This case was last updated from California Courts of Appeal on 11/21/2022 at 05:06:18 (UTC).

Kwan v. Superior Court for the City and County of San Francisco

Case Summary

On 05/24/2022 Kwan filed an Other lawsuit against Superior Court for the City and County of San Francisco. This case was filed in California Courts of Appeal, First Appellate District - Division 5 located in Statewide, California. The Judge overseeing this case is Feng, Samuel. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
Case Details Parties Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ***5243

  • Filing Date:

    05/24/2022

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Other

  • County, State:

    Statewide, California

Judge Details

Trial Court Judge

Feng, Samuel

 

Party Details

Petitioner

Renee Kwan

Respondent

Superior Court for the City and County of San Francisco

Interested Parties

Steven A. Ellenberg

Ellenberg & Hull, LLP

Andrew P. Holland

Thoits Law, PC

Hopkins & Carley, LC

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Petitioner Attorneys

Paul J. Steiner

Attorney at Law Offices of Paul J. Steiner

275 Battery Street, #1300

San Francisco, CA 94111

Gary S. Garfinkle

1205 Via Gabarda

Lafayette, CA 94549

Interested Party Attorneys

Dion N. Cominos

Attorney at Note: Confidential financial documents enclosed with exhibits.

275 Battery Street, Suite 2000

San Francisco, CA 94111

Alison P. Buchanan

Attorney at Hoge, Fenton, Jones & Appel, Inc

55 South Market Street - Suite 900

San Jose, CA 95113-2324

Court Documents

Court documents are not available for this case.

 

Docket Entries

  • 06/08/2022
  • DispositionDescription: Petition denied or dismissed after alternative writ or palma issued.; Disposition Type: Final BY THE COURT:* This court is in receipt of respondent superior court's June 6, 2022 orders, which in response to this court's May 26, 2022 "suggestive Palma" order reverse respondent's April 20, 2022 determination that petitioner is not entitled to a fee waiver. Since the June 6, 2022 orders address the concerns articulated in this court's May 26, 2022 order, and adequately comply with the actions suggested in that order, the court hereby dismisses the petition as moot. For clarification only, and not for the purpose of inviting such a petition, the court observes that any issue regarding the partial denial of petitioner's FW-002 form request must be raised by a separately filed writ petition.

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 06/08/2022
  • DocketDescription: Case complete.

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 06/08/2022
  • DocketDescription: Petition denied or dismissed after alternative writ or palma issued.; Notes: BY THE COURT:* This court is in receipt of respondent superior court's June 6, 2022 orders, which in response to this court's May 26, 2022 "suggestive Palma" order reverse respondent's April 20, 2022 determination that petitioner is not entitled to a fee waiver. Since the June 6, 2022 orders address the concerns articulated in this court's May 26, 2022 order, and adequately comply with the actions suggested in that order, the court hereby dismisses the petition as moot. For clarification only, and not for the purpose of inviting such a petition, the court observes that any issue regarding the partial denial of petitioner's FW-002 form request must be raised by a separately filed writ petition. * Before Jackson, P.J. and Simons, J.

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 06/08/2022
  • DocketDescription: Received copy of:; Notes: San Francisco Superior Court orders filed 6/6/22

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 06/02/2022
  • DocketDescription: Order filed.; Notes: BY THE COURT:* This court is in receipt of two orders issued by respondent superior court on May 27, 2022 in response to this court's May 26, 2022 order. From the "Order Vacating April 20, 2022 Order Denying Plaintiff's Fee Waiver Application; Order Granting Plaintiff's March 21, 2022 Fee Waiver Application," it appears respondent intended to grant petitioner's March 21, 2022 fee waiver application in its entirety. However, the separate FW-008 form Order, also filed on May 27, 2022, omits a ruling (on page 2) on petitioner's FW-002 "Request to Waive Additional Court Fees (Superior Court)" form requesting a fee waiver regarding additional items. The record before this court reveals petitioner's FW-002 form was part of petitioner's fee waiver application filed on March 21, 2022 in respondent superior court. (See Exh. 20 to Petn., p. 18.) Respondent superior court is requested to issue an order reflecting its ruling on that portion of petitioner's fee waiver application, and to provide a copy of that order to this court and petitioner's counsel on or before June 3, 2022. In addition to regular service of this order, the Clerk of Division Five shall serve this order on the Honorable Samuel K. Feng, Presiding Judge of respondent superior court. * Before Jackson, P.J. and Simons, J.

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 06/01/2022
  • DocketDescription: Filed letter from:; Notes: Gary Garfinkle, attorney for petitioner Kwan, re orders issued by San Francisco Superior Court

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 05/26/2022
  • DocketDescription: Order filed.; Notes: BY THE COURT:* This court has reviewed the petition for writ of mandate and accompanying record. It appears respondent superior court, after conducting hearings on the matter, erroneously denied petitioner's fee waiver application on April 20, 2022 on the basis that petitioner's "income is too high." (Exh. 12 to Petn., p. 254.) Petitioner did not seek a fee waiver based on Government Code section 68632, subdivision (b) [requiring waiver where applicant's "monthly income is 125 percent or less of the current poverty guidelines"]. Instead, petitioner sought a fee waiver under section 68632, subdivision (c), which requires the granting of a fee waiver where the applicant "cannot pay court fees without using moneys that normally would pay for the common necessaries of life for the applicant and the applicant's family." "[T]he applicant need not establish total destitution in order to qualify for in forma pauperis relief. [Citations.]" (Ferguson v. Keays (1971) 4 Cal.3d 649, 658, fn. 8; Earls v. Superior Court (1971) 6 Cal.3d 109, 117 [application may not be denied on the basis that "although the applicant is currently indigent, he may, over a period of months, succeed in accumulating the amount necessary to defray his costs"]; March v. Municipal Court (1972) 7 Cal.3d 422, 430 [relevant consideration is petitioner's current financial status, not future earning potential]; Isrin v. Superior Court (1965) 63 Cal.2d 153, 165 [fee waiver "may not be denied on the ground that counsel for the indigent litigant is representing him pursuant to a contingent fee contract"].) The record before this court reveals that petitioner's detailed application satisfied the foregoing standard.1 This order shall serve to notify the parties of this court's intention to issue a peremptory writ in the first instance directing respondent to vacate its April 20, 2022 order and to issue a new and different order granting petitioner's fee waiver application filed on March 21, 2022. (Palma v. U.S. Industrial Fasteners, Inc. (1984) 36 Cal.3d 171, 177-180; Brown, Winfield & Canzoneri, Inc. v. Superior Court (2010) 47 Cal.4th 1233.)However, to permit a more expeditious resolution of this petition, this court grants respondent superior court power and jurisdiction to issue an order (1) vacating its April 20, 2022 order, and (2) granting petitioner's fee waiver application filed on March 21, 2022. Should respondent superior court take those actions, this petition will be dismissed as moot. If the petition is not sooner rendered moot by the superior court taking the actions outlined above, any opposition by respondent to the petition and to the issuance of a peremptory writ in the first instance shall be served and filed on or before June 6, 2022, and any reply shall be served on or before June 15, 2022. In addition to regular service of this order, the Clerk of Division Five shall serve this order on the Honorable Samuel K. Feng, Presiding Judge of respondent superior court. * Before Jackson, P.J., Simons, J., and Needham, J. 1 We observe that this court granted petitioner's fee waiver application filed in conjunction with the present writ petition.

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 05/25/2022
  • DocketDescription: Order waiving filing fee.; Notes: For petitioner Kwan

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 05/24/2022
  • DocketDescription: Application for waiver of filing fee filed.

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 05/24/2022
  • DocketDescription: Filed proof of service.

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 05/24/2022
  • DocketDescription: Exhibits lodged.; Notes: Volume 2; Exhibits 17 - 22Note: Confidential financial documents enclosed with exhibits.

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 05/24/2022
  • DocketDescription: Exhibits lodged.; Notes: Volume 1; Exhibits 1 - 16Note: Confidential financial documents enclosed with exhibits.

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 05/24/2022
  • DocketDescription: Filed petition for writ of:; Notes: Mandate or Other Appropriate ReliefNote: This writ is a public record, however confidential financial matters are enclosed.

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 04/20/2022
  • DocketTrial Court Name: San Francisco County Superior Court - Main; County: San Francisco; Trial Court Case Number: CGC21594460; Trial Court Judge: Feng, Samuel

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less