On August 08, 2019 a
Order
was filed
involving a dispute between
Perez Ramirez, Paulino,
and
Walmart Inc.,
Walmart, Inc A Corporation,
for PI personal injury not MV
in the District Court of San Bernardino County.
Preview
F l
coumyops
smmmwéfiiéfifi?é¥o
LEE I 6 ?020
ri'x-
“
MEN WW (1/ :7
f
SUPERIOR COURT 0F THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
PAULINO PEREZ RAMIREZ, an individual; Case No.1 CIVDSl923411
Plaintiff, [BRe-PUSED] ORDER GRANTING JOINT
10
476-5598
VS.
STIPULATION RE: CONTINUANCE 0F
HEARING 0N DEFENDANT WALMART,
11 WALMART, 1NC., a corporation; and DOES INC-’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY
(818)
440
1 to 50, Inclusive. JUDGMENT
PC 12
91436
SUITE
Facsimile:
Defendant.
FIRM,
13
BLVD.,
CALIFORNIA
The Court having considered the Parties’ JOINT STIPULATION RE: CONTINUANCE OF
14
WALLACE
476-5998;
VENTURA
HEARING ON DEFENDANT WALMART, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT,
ENCINO.
15
THE16000 finding good cause appearing, hereby GRANTS the Stipulation and ORDERS as follows:
(818)
16
The hearing date for Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment is continued to April 5,
17
Telephone:
2021 at 9:00 a.m. at . Any opposition thereto is to be filed 14 days
18
before the hearing. Any reply to the opposition is t0 be filed five (5) days before the hearing date.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
DATED:
IT IS
l
SO ORDERED.
21 IQ ,
2020 MM The Honorable Donald Alvarez
Judge ofthe Superior Court
26
27
28
4
JOINT STIPULATION RE: CONTINUANCE 0F HEARING ON DEFENDANT WALMART, INC.’S
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; [PROPOSED] ORDER
PROOF OF SERVICE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
)SS:
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )
MJ>LHN
Iam and was at the time 0f service 0fthe papers herein, over the age 0f eighteen (1 8)years
and am not a party to the action. I am employed in theCounty of Los Angeles, California, and my
business address is16000 Ventura Blvd., Suite 440, Encino 91436.
On December 4, 2020, I caused t0 be served to the following document: JOINT
VON STIPULATION RE: CONTINUANCE 0F HEARING 0N DEFENDANT WALMART,
INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; [PROPOSED] ORDER
[X] By Electronic Mail — I caused said documents to be transmitted to the e-mail address(es) of
the addressee(s) designated.
[x] Via Mail: By placing a copy thereof for delivery in a separate envelope addressed t0
10
476-5598
each addressee, respectively, as follows:
(818)
11 [x] BY FIRST-CLAss MAIL [Code of Civ. Proc. §§ 1013 and 1013 (a)]
44o [ ] BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY [Code of Civ. Proc. §§ 1013(c) and 1013(d)]
PC 12
91436
suns
Facsimile:
FIRM, Jubin J.Niamehr, Esq. Andrew N. Kohn, Esq.
13
BLVD”
CALIFORNIA
JACOBY & MEYERS ATTORNEYS Christine E. Boisclair, Esq
14 LLP PETTIT KOHN INGRASSIA LUTZ & DOLIN,
WALLACE
476-5998;
VENIURA
10900 Wilshire Boulevard, 15th Floor PC
15 Los Angeles, California 90024 11622 El Camino Real,
ENCINo,
Suite 300
THE16000
Telephone: (3 10) 3 12-3300 San Diego, California 92130
(818)
16
Facsimile: (310) 715-8331 Telephone: (858) 755-8500
17
Email: referoutmail@iacobyandmeyers.com Facsimile: (858) 755-8504
Telephone:
AttorneyS/CO'COUHSCI for Plaintiff, Email: cboisclair@pettitkohn.com,
18
PAULINO PEREZ RAMIREZ wdavison ettitkohn.com
lremsnyder@PettitKohn.com
19
Attorneys for Defendant, WALMART, INC.
20
I am readily familiar with the firm’s practice of collection and proceeding correspondence for
21 mailing. Under that Practice, itwould be deposited with the United States Postal Service on that same
day with postage thereon fully prepaid at Encino, California, in the ordinary course of business. I am
22 aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date 0r
postage meter ismore than one day after the date of deposit for mailing in affidavit.
23
Ideclare under penalty of perjury under the laws ofthe State of California that the foregoing is
24
true and correct.
WWW
25
Executed on December 4, 2020 at Encino, California.
26
27
Frances Barragan U
28
5
JOINT STIPULATION RE: CONTINUANCE OF HEARING ON DEFENDANT WALMART, INC.’S
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; [PROPOSED] ORDER
Document Filed Date
December 18, 2020
Case Filing Date
August 08, 2019
Category
PI personal injury not MV
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
F l coumyops smmmwéfiiéfifi?é¥o LEE I 6 ?020 ri'x- “ MEN WW (1/ :7 f SUPERIOR COURT 0F THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO PAULINO PEREZ RAMIREZ, an individual; Case No.1 CIVDSl923411 Plaintiff, [BRe-PUSED] ORDER GRANTING JOINT 10 476-5598 VS. STIPULATION RE: CONTINUANCE 0F HEARING 0N DEFENDANT WALMART, 11 WALMART, 1NC., a corporation; and DOES INC-’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY (818) 440 1 to 50, Inclusive. JUDGMENT PC 12 91436 SUITE Facsimile: Defendant. FIRM, 13 BLVD., CALIFORNIA The Court having considered the Parties’ JOINT STIPULATION RE: CONTINUANCE OF 14 WALLACE 476-5998; VENTURA HEARING ON DEFENDANT WALMART, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, ENCINO. 15 THE16000 finding good cause appearing, hereby GRANTS the Stipulation and ORDERS as follows: (818) 16 The hearing date for Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment is continued to April 5, 17 Telephone: 2021 at 9:00 a.m. at . Any opposition thereto is to be filed 14 days 18 before the hearing. Any reply to the opposition is t0 be filed five (5) days before the hearing date. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 DATED: IT IS l SO ORDERED. 21 IQ , 2020 MM The Honorable Donald Alvarez Judge ofthe Superior Court 26 27 28 4 JOINT STIPULATION RE: CONTINUANCE 0F HEARING ON DEFENDANT WALMART, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; [PROPOSED] ORDER PROOF OF SERVICE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) )SS: COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) MJ>LHN Iam and was at the time 0f service 0fthe papers herein, over the age 0f eighteen (1 8)years and am not a party to the action. I am employed in theCounty of Los Angeles, California, and my business address is16000 Ventura Blvd., Suite 440, Encino 91436. On December 4, 2020, I caused t0 be served to the following document: JOINT VON STIPULATION RE: CONTINUANCE 0F HEARING 0N DEFENDANT WALMART, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; [PROPOSED] ORDER [X] By Electronic Mail — I caused said documents to be transmitted to the e-mail address(es) of the addressee(s) designated. [x] Via Mail: By placing a copy thereof for delivery in a separate envelope addressed t0 10 476-5598 each addressee, respectively, as follows: (818) 11 [x] BY FIRST-CLAss MAIL [Code of Civ. Proc. §§ 1013 and 1013 (a)] 44o [ ] BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY [Code of Civ. Proc. §§ 1013(c) and 1013(d)] PC 12 91436 suns Facsimile: FIRM, Jubin J.Niamehr, Esq. Andrew N. Kohn, Esq. 13 BLVD” CALIFORNIA JACOBY & MEYERS ATTORNEYS Christine E. Boisclair, Esq 14 LLP PETTIT KOHN INGRASSIA LUTZ & DOLIN, WALLACE 476-5998; VENIURA 10900 Wilshire Boulevard, 15th Floor PC 15 Los Angeles, California 90024 11622 El Camino Real, ENCINo, Suite 300 THE16000 Telephone: (3 10) 3 12-3300 San Diego, California 92130 (818) 16 Facsimile: (310) 715-8331 Telephone: (858) 755-8500 17 Email: referoutmail@iacobyandmeyers.com Facsimile: (858) 755-8504 Telephone: AttorneyS/CO'COUHSCI for Plaintiff, Email: cboisclair@pettitkohn.com, 18 PAULINO PEREZ RAMIREZ wdavison ettitkohn.com lremsnyder@PettitKohn.com 19 Attorneys for Defendant, WALMART, INC. 20 I am readily familiar with the firm’s practice of collection and proceeding correspondence for 21 mailing. Under that Practice, itwould be deposited with the United States Postal Service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at Encino, California, in the ordinary course of business. I am 22 aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date 0r postage meter ismore than one day after the date of deposit for mailing in affidavit. 23 Ideclare under penalty of perjury under the laws ofthe State of California that the foregoing is 24 true and correct. WWW 25 Executed on December 4, 2020 at Encino, California. 26 27 Frances Barragan U 28 5 JOINT STIPULATION RE: CONTINUANCE OF HEARING ON DEFENDANT WALMART, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; [PROPOSED] ORDER