This case was last updated from California Courts of Appeal on 05/10/2022 at 00:03:56 (UTC).

Doe et al. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County et al.

Case Summary

On 07/29/2021 Doe filed an Other lawsuit against Superior Court of Los Angeles County. This case was filed in California Courts of Appeal, Second Appellate District - Division 2 located in Statewide, California. The Judge overseeing this case is Murphy, Mary. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ***3874

  • Filing Date:

    07/29/2021

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Other

  • County, State:

    Statewide, California

Judge Details

Trial Court Judge

Murphy, Mary

 

Party Details

Petitioners

Jane Doe

John Doe

Jane GJ Doe

Jane DR Doe

Jane DS Doe

Jane RY Doe

Agustina Karina Flores

Victoria Macias

Respondents

Superior Court of Los Angeles County

Hon. Mary Ann Murphy

Van Nuys, CA 91401

Interested Party

Mountain View School District

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Petitioner Attorneys

Michael Santino Carrillo

Attorney at Carrillo Law Firm , LLP

1499 Huntington Dr Ste 402

South Pasadena, CA 91030

Ronald T. LaBriola

Attorney at The Senators (Ret.) Firm LLP

19100 Von Karman Ave Ste 850

Irvine, CA 92612

Holly Noelle Boyer

Attorney at Esner Chang & Boyer

234 East Colorado Blvd., Suite 975

Pasadena, CA 91101

Laura Marie Jimenez

Attorney at Law Offices of Laura M. Jimenez

1499 Huntington Dr # 402

South Pasadena, CA 91030

Stuart B. Esner

Attorney at Esner, Chang & Boyer

234 East Colorado Boulevard Suite 975

Pasadena, CA 91101

Luis A. Carrillo

Attorney at CARRILLO LAW FIRM, LLP

1499 Huntington Dr Suite No. 402

South Pasadena, CA 91030

Respondent Attorney

Frederick Bennett

Attorney at Superior Court of Los Angeles County

111 North Hill Street, Room 546

Los Angeles, CA 90012

Interested Party Attorneys

Dana Alden Fox

Attorney at Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith

633 W. 5Th Street, Suite 4000

Los Angeles, CA 90071

Edward Earl Ward, Jr

Attorney at LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP

633 West 5Th Street Ste 4000

Los Angeles, CA 90071

Wendy Sabina Dowse

Attorney at Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP,

74830 Us Highway 111, Ste 200

Indian Wells, CA 92210-7101

Jeffrey James Christovich

Attorney at Lewis, Brisbois, Bisgaard, et al.

633 West 5Th Street Ste 400

Los Angeles, CA 90071

Allyson Michelle Welden

Attorney at Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith, LLP

633 W 5Th St Ste 4000

Los Angeles, CA 90071-2074

Lann G. Mc Intyre

Attorney at Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP

550 West C Street Suite 1700

San Diego, CA 92101

 

Court Documents

B313874

Court of Appeal Opinion

 

Docket Entries

  • 08/25/2022
  • HearingDescription: Remittitur issued.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/25/2022
  • HearingDescription: Filed Supreme Court remittitur with opinion.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/27/2022
  • DocketDescription: Supreme Court order filed re:; Notes: On application of real party in interest and good cause appearing, it is ordered that the time to serve and file the answer brief on the merits is extended to and including June 10, 2022. No further extension is contemplated. [S272166]

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/13/2022
  • DocketDescription: Received document entitled:; Notes: opening brief on the merits- filed in the Supreme Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/09/2022
  • DocketDescription: Supreme Court order filed re:; Notes: On application of petitioners and good cause appearing, it is ordered that the time to serve and file the openillg brief on the merits is extended to and including April 11, 2022. No further extension is contemplated. [S272166]

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/09/2022
  • DocketDescription: Petition for review granted in Supreme Court.; Notes: The petition for review is granted. Pending review, the opinion of the Court of Appeal, which is currently published at 7_1 Cal.App.5th 227, may be cited, not only for its persuasive value, but also for the limited purpose of establishing the existence of a conflict in authority that would in turn allow trial courts to exercise discretion [...] Administrative Order 2021-04-21; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.l 115(e)(3) and corresponding Comment, par. 2.) [S272166]

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/19/2022
  • DocketDescription: Supreme Court order filed re:; Notes: The time for granting or denying review in the above-entitled matter is hereby extended to and including March 8, 2022, or the date upon which review is either granted or denied. [S272166]

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/15/2021
  • DocketDescription: Record transmitted to Supreme Court electronically.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/08/2021
  • DocketDescription: Service copy of petition for review received.; Notes: S272166

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/29/2021
  • DispositionDescription: Petition summarily denied by opinion; Disposition Type: Final 20p./DEN/HLC; Publication Status: Signed Published; Author: Hoffstadt, Brian M.; Participants: Chavez, Victoria M. (Concur) Lui, Elwood (Concur); Case Citation: 71 Cal.App.5th 227

    Read MoreRead Less
27 More Docket Entries
  • 07/30/2021
  • DocketDescription: Case complete.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/30/2021
  • DocketDescription: Order denying petition filed.; Notes: THE COURT: The court has read and considered the petition for writ of mandate filed July 29, 2021. The petition is denied. Petitioner has an adequate remedy by way of appeal. The stay of proceedings issued July 29, 2021, is dissolved. The court has further reviewed the petitioners' application to file under seal portions of the exhibits to the petition for writ of mandate. The application is granted as to the "Declaration Jeffrey J. Christovich in Support of Defendant Mountain View School District's Evidence Code section 782 Application [Filed Under Seal]," located at page numbers 108 through 146 of Volume Two of the exhibits to the writ of mandate. There is sufficient evidence that the trial court accepted that document for filing under seal. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.46(b).) However, the balance of the documents proposed for filing under seal in this court do not appear to have been sealed in the trial court and so may not be filed under seal. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.46(c).) In an abundance of caution, this court reserves jurisdiction to determine the propriety of filing those documents under seal. Petitioner has until Monday, August 2, 2021, to submit proof that the documents were sealed in the trial court.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/30/2021
  • DocketDescription: Filed letter from:; Notes: Holly N. Boyer, counsel for petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/29/2021
  • DocketDescription: Letter brief filed.; Notes: Petitioner: Jane Doe Attorney: Michael Santino Carrillo Jane Doe, Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/29/2021
  • DocketDescription: Stay order filed.; Notes: The court has completed its initial review of the petition for writ of mandate filed July 29, 2021. Petitioner's request for an immediate stay of further proceedings is granted with the exception of jury selection, which may be completed. The stay will remain in effect until resolution of the petition or further order of this court.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/29/2021
  • DocketDescription: Received:; Notes: Volume 2 of 2 of Exhibits **Requested to be filed under Seal**

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/29/2021
  • DocketDescription: Application filed to:; Notes: Application to file Exhibits under Seal.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/29/2021
  • DocketDescription: Exhibits filed in support of:; Notes: Volume 1 of 2.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/29/2021
  • DocketDescription: Filed petition for writ of:; Notes: Mandate ***Immediate Stay Requested***

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/29/2021
  • DocketBrief: Letter brief filed.; Party Attorney: Petitioner: Jane DoeAttorney: Michael Santino Carrillo; Notes: Jane Doe, Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where MOUNTAIN VIEW SCHOOL DISTRICT is a litigant

Latest cases where Superior Court of Los Angeles County is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer WELDEN ALLYSON M.

Latest cases represented by Lawyer CHRISTOVICH JEFFREY J.