This case was last updated from San Mateo County Superior Courts on 07/20/2018 at 05:42:18 (UTC).

FARMERS INSURANCE VS EMILY PINEDA

Case Summary

On 09/19/2012 FARMERS INSURANCE filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against EMILY PINEDA. This case was filed in San Mateo County Superior Courts, Southern Branch Hall Of Justice And Records located in San Mateo, California. The Judges overseeing this case are Foiles, Robert D, Dylina, Steven L and Dylina, Steven L.. The case status is Disposed - Dismissed.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *****6784

  • Filing Date:

    09/19/2012

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Dismissed

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • Court:

    San Mateo County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Southern Branch Hall Of Justice And Records

  • County, State:

    San Mateo, California

Judge Details

Judges

Foiles, Robert D

Dylina, Steven L

Dylina, Steven L.

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE

Defendants

EMILY PINEDA

PINEDA, EMILY

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

STRUMWASSER, GREGG

Defendant Attorney

SCOTT, STEVEN R

 

Court Documents

Request for Dismissal of - WITH prejudice in its entirety.

DISMISSAL (11) Comment REQDEA: REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL OF ENTIRE ACTION WITH PREJUDICE FILED AND ENTERED.

Case Management Statement.

STATEMENT (8) Comment CMS: CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY EMILY PINEDA.

Document.

FILING (4) Comment FILED: NOTICE OF HEARING: OSC FOR DISMISSAL AFTER COURT'S RECEIPT OF NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT FILED.

Notice of Conditional Statement.

NOTICE (4) Comment NCS: NOTICE OF CONDITIONAL SETTLEMENT FILED BY FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE

Document.

FILING (3) Comment FILED: CLERK'S NOTICE OF PRE-ARBITRATION AND SETTING HEARING FILED.

Conversion Action.

FILING (2) Comment AIMCT1: AT-ISSUE MEMORANDUM REQUESTING COURT TRIAL FILED BY FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE. TIME ESTIMATE: 16:00 HOUR(S)

Document.

FILING Comment FILED: AT ISSUE MEMORANDUM (IMPROPER FORM SUBMITTED) FILED.

Motion.

NOTICE (2) Comment NM: NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS FILED BY FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE

Motion.

NOTICE Comment NM: NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO FORM INTERROGATORIES FILED BY FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE

Proof of Service of Complaint/Petition.

PROOF OF SERVICE Comment PS: PROOF OF SERVICE (PERSONAL) OF SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT OF FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE SERVED ON EMILY PINEDA WITH SERVICE DATE OF 01/21/13.

Answer / Response / Denial - Limited up to $10000.

ANSWER Comment ANS5: (L) ANSWER TO COMPLAINT OF FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE FILED BY EMILY PINEDA REPRESENTED BY STEVEN R SCOTT - PRAYER AMOUNT LESS THAN $10,000.00

Civil Case Cover Sheet.

COVERSHEET Comment CCS: CIVIL CASE COVERSHEET RECEIVED

Summons Issued / Filed.

SUMMONS Comment S30IF: 30 DAY SUMMONS ISSUED AND FILED.

Complaint.

COMPLAINT Comment COM5: (L) COMPLAINT FILED - PRAYER AMOUNT $10000.00 OR LESS.

2 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 03/15/2016
  • Disposition: Judgment; Judgment Type; Dismissal - Other Dismissal; Party; Name: PINEDA EMILY; Comment: 0001 COMPLAINT; Party; Name: FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE; Comment: 0001 COMPLAINT.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/15/2016
  • View Court Documents
  • Request for Dismissal of - WITH prejudice in its entirety. Additional Info: DISMISSAL (11) Comment REQDEA: REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL OF ENTIRE ACTION WITH PREJUDICE FILED AND ENTERED.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/15/2016
  • Conversion Minute. Additional Info: Comment LINE: =====================================

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/15/2016
  • Conversion Minute. Additional Info: Comment MICMS: ENTERED BY A ORTEGA ON 03/17/16.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/15/2016
  • Conversion Minute. Additional Info: Comment CFO: THE COURT FINDS/ORDERS: CASE IS NOW DISMISSED.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/15/2016
  • Conversion Minute. Additional Info: Comment FFT: TODAY'S DATE WAS WAIVED.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/15/2016
  • Conversion Minute. Additional Info: Comment FFT: THE COURT NOTES THAT AN APPEARANCE WAS MADE ON 01/26/16 BY PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL AND NOTICE OF

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/15/2016
  • Conversion Minute. Additional Info: Comment COM: MS. SCHULMAN IS UNAWARE OF THE STATUS OF THE CASE.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/15/2016
  • Conversion Minute. Additional Info: Comment COM: THE COURT INQUIRES WHETHER THE CLAIM HAS BEEN PAID.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/15/2016
  • Conversion Minute. Additional Info: Comment COM1: (CASE CALLED AT 9:12 AM)

    Read MoreRead Less
75 More Docket Entries
  • 02/14/2013
  • Financial: PINEDA, EMILY; Total Financial Assessment $375.00; Total Payments and Credits $375.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/17/2013
  • Financial info for FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE : Case Payment Receipt # 201306170985 FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE $30.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/17/2013
  • Financial info for FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE : Case Payment Receipt # 201306170984 FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE $60.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/17/2013
  • Financial info for FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE : Case Payment Receipt # 201306170983 FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE $30.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/17/2013
  • Financial info for FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE : Transaction Assessment $30.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/17/2013
  • Financial info for FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE : Case Payment Receipt # 201306170982 FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE $60.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/17/2013
  • Financial info for FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE : Transaction Assessment $60.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/21/2012
  • Financial info for FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE : Case Payment Receipt # 201209210528 FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE $225.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/21/2012
  • Financial info for FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE : Transaction Assessment $225.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/21/2012
  • Financial: FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE; Total Financial Assessment $405.00; Total Payments and Credits $405.00

    Read MoreRead Less

Complaint Information

2. That at all times herein mentioned plaintiff was, and now is FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE, an Interinsurance Exchange, its subsidiaries, affiliates, and/or parent companies, duly organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California, and authorized to do business in the State of California, as an insurer.

3. That at all times herein mentioned, at least one of the defendants herein was a resident of the City of Menlo Park, Southern Branch: Hall of Justice and Records, County of

San Mateo, State of California.

4, That all times herein mentioned Illya Bershteyn was the owner of a certain 2001 Honda. 5. That prior to the commencement of this action, and more barticularly on the

‘date of the accident hereinafter alleged, plaintiff insured Illya Bershteyn by a policy of insurance for collision damage to said aforedescribed motor vehicle and loss of use of said motor vehicle; that plaintiff paid $7,371.31 on account of and for collision damage to said aforedescribed motor vehicle, for collision damage occurring at the time and place of the accident hereinafter alleged, and as consideration for such payment, the claims and demands against any person, persons or property; that to the extent of said sum paid by plaintiff, plaintiff has been assigned or is subrogated in the place of and to the demands of its said policyholder, for said policyholder’s motor vehicle damage as hereinafter described.

6. That at all times herein fientioned defendants, Emily Pineda; DOE 1 through DOE 35, and each of them, possessed or were the owners of a certain motor vehicle, and at the time and place of the accident hereinafter alleged, said motor vehicle was being driven and

operated by defendants, Emily Pineda, DOE 6 through DOE 10, and each of them, with the

consent, permission and knowledge of defendants, Emily Pineda, DOE 1 through DOE 5, and each of them.

7. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and upon such information and belief alleges, that at all times herein mentioned defendants, Emily Pineda, DOE 6 through DOE 10, and each of them, were agents, servants, employers and/or employees of defendants, Emily Pineda, DOE 11 through DOE 15, and each of them, and were at all such times acting within the purpose and scope of said agency, service and/or employment.

8. That at all times herein mentioned defendants, DOE 16 through DOE 20, and each of them, possessed or were the owners of a certain motor vehicle, and at the time and place of the accident herein-after alleged, said motor vehicle was being driven and operated by defendants DOE 21 through DOE 25, and each of them, with thg consent, permission and knowledge of defendants DOE 16 through DOE 20, and each of them.

9. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and upon sfich information and belief alleges, that at all times herein mentioned defendants DOE 21 through DOE 25, and each of them, were agents, servants, employers and/or employees of defendants DOE 16 through DOE 20, and defendants DOE 26 through DOE 30, and each of them, and were at all such times acting within the purpose and scope of said agency, service and/or employment.

10. That on or about 04/17/2012, said insured motor vehicle was along and upon Alameda De Las Pulgas, at or near its intersection with Maddux Drive, both of which are public streets and highways in the City of Redwood City, Southern Branch: Hall of Justice and Records, County of San Mateo, State of California.

11. That at said time and place the defendants, and each of them, so negligently,

carelessly and unlawfully drove, entrusted, controlled, maintained, operated and repaired

their said motor vehicle, so as to cause collision damage to plaintiff’s policyholder’s said motor vehicle, and loss of use of said motor vehicle, thereby damaging plaintiff and/or plaintiff’s insured, who assigned their claim to plaintiff, in the sum of $7,371.31. WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays for judgment against the defendants and each of them, as follows: 1. For damages in the sum of $7,371.31;

2. For prejudgment interest as allowed by law from 04/23/2012;

3. For costs of suit incurred herein; and 4. For such other relief as this Court may deem proper and just. 5. Plaintiff remits any sum in excess of the jurisdiction of this Court. DATED: 09/10/2012 DOWNS & ASSOCIAT By: GREGG STRUMWASSER, Esq. Attorney for Plaintiff