This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 03/22/2022 at 04:50:57 (UTC).

TEA SOO JUN VS DAI SOOK YOO ET AL

Case Summary

On 09/28/2017 TEA SOO JUN filed a Personal Injury - Uninsured Motor Vehicle lawsuit against DAI SOOK YOO. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are MICHAEL E. WHITAKER and FREDERICK C. SHALLER. The case status is Other.
Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****7603

  • Filing Date:

    09/28/2017

  • Case Status:

    Other

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Uninsured Motor Vehicle

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

MICHAEL E. WHITAKER

FREDERICK C. SHALLER

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs

JUN TEA SOO

YOO DAI

Defendants

PARK SHIN KWANG

YOO DAI SOOK

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorneys

YOO KENNETH KEEBYUNG

BAYONA EBER

Defendant Attorneys

MAYERS DARREN GREGORY

CAPRA-CUNNINGHAM MARISA

FARMER JOHN T.

MAYERS DARREN G.

 

Court Documents

Request for Dismissal

3/8/2022: Request for Dismissal

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL (SETTLEMENT))

2/8/2022: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL (SETTLEMENT))

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL (SETTLEMENT))

1/5/2022: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL (SETTLEMENT))

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL (SETTLEMENT))

11/9/2021: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL (SETTLEMENT))

Notice of Ruling

11/12/2021: Notice of Ruling

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL (SETTLEMENT))

9/7/2021: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL (SETTLEMENT))

Request for Dismissal

7/15/2021: Request for Dismissal

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL (SETTLEMENT))

7/7/2021: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL (SETTLEMENT))

Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE DISMISSAL (SETTLEMENT)

5/20/2021: Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE DISMISSAL (SETTLEMENT)

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER RE: NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT) OF 05/13/2021

5/13/2021: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (COURT ORDER RE: NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT) OF 05/13/2021

Notice of Settlement

5/13/2021: Notice of Settlement

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER RE: NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT)

5/13/2021: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (COURT ORDER RE: NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT)

Substitution of Attorney

12/1/2020: Substitution of Attorney

Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF ASSOCIATION OF COUNSEL

1/19/2021: Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF ASSOCIATION OF COUNSEL

Association of Attorney

2/3/2021: Association of Attorney

Substitution of Attorney

2/16/2021: Substitution of Attorney

Ex Parte Application - EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL AND ALL RELATED DATES PURSUANT TO STIPULATION

2/17/2021: Ex Parte Application - EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL AND ALL RELATED DATES PURSUANT TO STIPULATION

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL AND ALL REL...)

2/17/2021: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL AND ALL REL...)

50 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 03/08/2022
  • DocketRequest for Dismissal; Filed by Dai Yoo (Plaintiff); Tea Soo Jun (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 02/08/2022
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 32, Michael E. Whitaker, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement) - Not Held - Continued - Party's Motion

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 02/08/2022
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement))); Filed by Clerk

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 01/05/2022
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 32, Michael E. Whitaker, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement) - Not Held - Continued - Party's Motion

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 01/05/2022
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement))); Filed by Clerk

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/09/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 32, Michael E. Whitaker, Presiding; Jury Trial - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/22/2021
  • Docketat 10:00 AM in Department 32, Michael E. Whitaker, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/12/2021
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by Tea Soo Jun (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/09/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 32, Michael E. Whitaker, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement) - Held - Continued

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/09/2021
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement))); Filed by Clerk

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
87 More Docket Entries
  • 11/13/2017
  • DocketDEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/13/2017
  • DocketSUMMONS CROSS-COMPLAINT

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/13/2017
  • DocketCROSS-COMPLAINT-PERSONAL INJURY, PROPERTY DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/13/2017
  • DocketDemand for Jury Trial; Filed by Dai Sook Yoo (Defendant)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/13/2017
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by Dai Sook Yoo (Defendant)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/13/2017
  • DocketANSWER PERSONAL INJURY, PROPERTY DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/28/2017
  • DocketSUMMONS

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/28/2017
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Dai Yoo (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/28/2017
  • DocketCOMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/28/2017
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Tea Soo Jun (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: ****7603    Hearing Date: November 21, 2019    Dept: 5

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 5

tea soo Jun,

Plaintiff,

v.

dai sook yoo, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: ****7603, consolidated with

17STLC02937

Hearing Date: November 21, 2019

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

motion to compel deposition

BACKGROUND

Cross-Complainant Dai Sook Yoo (“Yoo”) moves to compel the deposition of Cross-Defendant Shin Kwang Park (“Park”). Park opposes the motion, which is granted.

LEGAL STANDARD

Per Code of Civil Procedure section 2025.450, if a party to the action fails to appear for deposition after service of a deposition notice and the party has not served a valid objection to that deposition notice, the party that noticed the deposition may move for an order to compel the deponent to attend and testify at deposition. (Code Civ. Proc., ;2025.450, subd. (a).)

DISCUSSION

Yoo has the right to take Park’s deposition without leave of court at any time after Park appeared in the action. (See Code Civ. Proc., ; 2025.210, subd. (a).) Yoo noticed Park’s deposition for February 26, 2019, April 5, 2019, and September 27, 2019. Park has not sat for deposition, as Park has claimed unavailability for all these dates. (See Declaration of Amelia McDonald, ¶¶ 3-13.) Yoo has therefore demonstrated that Park has failed to appear for deposition.

In opposition, Park argues that he properly objected to Yoo’s deposition notice on the basis that Park was unavailable on the noticed date. A party may object to a deposition notice based on an “error or irregularity” in the deposition notice. (See Code Civ. Proc., ; 2025.410, subd. (a).) Yoo’s unavailability is not an error or irregularity in the deposition notice. Moreover, Yoo afforded Park three opportunities to appear, and each time Park claimed to be unavailable, which suggests that Park is not acting in good faith. Accordingly, Park’s objections were not proper. Park must appear for deposition.

Park also argues that his unavailability “is an issue to be worked out between the parties and does not require court intervention.” (Opposition, at p. 4.) Yoo has noticed Park’s deposition for multiple dates, and Park has yet to identify a date certain on which he will appear for deposition. Court intervention is therefore warranted.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Yoo’s motion to compel Park’s deposition is granted. Park shall appear for a deposition within thirty (30) days of notice of this order, unless Yoo stipulates to extend the deadline. Yoo shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.

DATED: November 21, 2019 ___________________________

Stephen I. Goorvitch

Judge of the Superior Court



related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases represented by Lawyer MAYERS DARREN

Latest cases represented by Lawyer CAPRA-CUNNINGHAM MARISA

Latest cases represented by Lawyer FARMER JOHN