DOES 1 TO 100

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

CACCIATORE THOMAS P.

CACCIATORE THOMAS PETER

Defendant Attorney

STRAUS MARVIN JONATHON

 

Court Documents

DEFENDANT LYNN LOVE MKRTICHYAN'S NOTICE OF CHANGE OF LAW FIRM

7/2/2018: DEFENDANT LYNN LOVE MKRTICHYAN'S NOTICE OF CHANGE OF LAW FIRM

ORDER AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL FSC AND RELATED MOTION DISCOVERY DATES PERSONAL INJURY COURTS ONLY CENTRAL DISTRICT

7/11/2018: ORDER AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL FSC AND RELATED MOTION DISCOVERY DATES PERSONAL INJURY COURTS ONLY CENTRAL DISTRICT

Stipulation to Continue Trial/FSC [and Related Motion/Discovery Dates] Personal Injury Courts Only (Department 91, 92, 93, 97)

10/24/2018: Stipulation to Continue Trial/FSC [and Related Motion/Discovery Dates] Personal Injury Courts Only (Department 91, 92, 93, 97)

Stipulation and Order

2/7/2019: Stipulation and Order

Ex Parte Application

4/17/2019: Ex Parte Application

Minute Order

4/17/2019: Minute Order

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

2/22/2017: COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

SUMMONS

2/22/2017: SUMMONS

Proof of Service of Summons and Complaint

3/7/2017: Proof of Service of Summons and Complaint

LYNN LOVE MKRTICHYAN'S ANSWER TO STEPHANIE KUKUCZKA'S, MICHAEL KUKUCZKA'S, AND MICHAEL KUKUCZKA, JR.'S COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

5/5/2017: LYNN LOVE MKRTICHYAN'S ANSWER TO STEPHANIE KUKUCZKA'S, MICHAEL KUKUCZKA'S, AND MICHAEL KUKUCZKA, JR.'S COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

 

Docket Entries

  • 05/13/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Jury Trial - Not Held - Advanced and Continued - by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/03/2019
  • at 10:00 AM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Advanced and Continued - by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/17/2019
  • at 09:42 AM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Nunc Pro Tunc Order

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/17/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Hearing on Ex Parte Application (for an Order Continuing the Trial Date and Related Dates Pursuant to Stipulation) - Held - Motion Granted

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/17/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Nunc Pro Tunc Order)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/17/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Defendant's Ex Parte Application for an Order Continuing the ...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/17/2019
  • Ex Parte Application (for an Order Continuing the Trial Date and Related Dates Pursuant to Stipulation); Filed by Lynn Love Mkrtichyan (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/27/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Jury Trial - Not Held - Continued - Stipulation

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/13/2019
  • at 10:00 AM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Continued - Stipulation

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/07/2019
  • Stipulation and Order (TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FSC [AND RELATED MOTION/DISCOVERY DATES] PERSONAL INJURY COURTS ONLY (CENTRAL DISTRICT)); Filed by Stephanie Kukuezka (Plaintiff); Michael Kukuezka (Plaintiff); Michael Jr. Kukuczka (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
3 More Docket Entries
  • 07/11/2018
  • [Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC (and Related Motion/Discovery Dates) Personal Injury Courts Only (Central District); Filed by Lynn Love Mkrtichyan (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/11/2018
  • ORDER AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL FSC AND RELATED MOTION DISCOVERY DATES PERSONAL INJURY COURTS ONLY CENTRAL DISTRICT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/02/2018
  • DEFENDANT LYNN LOVE MKRTICHYAN'S NOTICE OF CHANGE OF LAW FIRM

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/02/2018
  • Notice; Filed by Lynn Love Mkrtichyan (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/05/2017
  • LYNN LOVE MKRTICHYAN'S ANSWER TO STEPHANIE KUKUCZKA'S, MICHAEL KUKUCZKA'S, AND MICHAEL KUKUCZKA, JR.'S COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/05/2017
  • Answer; Filed by Lynn Love Mkrtichyan (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/07/2017
  • Proof of Service of Summons and Complaint

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/22/2017
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/22/2017
  • Complaint; Filed by Stephanie Kukuezka (Plaintiff); Michael Kukuezka (Plaintiff); Michael Jr. Kukuczka (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/22/2017
  • COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC651466    Hearing Date: March 13, 2020    Dept: 28

Motion to Continue Trial

Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiffs Stephanie Kukuczka, Michael Kukuczka, and Michael Kukuczka, Jr. (collectively “Plaintiffs”) filed this action against Defendant Lynn Love Mkrtichyan (“Defendant”) on February 22, 2017 alleging a single cause of action for motor vehicle negligence arising from a vehicle collision which occurred on March 1, 2016. The last names of the Plaintiffs are incorrectly referred to as “Kukuezka” in the court system. 

Trial is currently set for March 16, 2020. 

PARTYS REQUESTS

Plaintiffs move the Court to continue the trial date to “on or about” October 19, 2020. 

LEGAL STANDARD

Trial dates are firm to ensure prompt disposition of civil cases. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(a).) Continuances are thus generally disfavored. (See id. rule 3.1332(b).) Nevertheless, the trial court has discretion to continue trial dates. (Hernandez v. Superior Court (2004) 115 Cal.App.4th 1242, 1246.) Each request for continuance must be considered on its own merits and is granted upon an affirmative showing of good cause. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(c); Hernandez, supra, 115 Cal.App.4th at 1246.) Circumstances that may indicate good cause include: (1) the unavailability of an essential lay or expert witness due to death, illness, or other excusable circumstances; (2) the unavailability of a party due to death, illness, or other excusable circumstances; (3) the unavailability of trial counsel due to death, illness, or other excusable circumstances; (4) the substitution of trial counsel where there is an affirmative showing that the substitution is required in the interests of justice; (5) the addition of a new party if (A) the new party has not had a reasonable opportunity to conduct discovery and prepare for trial, or (B) the other parties have not had a reasonable opportunity to conduct discovery and prepare for trial in regard to the new party’s involvement in the case; (6) a party’s excused inability to obtain essential testimony, documents, or other material evidence despite diligent efforts; or (7) a significant, unanticipated change in the status of the case as a result of which the case is not ready for trial. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(c).)

DISCUSSION

Plaintiffs seek a fourth trial continuance in the instant matter from March 16, 2020 to “on or about” October 19, 2020 to allow for time to complete depositions and expert designations based on the findings of the medical examination of Plaintiff Michael Kukuczka Jr. (Malczynski Decl., ¶ 7.) The Court most recently granted a trial continuance on August 26, 2019 based on Plaintiff’s ex parte application, which stated that new counsel had been substituted after Plaintiff Michael Kukuczka Jr. was diagnosed with a brain injury. (Plaintiff’s Ex Parte App., 08/26/2019, p. 2.) Additionally, on January 22, 2020, the Court granted Defendant’s Motion for Order Requiring Plaintiff Michael Kukuczka, Jr. to Submit to Medical Examination, and ordered the medical examination to take place within 20 days of the ruling on the motion. (Minute Order, 1/22/2020.)

In the instant motion, Plaintiffs argue that good cause exists to continue the March 16, 2020 trial because Plaintiff Michael Kuluczka, Jr.’s traumatic brain injury diagnosis has “significantly changed the status of this case,” and Plaintiff’s medical treatment as well as scheduling issues have prevented Plaintiff’s medical examination from taking place at an earlier date. (Mot., p. 5.) According to Plaintiff’s counsel, the earliest available date for the medical examination was February 24, 2020, after which “expert designations and depositions need to be noticed and proceed” based on the findings of the examination. (Malczynski Decl., ¶ 6-7.)

The Court does not find that good cause exists to continue the trial in the instant matter. First, as part of the ruling on January 22, 2020, the Court specifically ordered Plaintiff’s medical examination to be conducted within twenty days of the ruling, however the parties failed to schedule an examination within that time. Second, the Court has already granted a trial continuance on the basis of Plaintiff Michael Kukuczka Jr.’s diagnosis and the corresponding substitution of new counsel who are experienced in brain injury matters. (Plaintiff’s Ex Parte App., 08/26/2019, p. 2.) Given that Plaintiff’s diagnosis occurred prior to the substitution of counsel on July 30, 2019, it does not now constitute a “significant change” in the status of the case as contended by Plaintiffs. (See Malczynski Decl., ¶ 3.) The three prior trial continuances over the course of three years have allowed the parties ample time to conduct discovery and proceed with medical examinations. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1332(d)(2).) 

CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, Defendant’s motion to continue trial to October 19, 2020, is DENIED.

Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

Case Number: BC651466    Hearing Date: January 21, 2020    Dept: 28

Motion to Compel Attendance at a Physical Examination

Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows.

BACKGROUND

On February 22, 2017, Plaintiffs Stephanie Kukuczka, Michael Kukuczka, and Michael Kukuczka, Jr. (“Plaintiffs”) filed a complaint against Defendant Lynn Love Mkrtichyan (“Defendant”).  The complaint alleges motor vehicle negligence for a rear-end collision that occurred on March 1, 2016.

On December 17, 2019, Defendant filed a motion to compel Plaintiff’s attendance at a physical examination pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 2032.320.

Trial is set for March 16, 2020.

PARTY’S REQUEST

Defendant asks the Court to compel Plaintiff Michael Kukuczka, Jr.to appear for a neurological examination because he is claiming to have suffered a traumatic brain injury from the March 1, 2016 collision.

///

LEGAL STANDARD

California Code of Civil Procedure section 2032.220, subdivision (a) states: “In any case in which a plaintiff is seeking recovery for personal injuries, any defendant may demand one physical examination of the plaintiff, if both of the following conditions are satisfied: (1) The examination does not include any diagnostic test or procedure that is painful, protracted, or intrusive. (2) The examination is conducted at a location within 75 miles of the residence of the examinee.”

California Code of Civil procedure section 2032.310 states: “(a) If any party desires to obtain discovery by a physical examination other than that described in Article 2 (commencing with Section 2032.210), or by a mental examination, the party shall obtain leave of court. (b) A motion for an examination under subdivision (a) shall specify the time, place, manner, conditions, scope, and nature of the examination, as well as the identity and the specialty, if any, of the person or persons who will perform the examination. The motion shall be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration under Section 2016.040. (c) Notice of the motion shall be served on the person to be examined and on all parties who have appeared in the action.”

California Code of Civil Procedure section 2032.320 states: “(a) The court shall grant a motion for a physical or mental examination under Section 2032.310 only for good cause shown. . . . (d) An order granting a physical or mental examination shall specify the person or persons who may perform the examination, as well as the time, place, manner, diagnostic tests and procedures, conditions, scope, and nature of the examination.”

DISCUSSION

Plaintiff Michael Kukuczka, Jr. alleges to have sustained a traumatic brain injury from the March 1, 2016 collision.  (Agyeman Decl., ¶ 7, Exh. D.)  Accordingly, the Court finds there is good cause to grant leave for Moving Defendant to conduct a neurological examination on Plaintiff Michael Kukuczka, Jr.

CONCLUSION

Therefore, the motion is GRANTED.

Plaintiff Michael Kukuczka, Jr. is ordered to appear for a neurological examination according to the following terms:

Date: A date within 20 days of this ruling that is mutually agreeable between the parties.

Time: A time mutually agreeable between the parties.

Location: 16311 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 680, Encino, California 91436-4321.

Nature: Dr. Arthur P. Kowell, M.D. shall conduct a neurological examination consisting of taking a medical history, examining Plaintiff’s head and neck. No portion of the examination is to be painful, proactive, or intrusive. 9 hours.

Defendant is ordered to give notice of this ruling.