This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 10/19/2020 at 04:58:17 (UTC).

VIDA TEBBI VS FITNESS INTERNATIONAL LLC ET AL

Case Summary

On 05/22/2018 VIDA TEBBI filed a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury lawsuit against FITNESS INTERNATIONAL LLC. 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:

    ****7114

  • Filing Date:

    05/22/2018

  • 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 Judge

STEPHEN I. GOORVITCH

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner

TEBBI VIDA

Defendants and Respondents

FITNESS INTERNATIONAL LLC

LA FITNESS

DOES 1-50

L.A. FITNESS INTERNATIONAL LLC

LA FITNESS CORPORATE OFFICE HEADQUARTERS HQ

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

ESCANDARI ALEXANDER H. ESQ.

FARAMARZI FARAH

ESCANDARI ALEXANDER H ESQ.

Defendant Attorney

SMITH ALICE LIH-LING

 

Court Documents

Motion for Leave to Amend - MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

9/15/2020: Motion for Leave to Amend - MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

9/10/2020: Notice of Posting of Jury Fees

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE; HEARING ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE...)

8/7/2020: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE; HEARING ON MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE...)

Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF COURT'S ORDER RE MSJ, TSC, FSC, AND TRIAL

4/30/2020: Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF COURT'S ORDER RE MSJ, TSC, FSC, AND TRIAL

Notice - NOTICE OF ENTRY OF ORDER ON STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FSC

1/16/2020: Notice - NOTICE OF ENTRY OF ORDER ON STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FSC

[Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC (and Related Motion/Discovery Dates) Person - [PROPOSED ORDER] AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FSC (AND RELATED MOTION/DISCOVERY DATES) PERSO

7/16/2019: [Proposed Order] and Stipulation to Continue Trial, FSC (and Related Motion/Discovery Dates) Person - [PROPOSED ORDER] AND STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL, FSC (AND RELATED MOTION/DISCOVERY DATES) PERSO

DEFENDANT FITNESS INTERNATIONAL LLC.S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT;DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

9/21/2018: DEFENDANT FITNESS INTERNATIONAL LLC.S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT;DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Proof of Personal Service

10/29/2018: Proof of Personal Service

Proof of Personal Service

10/29/2018: Proof of Personal Service

Declaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil

12/11/2018: Declaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil

Notice - Notice of Errata Re Fitness International, LLC's Motion to Compel Request for Production of Documents from Plaintiff

2/13/2019: Notice - Notice of Errata Re Fitness International, LLC's Motion to Compel Request for Production of Documents from Plaintiff

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Compel Plaintiff's Responses to Fitness'...)

2/27/2019: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Compel Plaintiff's Responses to Fitness'...)

Order Appointing Court Approved Reporter as Official Reporter Pro Tempore

2/28/2019: Order Appointing Court Approved Reporter as Official Reporter Pro Tempore

Substitution of Attorney

3/29/2019: Substitution of Attorney

Opposition - OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT FITNESS INTERNATIONAL'S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT'S REQUEST FOR FORM INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE

4/4/2019: Opposition - OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT FITNESS INTERNATIONAL'S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT'S REQUEST FOR FORM INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE

Declaration - DECLARATION OF VIDA TEBBI IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO DEFEMDAMT FITNESS INTERNATIONAL, LLC'S MOTIONS TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO DISCOVERY AND REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS

4/4/2019: Declaration - DECLARATION OF VIDA TEBBI IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO DEFEMDAMT FITNESS INTERNATIONAL, LLC'S MOTIONS TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO DISCOVERY AND REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSES TO FITNESS'...)

4/5/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSES TO FITNESS'...)

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR MINUTE ORDER (RULING ON SUBMITTED MATTER) OF 04/08/2019

4/8/2019: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR MINUTE ORDER (RULING ON SUBMITTED MATTER) OF 04/08/2019

52 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 10/26/2021
  • Hearing10/26/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department 32 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/13/2021
  • Hearing10/13/2021 at 10:00 AM in Department 32 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Final Status Conference

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/24/2021
  • Hearing05/24/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department 32 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; : OSC RE Dismissal

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/22/2021
  • Hearing02/22/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department 32 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Hearing on Motion for Leave to Amend Complaint

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/15/2020
  • DocketMotion for Leave to Amend (Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint); Filed by Vida Tebbi (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/10/2020
  • Docketat 1:30 PM in Department 32, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Hearing on Motion for Leave (to file a First Amended Complaint) - Held - Motion Denied

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/10/2020
  • DocketNotice of Posting of Jury Fees; Filed by Fitness International, LLC (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/10/2020
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Hearing on Motion for Leave to file a First Amended Complaint)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/10/2020
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for ((Hearing on Motion for Leave to file a First Amended Complaint) of 09/10/2020); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/10/2020
  • DocketNotice (Notice of Entry of Stipulated Protective Order); Filed by Fitness International, LLC (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
76 More Docket Entries
  • 12/11/2018
  • DocketMotion to Be Relieved as Counsel; Filed by Alexander H Escandari, Esq. (Attorney)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/29/2018
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by Vida Tebbi (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/29/2018
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by Vida Tebbi (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/29/2018
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by Vida Tebbi (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/29/2018
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by Vida Tebbi (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/21/2018
  • DocketDEFENDANT FITNESS INTERNATIONAL LLC.S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS COMPLAINT;DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/21/2018
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by Fitness International, LLC (Defendant); LA Fitness (Legacy Party)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/22/2018
  • DocketSUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/22/2018
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Vida Tebbi (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/22/2018
  • DocketCOMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES: 1. NEGLIGENCE- PREMISES LIABILITY; ETC

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC707114    Hearing Date: September 10, 2020    Dept: 32

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 32

vida tebbi,

Plaintiff,

v.

fitness international, llc,

Defendant.

Case No.: BC707114

Hearing Date: September 10, 2020

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

motion for leave to amend

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Vida Tebbi (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendant Fitness International, LLC (“Defendant”) alleging that she was injured while using a treadmill at Defendant’s gym. Plaintiff filed this action on May 22, 2018, asserting causes of action for premises liability, “unsafe conditions,” and dangerous condition of private property. Now, Plaintiff seeks leave to file a claim for negligence based upon the theory that Defendant’s employee moved Plaintiff after she fell off the treadmill, causing further injury. Defendant opposes the motion, which is denied without prejudice.

LEGAL STANDARD

Under California Rules of Court, rule 3.124, a motion to amend a pleading must include a copy of the proposed amendment and state the allegations that the moving party proposes to add or delete.  (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1324, subd. (a).) California Rules of Court, rule 3.124 also requires that the moving party advance a declaration stating the effect of the amendment, why the amendment is necessary and proper, when the facts giving rise to the amended allegations were discovered, and the reasons why the request for amendment was not made earlier.  (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1324, subd. (b).)

DISCUSSION

Plaintiff’s counsel’s declaration is deficient because it does not address when the facts giving rise to the amended allegations were discovered and the reasons why the motion was not filed sooner. Plaintiff’s counsel substituted in as counsel for Plaintiff on March 29, 2019. The written discovery makes clear that “Plaintiff sought to hold Defendant responsible for Negligence for placing the treadmills in close proximity to one another and for Defendant’s employee intentionally moving Plaintiff after she fell, exacerbating her injuries.” (Declaration of Farah Faramarzi, ¶ 10.) The declaration does not state when Plaintiff’s counsel learned this information, i.e., the declaration does not state when Plaintiff’s discovery responses were prepared and when Plaintiff’s counsel reviewed those responses. Nor does the declaration when she informed Defendant’s counsel that she intended to amend to add the negligence claim. (Id., ¶ 11.) Plaintiff’s counsel states that she waited to file the motion until settlement discussions had concluded, which may constitute good cause, but she does not include relevant dates of the settlement discussions. (Id., ¶¶ 13-17.) In other words, the Court cannot determine when Plaintiff’s counsel discovered the new facts in relation to when the settlement discussions began. Based upon the deficiencies in Plaintiff’s counsel’s declaration, the Court is unable to determine “when the facts giving rise to the amended allegations were discovered, and the reasons why the request for amendment was not made earlier,” as required by California Rules of Court, rule 3.1324(b).  

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend is denied without prejudice. Plaintiff shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.

DATED: September 10, 2020 ___________________________

Stephen I. Goorvitch

Judge of the Superior Court

Case Number: BC707114    Hearing Date: August 07, 2020    Dept: 32

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 32

vida tebbi,

Plaintiff,

v.

fitness international, llc,

Defendant.

Case No.: BC707114

Hearing Date: August 7, 2020

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

motion for leave to amend

NOTICE

Department #32 will be dark for motions on August 7, 2020.  The parties are ordered to email the Court’s clerk at SSCDept32@lacourt.org to inform the clerk whether they are submitting on the Court’s tentative or whether they are requesting a hearing.  If any party requests a hearing, one will be scheduled.  If the parties do not email the Court’s clerk before the hearing time to request a hearing, they will waive the right to be heard and shall submit to this tentative order, which shall issue.

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Vida Tebbi (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendant Fitness International, LLC (“Defendant”) alleging that she was injured while using a treadmill at Defendant’s gym. Plaintiff filed this action on May 22, 2018, asserting causes of action for premises liability, “unsafe conditions,” and dangerous condition of private property. Now, Plaintiff seeks leave to file a claim for negligence based upon the theory that Defendant’s employee moved Plaintiff after she fell off the treadmill, causing further injury. Defendant opposes the motion, which is denied without prejudice.

LEGAL STANDARD

Under California Rules of Court, rule 3.124, a motion to amend a pleading must include a copy of the proposed amendment and state the allegations that the moving party proposes to add or delete.  (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1324, subd. (a).) California Rules of Court, rule 3.124 also requires that the moving party advance a declaration stating the effect of the amendment, why the amendment is necessary and proper, when the facts giving rise to the amended allegations were discovered, and the reasons why the request for amendment was not made earlier.  (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1324, subd. (b).)

DISCUSSION

Plaintiff’s counsel’s declaration is deficient because it does not address when the facts giving rise to the amended allegations were discovered and the reasons why the motion was not filed sooner. Plaintiff’s counsel substituted in as counsel for Plaintiff on March 29, 2019. The written discovery makes clear that “Plaintiff sought to hold Defendant responsible for Negligence for placing the treadmills in close proximity to one another and for Defendant’s employee intentionally moving Plaintiff after she fell, exacerbating her injuries.” (Declaration of Farah Faramarzi, ¶ 10.) The declaration does not state when Plaintiff’s counsel learned this information, i.e., the declaration does not state when Plaintiff’s discovery responses were prepared and when Plaintiff’s counsel reviewed those responses. Nor does the declaration when she informed Defendant’s counsel that she intended to amend to add the negligence claim. (Id., ¶ 11.) Plaintiff’s counsel states that she waited to file the motion until settlement discussions had concluded, which may constitute good cause, but she does not include relevant dates of the settlement discussions. (Id., ¶¶ 13-17.) In other words, the Court cannot determine when Plaintiff’s counsel discovered the new facts in relation to when the settlement discussions began. Based upon the deficiencies in Plaintiff’s counsel’s declaration, the Court is unable to determine “when the facts giving rise to the amended allegations were discovered, and the reasons why the request for amendment was not made earlier,” as required by California Rules of Court, rule 3.1324(b).  

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend is denied without prejudice. Plaintiff shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.

DATED: August 7, 2020 ___________________________

Stephen I. Goorvitch

Judge of the Superior Court