On August 20, 2020 a
Order
was filed
involving a dispute between
Brilliant Ideas Consulting Inc.,
Gordon Bruce,
Gordon Elizabeth Jean,
Gordon Maxwell James,
Gordon Tami,
and
Edison International,
Southern California Edison Company,
for Other Real Property (not eminent domain, landlord/tenant, foreclosure) (General Jurisdiction)
in the District Court of Los Angeles County.
Preview
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
Civil Division
Central District, Spring Street Courthouse, Department 10
20STCV31797 April 29, 2021
BRUCE GORDON, et al. vs SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 4:21 PM
EDISON COMPANY, et al.
Judge: Honorable William F. Highberger CSR: None
Judicial Assistant: A. Lim ERM: None
Courtroom Assistant: None Deputy Sheriff: None
APPEARANCES:
For Plaintiff(s): No Appearances
For Defendant(s): No Appearances
NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: Court Order
The Court's message board posting, on Case Anywhere website, is as follows:
"By reference to 20STCV42526 Malibu West Pacifica Condominium Association v. SCE, it has
come to my attention that at least one of the Complaints in this JCCP does not expressly list
GAL's for parties who appear to need them, that our party listings in our records do not
accurately match the face of the Complaint, and that this Court, unaware of these defects due to
LASC staff's submission of defective paperwork to the judge for action, has approved many
Petitions To Approve Minor's Compromise in error.
Absent a quick correction of this problem in this case and correction of all similar problems
which I fear now infect many of the other Complaints in this JCCP, I will need to void nunc pro
tunc all the Minor's Compromises in this docket and set an OSC why ALL such Minor's
Compromises should not be voided nunc pro tunc in all the other coordinated cases. For this
reason, I am setting a Further Status Conference on Friday May 7, 2021 at 11 a.m. so that I can
educate Plaintiffs' Leadership as to the problem and enlist their help in being sure that ALL of
the plaintiffs' firms involved in these cases audit their own work and cooperate with the Court in
getting all these problems resolved.
Specific to 20STCV42526, the only pleading filed by Plaintiffs to date is a multi-plaintiff
original Complaint filed Nov. 6, 2020. It lists various parties, but there is no reference
whatsoever in the caption suggesting that any of the listed plaintiffs lacks capacity and must sue
via a GAL. It also lists various Trusts as plaintiffs, which is its own problem since Trusts, as
such, cannot sue in their own name; they must sue via a Trustee acting on their behalf.
Notwithstanding the failure to list any GAL's, I was hoodwinked into signing at least eight GAL
applications on Dec. 15, 2020, and I also approved Orders Approving Compromise and related
Orders For Deposit Into Blocked Account on Dec. 30, 2020 for some of these same wards and
Minute Order Page 1 of 6
Document Filed Date
April 29, 2021
Case Filing Date
August 20, 2020
Category
Other Real Property (not eminent domain, landlord/tenant, foreclosure) (General Jurisdiction)
Status
Request for Dismissal - Before Trial not following ADR or more than 60 days since ADR 06/20/2023
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Civil Division Central District, Spring Street Courthouse, Department 10 20STCV31797 April 29, 2021 BRUCE GORDON, et al. vs SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 4:21 PM EDISON COMPANY, et al. Judge: Honorable William F. Highberger CSR: None Judicial Assistant: A. Lim ERM: None Courtroom Assistant: None Deputy Sheriff: None APPEARANCES: For Plaintiff(s): No Appearances For Defendant(s): No Appearances NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: Court Order The Court's message board posting, on Case Anywhere website, is as follows: "By reference to 20STCV42526 Malibu West Pacifica Condominium Association v. SCE, it has come to my attention that at least one of the Complaints in this JCCP does not expressly list GAL's for parties who appear to need them, that our party listings in our records do not accurately match the face of the Complaint, and that this Court, unaware of these defects due to LASC staff's submission of defective paperwork to the judge for action, has approved many Petitions To Approve Minor's Compromise in error. Absent a quick correction of this problem in this case and correction of all similar problems which I fear now infect many of the other Complaints in this JCCP, I will need to void nunc pro tunc all the Minor's Compromises in this docket and set an OSC why ALL such Minor's Compromises should not be voided nunc pro tunc in all the other coordinated cases. For this reason, I am setting a Further Status Conference on Friday May 7, 2021 at 11 a.m. so that I can educate Plaintiffs' Leadership as to the problem and enlist their help in being sure that ALL of the plaintiffs' firms involved in these cases audit their own work and cooperate with the Court in getting all these problems resolved. Specific to 20STCV42526, the only pleading filed by Plaintiffs to date is a multi-plaintiff original Complaint filed Nov. 6, 2020. It lists various parties, but there is no reference whatsoever in the caption suggesting that any of the listed plaintiffs lacks capacity and must sue via a GAL. It also lists various Trusts as plaintiffs, which is its own problem since Trusts, as such, cannot sue in their own name; they must sue via a Trustee acting on their behalf. Notwithstanding the failure to list any GAL's, I was hoodwinked into signing at least eight GAL applications on Dec. 15, 2020, and I also approved Orders Approving Compromise and related Orders For Deposit Into Blocked Account on Dec. 30, 2020 for some of these same wards and Minute Order Page 1 of 6