This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 06/03/2019 at 03:51:35 (UTC).

TIGRAN MARTIROSYAN ET AL VS ARON UNIS ET AL

Case Summary

On 12/19/2017 TIGRAN MARTIROSYAN filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against ARON UNIS. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is STEPHEN I. GOORVITCH. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****7388

  • Filing Date:

    12/19/2017

  • 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

STEPHEN I. GOORVITCH

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs, Petitioners and Guardian Ad Litems

MARTIROYAN TIGRAN

AVAGYAN LUSINE

Defendants and Respondents

UNIS ARON

UNIS BELIS

DOES 1 TO 10

Minors

MARTIROSYAN ANGELA

MARTIROSYAN KARO

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff, Petitioner and Minor Attorney

ARMAN SAHAKYAN & ASSOCIATES

Defendant Attorney

NETTELS CHARLES F.

 

Court Documents

APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM?CIVIL

1/11/2018: APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM?CIVIL

APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM?CIVIL

1/11/2018: APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM?CIVIL

SUMMONS

3/9/2018: SUMMONS

Proof of Personal Service

3/28/2018: Proof of Personal Service

Unknown

11/7/2018: Unknown

Request for Dismissal

2/1/2019: Request for Dismissal

Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

2/1/2019: Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

Unknown

2/1/2019: Unknown

Declaration

2/1/2019: Declaration

Declaration

2/1/2019: Declaration

Other -

2/1/2019: Other -

Unknown

2/1/2019: Unknown

Motion for Order

3/26/2019: Motion for Order

Reply

4/22/2019: Reply

Minute Order

5/2/2019: Minute Order

Notice of Ruling

5/7/2019: Notice of Ruling

Answer

5/15/2019: Answer

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

12/19/2017: COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

12 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 05/15/2019
  • Answer; Filed by Aron Unis (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/15/2019
  • Demand for Jury Trial; Filed by Aron Unis (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/07/2019
  • Notice of Ruling; Filed by Aron Unis (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/02/2019
  • at 1:30 PM in Department 5, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Hearing on Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Default and Default Judgment (CCP 473.5) - Held - Motion Granted

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/02/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Hearing on Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Default and Default Jud...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/22/2019
  • Reply (TO PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENT); Filed by Aron Unis (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/18/2019
  • Opposition (to Motion to Set Aside Entry of Default Judgment); Filed by Tigran Martiroyan (Plaintiff); Lusine Avagyan (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/26/2019
  • Motion for Order (SETTING ASIDE AND VACATING DEFAULT JUDGMENTS AND GRANTING DEFENDANT LEAVE TO DEFEND; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATIONS OF DEFENDANT ARON UNIS AND MINDI C. GRANT, ESQ.; EXHIBITS "Au-"B); Filed by Aron Unis (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/01/2019
  • Declaration (OF PLAINTIFF LUSINE AVAGYAN); Filed by Tigran Martiroyan (Plaintiff); Lusine Avagyan (Plaintiff); Angela Martirosyan (Plaintiff) et al.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/01/2019
  • Judgment (- Default Judgment By Court - Before Trial - 02/04/2019 entered for Plaintiff Martiroyan, Tigran against Defendant Unis, Aron.); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
11 More Docket Entries
  • 03/28/2018
  • Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint); Filed by Tigran Martiroyan (Plaintiff); Lusine Avagyan (Plaintiff); Angela Martirosyan (Plaintiff) et al.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/28/2018
  • Proof of Personal Service

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/09/2018
  • Summons; Filed by Tigran Martiroyan (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/09/2018
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/11/2018
  • Application ; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/11/2018
  • APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM CIVIL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/11/2018
  • Application ; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/11/2018
  • APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPOINTMENT OF GUARDIAN AD LITEM CIVIL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/19/2017
  • COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/19/2017
  • Complaint; Filed by Tigran Martiroyan (Plaintiff); Lusine Avagyan (Plaintiff); Angela Martirosyan (Plaintiff) et al.

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC687388    Hearing Date: March 02, 2020    Dept: 32

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 32

tigran martirosyan, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

aaron unis, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: BC687388

Hearing Date: March 2, 2020

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

Motion to dismiss

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Karo Martirosyan (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendant Aaron Unis (“Defendant”) following a motor vehicle collision. Defendant moves to dismiss the complaint as a terminating sanction. The unopposed motion is granted.

LEGAL STANDARD

The court has discretion to impose terminating sanction when a party willfully disobeys a discovery order. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2023.010, subd. (g), 2030.290, subd. (c).) The court may impose a terminating sanction by striking a party’s pleading. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.030, subd. (d)(1).)

DISCUSSION

In its order of November 19, 2019, the Court ordered Plaintiff to appear for deposition within 20 days of notice of the order. Defendant gave Plaintiff notice of the order on November 21, 2019 by mail. Plaintiff thus had until December 16, 2019 to appear for deposition. Plaintiff has not yet appeared for deposition. Further, Plaintiff has not opposed this motion, and there is nothing in the record suggesting that Plaintiff has submitted to a deposition. Also, Plaintiff attempted to dismiss the complaint via a defective request for dismissal. The Court therefore concludes Plaintiff does not intend to maintain this action. Accordingly, the motion is granted.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Defendant’s motion is granted. Plaintiff’s complaint is dismissed with prejudice. Defendant shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.

DATED: March 2, 2020 ___________________________

Stephen I. Goorvitch

Judge of the Superior Court

Case Number: BC687388    Hearing Date: November 19, 2019    Dept: 5

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 5

tigran martirosyan, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

aaron unis, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: BC687388

Hearing Date: November 19, 2019

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

Motions to compel depositions of PLAINTIFFS

BACKGROUND

Plaintiffs Karo Martirosyan and Angela Martirosyan (“Plaintiffs”) filed this action against Defendant Aaron Unis (“Defendant”) following a motor vehicle collision. Defendant moves to compel the depositions of Plaintiffs, which plaintiffs oppose. The motions are 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

Defendant has the right to take Plaintiffs’ depositions without leave of the Court. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.210, subd. (a).) Here, Plaintiffs have refused to appear for deposition on the basis that they are minors. Plaintiffs cite no authority for the proposition that they need not appear for deposition if they have not yet reached the age of majority. Indeed, Plaintiffs have put their injuries at issue by filing this lawsuit, so they cannot now refuse to submit to depositions. If Plaintiffs contend their depositions would result in “unwarranted annoyance, embarrassment, or oppression, or undue burden and expense . . . ,” Plaintiffs should have filed a motion for protective order. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 2025.420.) Plaintiffs did not do so. Nor would the Court be inclined to grant such a motion because Plaintiffs are parties to the case, meaning they chose to put their injuries at issue, and they are percipient witnesses to the underlying collision. Accordingly, the motions to compel are granted.

Defendant seeks sanctions against Plaintiffs and counsel-of-record in the amount of $961.65. The Court finds Plaintiffs’ failure to appear for deposition a misuse of the discovery process. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.010, subd. (d).) Simply, Plaintiffs’ opposition has no merit, and the Court is surprised that a motion on this issue was necessary. Therefore, the Court orders Plaintiffs and their counsel-of-record, Arman Saakyan, to pay sanctions in the amount of $961.65, which is reasonable under the circumstances.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

The Court grants the motion to compel Plaintiffs’ depositions. Plaintiffs shall submit to depositions within twenty (20) days of notice of this order. The Court orders Plaintiffs and their counsel-of-record, Arman Saakyan, to pay sanctions in the amount of $961.65 within twenty (20) days of notice of this order. Defendant shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.

DATED: November 19, 2019 ___________________________

Stephen I. Goorvitch

Judge of the Superior Court