This case was last updated from California Courts of Appeal on 01/19/2022 at 01:39:56 (UTC).

Kaminska v. City of Los Angeles et al.

Case Summary

On 09/03/2021 Kaminska filed an Other lawsuit against City of Los Angeles. This case was filed in California Courts of Appeal, Second Appellate District located in Statewide, California. The Judge overseeing this case is Court, Michelle. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ***5166

  • Filing Date:

    09/03/2021

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Other

  • Courthouse:

    Second Appellate District

  • County, State:

    Statewide, California

Judge Details

Trial Court Judge

Court, Michelle

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Appellant

Beata Kaminska

Los Angeles, CA 90020

Respondents and Defendants

City of Los Angeles

Sgt. Richard Askew

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Respondent and Defendant Attorneys

Matthew W. McAleer

Attorney at Ofc City Attorney

200 N Main St Fl 6 City Hall East

Los Angeles, CA 90012

Elizabeth Louise Greenwood

200 N Main St., Suite 500 Che

Los Angeles, CA 90012

Michael M. Walsh

Attorney at Los Angeles City Attorney

200 N. Main Street 7Th Floor

Los Angeles, CA 90012

Court Documents

Court documents are not available for this case.

 

Docket Entries

  • 03/07/2022
  • HearingDescription: Remittitur issued.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/05/2022
  • DocketDescription: Service copy of petition for review received.; Notes: Petitioner Beata Kaminska

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/05/2022
  • DocketDescription: Record transmitted to Supreme Court electronically.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/30/2021
  • DocketDescription: Appellant's notice designating record on appeal filed in trial court on:; Notes: Notice dated Sept. 13, 2021: 8.122 w. Settled Statement

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/17/2021
  • DispositionDescription: Other involuntary dismissal; Disposition Type: Final

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/17/2021
  • DocketDescription: Dismissal order filed.; Notes: [...] This court lacks jurisdiction to hear an appeal taken from a nonappealable order. (Sherman v. Standard Mines Co. (1913) 166 Cal.524, 525 [attempt to appeal from nonappealable order does not give court jurisdiction or authority to review it].) Therefore, the appeal initiated by the notice filed on September 3, 2021 is dismissed. (See order)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/09/2021
  • DocketDescription: Reply filed to:; Notes: Respondents' reply to appellant's response to this Court's Oct 13, 2021 notice

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/09/2021
  • DocketDescription: Filed document entitled:; Notes: Notice of intra-office substitution of attorney. Deputy City Attorney Michael M Walsh is substituted in place of Deputy City Attorney Matthew McAleer.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/26/2021
  • DocketDescription: Order of dismissal vacated.; Notes: It appearing that through inadvertence and mistake on October 15, 2021, this court dismissed the above-entitled appeal under Rule 8.100(c), for the appeal filed September 3, 2021. Appellant had already submitted a Superior Court fee waiver order on October 7, 2021. Now, therefore, it is ordered that the dismissal filed October 15, 2021, is vacated.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/25/2021
  • DocketDescription: Received document entitled:; Notes: Motion to Reinstate and Vacate Dismissal

    Read MoreRead Less
3 More Docket Entries
  • 10/13/2021
  • DocketDescription: Letter sent to:; Notes: After reviewing appellant's civil case information statement filed on October 7, 2021, it appears the appeal filed on September 03, 2021 was taken from a nonappealable order. Appellant is hereby requested to demonstrate in writing why the appeal should not be dismissed as having been taken from a nonappealable order, within 15 days of the date of this notice. Respondent may file a reply to the response within 10 days of the response file date. Failure by the appellant to respond within the time provided may result in the appeal being dismissed as taken from a nonappealable order. (Sherman v. Standard Mines Co. (1913) 166 Cal. 524, 525.) Any response shall have attached to it a proof of service. (Cal. Rules of Court, rules 8.25 (a)(1)-(2).)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/13/2021
  • DocketDescription: Civil case information statement filed.; Notes: Plaintiff and Appellant: Beata Kaminska Pro Per

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/13/2021
  • DocketBrief: Civil case information statement filed.; Party Attorney: Plaintiff and Appellant: Beata KaminskaPro Per

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/08/2021
  • DocketDescription: Default notice sent; no case information statement filed, or statement incomplete.; Notes: Appellant ( Sept. 3, 2021: Beata Kamiska ) is in default for failure to file a Case Information Statement pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 8.100(g).

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/07/2021
  • DocketDescription: Order waiving filing fee.; Notes: LASC Fee Waiver granted on Sep 3, 2021

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/05/2021
  • DocketDescription: Mail returned and re-sent.; Notes: Rcvd from Beata Kaminska court's Sep 22, 2021 default notice - resent to corrected address

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/27/2021
  • DocketDescription: Case information statement returned for correction.; Notes: Civil Case Information Statement submitted on Sept. 23, 2021 has been returned for failure to attach a copy of judgment or order being appealed. (Cal Rules of Court, rule 8.100(g)(1).) You must resubmit the complete CIS including the required attachment and a new proof of service on opposing party, CRC, rule 8.25(a)(1)-(2).

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/22/2021
  • DocketDescription: Default notice sent-appellant notified per rule 8.100(c).; Notes: No fee rcvd

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/22/2021
  • DocketDescription: Notice of appeal lodged/received.; Notes: Sept. 3, 2021: Beata Kamiska

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/06/2021
  • DocketTrial Court Name: Los Angeles County Superior Court; County: Los Angeles; Trial Court Case Number: BC595737; Trial Court Judge: Court, Michelle

    Read MoreRead Less
related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where CITY OF LOS ANGELES is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer Elizabeth Louise Greenwood

Latest cases represented by Lawyer Michael M. Walsh