Motion in Limine Evidentiary in MARIA CARDONA VS SAM'S WEST INC ET AL| Trellis.Law

On January 20, 2017 a Motion,Ex Parte was filed involving a dispute between Cardona Maria, and Goris Al, Sam'S West Inc, for civil in the District Court of Los Angeles County.

Preview
1 Bron E. D'Angelo, Esq., SBN 246819
Brian P. Suba, Esq., Bar No. 276526
2 PETTIT KOHN INGRASSIA LUTZ & DOLIN PC
5901 W. Century Boulevard, Suite 1100
3 Los Angeles, CA 90045
Telephone: (310) 649-5772 10/1/18
4 Facsimile: (310) 649-5777
E-mail: bdangelo@pettitkohn.com
5
Attorneys for Defendant Carlos Hidalgo
6 SAM'S WEST, INC.
7
8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9 FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT
10
11 MARIA CARDONA, an individual, CASE NO.: BC647548
12 Plaintiff,
DEFENDANT SAM'S WEST, INC.'S
13 V. MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE
TESTIMONY OF BRIAN KING MD;
14 SAM'S WEST, INC., a business entity; AL DECLARATION OF BRIAN P. SUBA IN
GORIS, an individual; and DOES 1 through SUPPORT THEREOF AND [PROPOSED]
15 100, inclusive, ORDER
16 Defendant( s), (N0.11)
17
Dept.: 5
18 Judge: Hon. Elaine Lu
Filed: January 20, 2017
19 _______________ __, Trial: October 19, 2018
20 TO THE COURT AND ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

21 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE Defendant SAM'S WEST, INC. ("Sam's West" or
22 "Defendant") hereby moves this Court for an order, in limine, to limit the exclude the testimony

23 of Plaintiffs expert Brian King.

24 TO THE COURT AND ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

25 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE Defendant SAM'S WEST, INC. ("Sam's West" or

26 "Defendant") hereby moves this Court for an order, in limine, for an order precluding Plaintiff

27 Maria Cardona, and her counsel, and her witnesses, from offering or attempting to offer into

28 evidence any opinion testimony from Plaintiffs designated expe1t witness Brian King, M.D.
E-SCANNED

2354-8758
MOTION IN LJMINE 11 - EXCLUDE BRIAN KING,MD
1 ("King"). This motion is made pursuant to California Evidence Code Sections 350,352, and 801,

2 and California code of Civil Procedure Sections 2034.260 and 2034.300, on the following

3 grounds:

4 I. Plaintiffs Disclosure of Expert Information and accompanying expert witness

5 declaration failed to comply with the content requirements of Code of Civil

6 Procedure section 2034.250(c) and failed to make a representation that Dr. King

7 has agreed to testify at trial and will be sufficiently familiar with the pending

8 action to provide meaningful oral deposition testimony per CCP § 2034.260(c)(3)

9 & (4).

10 2. Plaintiffs counsel refused to make King available for a timely deposition prior to

11 October 4, 2018, the expert cutoff. This refusal by Plaintiff was light of a notice of

12 deposition being properly and timely served, repeated attempts by Defendant's

13 counsel to meet and confer with Plaintiffs counsel over timely deposition dates.

14 Accordingly, King's testimony should be excluded pursuant to Code of Civil

15 Procedure Section 2034.300 ("the trial court shall exclude from evidence the

16 expert opinion of any witness that is offered by any party who has unreasonably

17 failed to ... (d) Make that expert available for a deposition under Article 3

18 (commencing with Section 2034.41 0)"). Under Code of Civil Procedure section

19 2034.300, the trial court shall exclude from evidence the expert opinion of any

20 expert witness who has unreasonably failed to present to a timely deposition.

21 3. Plaintiff and her expe1t failed to comply with Code of Civil Procedure Sections

22 2034.210 and 2034.415 requiring production the materials requested in King's

23 deposition notice no later than three business days before or his deposition. Mr.

24 King's expert file and materials were due to Defendant on or before September 18,

25 2018. To date, Defendant has yet to receive Dr. King's expert file.

26 Pursuant to Local Rule 8.92, Defendant's counsel met and conferred with Plaintiffs

27 counsel regarding the subject matter of this motion, but Plaintiffs counsel declined to stipulate

28 that such evidence or argument will not be present at trial.
E-SCANNED

2
2354-8758
MOTION IN LIMINE 11 - EXCLUDE BRIAN KING,MD
I This motion is based on this motion, the attached Memorandum of Points and Authorities,

2 the attached Declaration of Brian P. Suba and exhibits contained therein, any Reply brief, the

3 complete files and records in this action, and any other further oral and/or documentary evidence

4 as may be presented at or before the hearing on this motion.

5
PETTIT KOHN INGRASSIA LUTZ & DOLIN PC
6

7
Dated: October I, 2018 By:
8 Br'n . D'Angelo, Esq.
Bri n P. Suba, Esq.
9 Attorneys for Defendant
SAM'S WEST, INC.
10

15
16

25
26
27

28
E-SCANNED

2354-8758
3
MOTION IN LIMINE 11 - EXCLUDE BRIAN KING,MD
I MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

2 I. Summary of the Argument

3 Defendant Sam's Club requests the Court to preclude Plaintiffs expert Brian King,

4 M.D. 's ("King") testimony, opinion, or reference at trial because Plaintiff has unreasonably failed

5 to comply with California Code of Civil Procedure section 2034.300.

6 Plaintiff failed to(!) timely provide King for deposition and (2) produce his expert file.

7 Based on the current trial date (10119118), expert discovery is permitted "as a matter of

8 right" up to and including October 4, 2018. Code of Civil Procedure Section 2024.030 required

9 Plaintiff to produce Dr. King for deposition by that date and she failed to do so.

10 Under Code of Civ. Proc. Sections 2034.415 and 2034.270, Plaintiff had a separate

11 obligation to produce Dr. King's expert file as properly noticed. This request was simply ignored

12 by Plaintiff. As of the filing of this motion, Defendant is still not in receipt of Plaintiffs expert

13 file due to them on September 18, 20 I 8.

14 Importantly, Plaintiffs designation and accompanying declaration concerning King failed

15 to meet any of the basic requirements ofa proper designation. Mr. Ghermezian's declaration fails

16 to provide any qualifications or general substance of expected testimony of either Dr. King, nor

17 does the designation make a representation that King has agreed to testify at trial and will be

18 sufficiently familiar with the pending action to provide meaningful oral deposition testimony.

19 Defendant has been unduly prejudiced by Plaintiffs failure to comply with the expert

20 discovery requirements of the Code nor has Plaintiff tendered any meaningful report or testimony

21 by her proposed expert to give Defendant a fair opportunity to rebut the alleged opinions. The

22 overarching purpose of discovery and the disclosure requirements is to prevent surprise at trial.

23 Due to Plaintiffs willful refusal to comply with the requires ofCCP Sections 2034 et seq.,

24 Defendant respectfully requests this Court to exclude any testimony or opinion of Brian King,

25 M.D.

26 II I

27 II I

28 II I
E-SCANNED

4
2354-8758
MOTION IN LIM!NE 11 - EXCLUDE BRIAN KING,MD
I II. Statement of Relevant Facts.

2 1. Procedural History and Plaintiff's Expert Disclosure

3 Plaintiff sued Defendant because she fell in Defendant's store. Plaintiff claims she stepped

4 on guavas. Video captured the incident. No guavas were seen on the video and none of

5 Defendant's employees cleaned up anything after the accident. There is no evidence that Plaintiff

6 slipped or stepped on guavas.

7 The Court set trial for October 19, 2018. Accordingly, the cutoff for expert discovery is

8 October 4, 2018. (CCP §2024.030.)

9 On August I, 20 I 8, Defendant timely serve its Demand for Exchange of Expert Trial

10 Witness Information relating to Plaintiff. (Exhibit "A") On August 30, 2018, Plaintiff served her

II Disclosure of Expert Witness Information ("Expert Disclosure") (Exhibit "B"), naming Brian

12 King, M.D. as an expert witness in the pleading. In the supporting expert declaration, Mr.

13 Ghermezian makes no representation that King has agreed to testify at trial and will be

14 sufficiently familiar with the pending action to provide meaningful oral deposition testimony

15 No curriculum vitaes, description of testimony, reports from any King, or fee schedules

16 were attached or provided.

17 2. Plaintiff refused to produce King for Deposition

18 On September 7, 2018, Defendant noticed King's expert deposition for September 21,

19 2018. (Exhibit "C") Three (3) days prior to the deposition, Plaintiff served an objection indicating

20 King's and counsel's unavailability. (Exhibit "D") Plaintiffs objection did not object to the

21 production of King's expert file nor did Plaintiff produce King's file, which was due to Defendant

22 on September 18, 2018. Defendant immediately requested dates certain for King's deposition to

23 take place on or before October 4, 2018. (Exhibit "E") Following correspondence to counsel each

24 on September 18 and 19, Plaintiffs refused to provide a date certain prior to the September 20

25 deposition of King. (Exhibit "F") A Certificate ofNonappearance was taken. (Exhibit "G")

26 To date, Plaintiff has not produced King's expert file. Similarly, Plaintiff has yet to

27 provide any dates certain for Dr. King's deposition on or before the expert cutoff of October 4,

28 2018.
E-SCANNED

2354-8758
5
MOTION IN LIMINE 11 - EXCLUDE BRIAN KING,MD
I II. ARGUMENT

2 A. Plaintiff failed to comply with every provision of Cal. Civ. Proc. Section
2034.300.
3
4 CCP 2034.300 states that "the trial court shall exclude from evidence the expert opinion of

5 any witness that is offered by any party who has unreasonably failed to do any of the following:

6 (a) List that witness as an expert under Section 2034.260.
(b) Submit an expert witness declaration.
7 (c) Produce reports and writings of expert witnesses under Section 2034.270.
(d) Make that expert available for a deposition under Article 3 (commencing with Section
8 2034.410).

9 1. Plaintiff unreasonably failed to comply with the disclosure and content
requirements of Section 2034.260 and failed to submit a proper expert
JO witness declaration for Dr. King.

11 Code of Civil Procedure Section 2034.260 governs the initial disclosures of expe1i

12 witnesses. It requires that a party list the name and address of any person the party expects to

13 offer expert testimony at trial. It further requires that the party submit an expert witness

14 declaration that includes "[a] brief narrative statement of the qualifications of each expert" and

15 "[a] representation that the expert will be sufficiently familiar with the pending action to submit

16 to a meaningful oral deposition concerning the specific testimony, including any opinion and its

17 basis, that the expert is expected to give at trial." Code Civ. Proc. § 2034.260(c)(l) and (4).

18 Section 2034.300 provides that, "on objection of any party who has made a complete and timely

19 compliance with section 2034.260, the trial comi shall exclude from evidence the expert opinion

20 of any witness that is offered by any party who has unreasonably failed to" comply with the

21 requirements for disclosure of expert information. (See Zellerino. v. Brown, 235 Cal. App. 3d

22 1097, 1112-1117 (1991) (motion in limine is an appropriate means by which to exclude expert

23 testimony upon non-compliance with regular and expert statutory discovery requirements).

24 These requirements "are doubtless aimed at eradicating the practice of submitting long

25 lists of experts, none of whom have actually yet been retained, or even contacted by the party

26 designating them." (1 Hogan,§ 10.6, pp. 628-629.) To effect this and other purposes the statute

27 permits a trial court to exclude the testimony of experts when a party has failed to comply with

28 each of the provisions of section 2034, subdivision (j.) (See Kennedy v. Modesto City
E-SCANNED

2354-8758
6
MOTION IN LIMINE 11 - EXCLUDE BRIAN KING,MD
1 Hospital (1990) 221 Cal. App. 3d 575, 580 [270 Cal. Rptr. 544]; Cal. Judges Benchbook Civil

2 Trials (CJER 1990 Supp.) Witnesses,§ 8.58, p. 69.) (Zellerino v. Brown (1991) 235 Cal.App.3d

3 1097, 1117 [1 Cal.Rptr.2d 222].)

4 The California Supreme Court, in Bonds. v. Roy, 20 Cal. 4th 140 ( 1999), held that "the

5 exclusion sanction of [section 2034.300] applies when a party unreasonably fails to submit an

6 expert witness declaration that fully complies with the content requirements of[2034.260(c)] [.]"

7 In explaining its holding, the Court discussed the importance of the statutory requirements for

8 expert disclosures:

9 [T]he very purpose of the expert witness discovery statute is to give fair
notice of what an expert will say at trial. This allows the parties to assess
10 whether to take the expert's deposition, to fully explore the relevant subject
area at any such deposition, and to select an expert who can respond with a
11 competing opinion on that subject area .... The need for pretrial discovery
is greater with respect to expert witnesses than it is for ordinary fact
12 witnesses because the other parties must prepare to cope with witnesses
possessed of specialized knowledge in some scientific or technical field.
13 They must gear up to cross-examine them effectively, and they must
marshal the evidence to rebut their opinions. (Id.)
14

15 Here, the expert witness declaration submitted with Plaintiffs expert designation to

16 comply with the requirements of Section 2034.260( c)(1) through (5). Specifically, Plaintiff fails

17 to make a representation that King is sufficiently familiar with the pending action to testify at trial

18 and to provide meaningful deposition testimony. Plaintiffs omission is telling as it suggests that

19 Dr. King has yet to be retained as Plaintiff has yet to produce an expert file or provide a date for

20 Dr. King's deposition (discussed below). This is precisely the type of gamesmanship warned of

21 by the Court in Zellerino. Dr. King must be excluded from testifying at the October 19, 2018 trial.

22 2. Plaintiff ignored Defendant's timely request to produce King for Deposition.
23 As discussed above, despite a timely deposition notice, Plaintiff failed to produce King for

24 deposition within the expert discovery cutoff. Code ofCiv. Proc. Section 2024.030 states:

25 Any party shall be entitled as a matter of right to complete discovery
proceedings pertaining to a witness identified under Chapter 18
26 (commencing with Section 2034.010) on or before the 15th day, and to
have motions concerning that discovery heard on or before the 10th day,
27 before the date initially set for the trial of the action. [Emphasis added.]
28 Ill
E-SCANNED

2354-8758
7
MOTION IN LIMINE 11 - EXCLUDE BRIAN KING,MD
The Court set trial for October 19, 2018 and Defendant was entitled to complete expert

2 discovery including King's deposition by October 4, 2018. Plaintiff failed to provide King for

3 deposition nor were any dates proposed for the deposition within the expert cutoff.

4 3. Plaintiff failed to produce King's expert file, reports, and requested
documents.
5

6 Code of Civ. Proc. Sections 2034.415 and 2034.27 required Plaintiff to produce Dr.

7 King's expert file called for by Defendant's notice. Pursuant to the Code, Plaintiff was required to

8 provide his expert file and materials as requested by Defendant's timely deposition notice by

9 September 18, 2018. As of the filing of this motion, Plaintiff has failed to provide King's expert

IO file.

11 IV. CONCLUSION

12 Defendant respectfully requests this Court preclude the testimony, reference, or opinion of

13 Brian King, M.D. for Plaintiffs failure to comply with the provisions of CCP Section 2034.300,

14 prejudicing Defendant's to rightfully and timely complete expert discovery, and in refusing to

15 produce the expert file of King as required by CCP Section 2034.41.

16
PETTIT KOHN INGRASSIA LUTZ & DOLIN PC
17

18
Dated: October 1, 2018 By:
19 Bro' . D'Angelo, Esq.
Brian P. Suba, Esq.
20 Attorneys for Defendant
SAM'S WEST, INC.
21

26
27

28
E-SCANNED

2354-8758
8
MOTION IN LIMINE 11 - EXCLUDE BRJAN KING,MD
DECLARATION OF BRIAN P. SUBA IN SUPPORT
2 I, Brian P. Sub a, declare as follows:

3 1. I am an attorney duly licensed to practice law before all the courts of the State of

4 California, and an associate attorney with the law firm of Pettit Kohn Ingrassia Lutz Dolin PC,

5 attorneys ofrecord for Defendant SAM'S WEST, INC. ("Defendant") in the above-captioned

6 case. I am familiar with the facts and proceedings of this case and if called as a witness, I could

7 and would competently testify to the following facts of my own personal knowledge.

8 2. The Court set trial for October 19, 2018. Pursuant to CCP §2024.030, the cutoff

9 for expert discovery is October 4, 2018.

10 3. On August I, 2018, Defendant timely serve its Demand for Exchange of Expert

11 Trial Witness Information relating to Plaintiff. (Attached as Exhibit "A" is a true and correct

12 copy of Defendant's Demand for Exchange of Expert Trial Witness Information)

13 4. On August 30, 2018, Plaintiff served her Disclosure of Expert Witness

14 Information ("Expert Disclosure"), naming Brian King, M.D. as an expert witness in the

J5 pleading. In the supporting expert declaration, Mr. Ghermezian does not make a representation

16 that King is sufficiently familiar with the pending action to testify at trial and to provide

J7 meaningful deposition testimony. (Attached as Exhibit "B" is a true and correct copy of

18 Plaintiffs Expert Designation).

19 5. On September 6, 2018, Defendant noticed King's expert deposition for September

20 21, 2018. (Attached as Exhibit "C" is a true and correct copy of Defendant's notice of taking

21 deposition of King with request for production of documents.) Four (4) days prior to the

22 deposition, Plaintiff served an objection indicating King and counsel's unavailability. (Attached

23 as Exhibit "D" is a true and correct copy of Plaintiffs objection.) Plaintiffs objection did not

24 object to the production of King's expert file nor did Plaintiff produce King's file.

25 6. On September 18, 2018, Defendant immediately requested dates certain for King's

26 deposition to take place on or before the expert October 4, 2018. (Attached as Exhibit "E" is a

27 true and correct copy of correspondence sent to Plaintiffs counsel's office requesting dates

28 certain for Dr. King's deposition.) Though King's expert file was due, no documents reflecting
E-SCANNED

2354-8758
9
MOTION IN LIMINE 11 - EXCLUDE BRIAN KING,MD
1 the same were produced by Plaintiff to Defendant.

2 7. Hearing no response from Plaintiff, I emailed Plaintiffs counsel again on

3 September 19, 2018 requesting dates ce1iain for Dr. King's deposition and advising that a

4 nonappearance would be taken if Plaintiff failed to provide alternative dates within thee.

5 (Attached as Exhibit "F" is a true and correct copy ofmy September 19, 2018 email to Plaintiffs

6 counsel following up on dates.)

7 8. My office did not receive any further communication from Plaintiff or her counsel

8 offices prior to King's timely set deposition. A nonappearance was taken. (Attached as Exhibit

9 "G" is a true and correct copy of the Certificate ofNonappearance for Dr. King's deposition on

10 September 21, 2018.) To date, Plaintiff has not produced King's expert file originally due on

11 September 18, 2018. Similarly, Plaintiff has yet to provide any dates certain for Mr. King's

12 deposition on or before the expert cutoff of October 4, 2018.

14 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the

15 foregoing is true and correct.

16 Executed this 1st day of October 2018 at Los Angeles, California.

Bri@
17

22
23

25
26
27

28
E-SCANNED

2354-8758
10
MOTION IN LIMINE I I - EXCLUDE BRIAN KING,MD
EXHIBIT A
E-SCANNED
1 Bron E. D'Angelo, Esq., SBN 246819
Brian P. Suba, Esq., Bar No. 276526
2 PETTIT KOHN INGRASSIA LUTZ & DOLIN PC
5901 W. Century Boulevard, Suite 1100
3 Los Angeles, CA 90045
Telephone: (310) 649-5772
4 Facsimile: (310) 649-5777
E-mail: bdangelo@pettitkohn.com
5
Attorneys for Defendant
6 SAM'S WEST, INC.

8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

9 FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

11 MARIA CARDONA, an individual, CASE NO.: BC647548

12 Plaintiff, DEFENDANT SAM'S WEST, INC.'S
DEMAND FOR EXCHANGE OF WITNESS
13 v. INFORMATION

14 SAM'S WEST, INC., a business entity; AL
GORIS, an individual; and DOES 1 through Dept.: 5
15 100, inclusive, Judge: Hon. Elaine Lu
Filed: January 20, 2017
16 Defendant(s). Trial: October 19, 2018

18 TO PLAINTIFF AND TO HER ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

19 Defendant SAM'S WEST, INC. ("Defendant"), hereby demands, pursuant to California

20 Code of Civil Procedure section 2034.210, et seq., that on or before August 30, 2018, the parties

21 participate in a mutual simultaneous exchange of information concerning each parties expe1t

22 witness(s), in writing. Each party shall provide:

23 1. A written list containing the name and address of each natural person, including

24 any party whose oral or deposition testimony in the form of an expert opinion the responding

25 party expects to offer in evidence at trial, or, in the alternative, a statement that the responding

26 party does not presently intend to offer the testimony of any expert witness.

27 2. An expert witness declaration signed by the responding party's attorney of record

28 containing for each such witness:
1
E-SCANNED

2354-8758
DEFENDANT SAM'S WEST, INC.'S DEMAND FOR EXCHANGE OF WITNESS INFORMATION
1 (a) A brief narrative statement of the qualifications of the expert;

2 (b) A brief narrative statement of the general substance of the testimony that

3 the expert is expected to give;

4 (c) A representation that the expert has agreed to testify at the trial;

5 (d) A representation that the expert will be sufficiently familiar with the

6 pending action to submit to a meaningful oral deposition concerning the

7 specific testimony, including any opinion and its basis, that the expert is

8 expected to give at trial;

9 (e) A statement of the expert's hourly fee for providing deposition testimony;

10 and;

11 (f) A statement of the expert's hourly fee for consulting with the retaining

12 attorney.

13 Under section 2034.210, et seq., of the California Code of Civil Procedure, each

14 responding party is also required to produce for inspection and copying, at the time and place of

15 exchange stated above, all discoverable reports and writings, if any, made in the course of

16 preparing an expert opinion by any witness on the list to be exchanged who is an employee of the

17 responding party or has been retained by that party for the purpose of forming and expressing an

18 opinion in anticipation of the litigation or in preparation for the trial of the action.

19
20 PETTIT KOHN INGRASSIA LUTZ & DOLIN PC

.~.~··
21
>
22 Dated: August 1, 2018 By:
23 Brian P. Suba, Esq.
Attorneys for Defendant
24 SAM'S WEST, INC.
25

26
27

28
2
E-SCANNED

2354-8758
DEFENDANT SAM'S WEST, INC.'S DEMAND FOR EXCHANGE OF WITNESS INFORMATION
I PROOF OF SERVICE
Maria Cardo11a v. Sam's West, l11c., et al.
2 Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC647548

3 I declare that:

4 I am and was at the time of service of the papers herein, over the age of eighteen (18)
years and am not a party to the action. I am employed in the County of San Diego, California and
5 my business address is 11622 El Camino Real, Suite 300, San Diego, California 92130-2051.

6 On 8/1/18, I caused to be served the following documents:

7 DEFENDANT SAM'S WEST, INC.'S DEMAND FOR EXCHANGE OF WITNESS
INFORMATION
8
[X] VIA MAIL: By placing a copy thereof for delivery in a separate envelope addressed to each
9 addressee, respectively, as follows:
[x] BY FIRST-CLASS MAIL (Code of Civ. Proc. §§ 1013 and 1013(a))
10 [] BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY (Code Civ. Proc.§§ 1013(c) and (d))
[] BY CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT (Code of Civ. Proc. §§ 1013 and 1013(a))
11
Raymond Ghermezian, Esq.
12 Raymond Ghermezian, A Professional Law Corporation
3435 Wilshire Blvd., Ste 1800
13 Los Angeles, CA 90010
Tel: 323-900-5800
14 Fax: 323-900-5801
Email: raymond@ghermezianlaw.com
15 sylvia@ghermezianlaw.com
Attomeysfor Plailltiff, MARIA CARDONA
16
I am readily familiar with the firm's practice of collection and processing correspondence
17 for mailing. Under that practice, it would be deposited with the United States Postal Service on
that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at Los Angeles, California, in the ordinary
18 course of business. I am aware that service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or
postage meter date is more than one day after the date · · maili ·n affidavit.
19

28
3
E-SCANNED

2354-8758
DEFENDANT SAM'S WEST, INC. 'S DEMAND FOR EXCHANGE OF WITNESS INFORMATION
E-SCANNED

EXHIBITB
I Raymond Ghermezian, Esq. (SBN 198777)
RAYMOND GHERMEZIAN, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
2 3435 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 1800
Los Angeles, CA 9001 O
3 Tel: (323) 900-5800 Fax:(323) 900-5801
4 In Association With:

5 David Azizi, Esq. [SBN 198803]
LAW OFFICES OF DAVID AZIZI
6 3435 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 1800
Los Angeles, CA 9001 O
7 Tel: (310) 284-9600 Fax:(888) 400-8944

8 Attorney for Plaintiffs

10 'SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

11 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

13 MARIA CARDO~A, an individual, )CASE NO.: BC647548
)
14 Plaintiffs, )
)PLAINTIFF'S WRITTEN EXCHANGE OF
15 vs. ; lREQUIRED EXPERT INFORMATION
, [C.C.P. §2034.260] AND EXPERT
16 SAM'S WEST, INC., a business entity, AL WITNESS DECLARATIONS [C.C.P.
GORIS, an individual; and DOES 1 through)§2034.260(c)]
17 100, inclusive, · )

19
_ _ _ _ _ _..,,D,_,,e""'fe""'n""d""an.,..ts""._ _ _
lj
20
21 TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR RESPECTIVE ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

22 The names and addresses of each person whose expert opinion Plaintiff expects

23 to offer into evidence at trial are:

24
25 1. Brad Avrit, P.E., and/or Eris Barillas, MSCE, CXLT 4132 Del Rey Avenue, Marina

26 Del Rey, California 90292; (310) 306-3877.

27 2 0
Peter R. Francis, Ph.D. 13661 Acorn Patch Lane, Poway, CA. 92064. (858) 485-

28
1
PLAINTIFF'S WRITTEN EXCHANGE OF REQUIRED EXPERT INFORMATION [C.C.P
E-SCANNED

§2034.260],AND EXPERT WITNESS DECLARATIONS [C.C.P. §2034.260(c)]
1 8863.
2 3. Brian F. King, M.D. 11620 Wilshire Blvd# 100, Los Angeles, CA 90025. (310)

3 914-7336,

4 4. Andrew Morris, 2557a Pacific Coast Highway, Torrance, CA 90505-7035, (310)

5 259-1327.

6 5. Arthur Kreitenberg, M.D., 434 South San Vicente Blvd, Los Angeles, CA 90048,

7 (310) 659-3400.

8
9 NON-RETAINED EXPERTS

10
11 6. Alexander P. Hersel, M.D., 1451 S. Broadway St., Santa Monica, CA 90404, (805)

12 367-7522.

13 7. Isaac Regev, M.D., 6404 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1121, Los Angeles, CA 90048, (323)
14 653-4544'.

15 8. Rajan M. Patel, M.D., 6330 San Vicente Blvd., Suite 310, Los Angeles, CA 90048,

16 (310) 855-0751.

17 9. Akash Bajaj, M.D., 14151 Broadway St., Santa Monica, CA 90404, (310) 855-0751.
18 10. Any and all physicians and treating personnel from Center for Orthopedic & Sports
19 Excellence, 434 South San Vicente Blvd, Los Angeles, CA 90048, (310) 659-3400,
20 who provided any and all care and treatment to the plaintiff.
21 11. Any and all physicians and treating personnel from Masrour Chiropractic, 7136
22 Pacific Blvd, Suite 240, Huntington Park, CA 90255, (323) 584-8285, who provided
23 any and a:11 care and treatment to the plaintiff.

24 12. Any and all physicians and treating personnel from Shin MRI, 266 S. Harvard Blvd,
25 Suite 180! Los Angeles, CA 90004, (213) 387-3002, who provided any and all care

26 and treatment to the plaintiff.
27 13. Any and all physicians and treating personnel from Dynamic Upright MRI, 5757

28
2
PLAINTIFF'S WRITTEN EXCHANGE OF REQUIRED EXPERT INFORMATION [C.C.P
E-SCANNED

§2034.260]iAND EXPERT WITNESS DECLARATIONS [C.C.P. §2034.260(c)]
1 Wilshire Blvd., Suite PB, Los Angeles, CA 90036, (323) 964-0674, who provided any

2 and all care and treatment to the plaintiff.

3 14. Any and all physicians and treating personnel from Tower Orthopaedic & Sports

4 Medicine, 6330 San Vicente Blvd., Suite 310, Los Angeles, CA 90048, (310) 855-

5 0751, who provided any and all care and treatment to the plaintiff.
6 15. Any and all physicians and treating personnel from Broadway Surgical Institute

7 Medicine, 14151 Broadway St. Santa Monica, CA 90404, (805) 367-7522, who

8 provided any and all care and treatment to the plaintiff.

9 16. Any and all physicians and treating personnel from WestStar Physical Therapy,

10 7807Telegraph Rd., Suite B, Montebello, CA, 90640, (323) 722-3529, who provided

11 any and all care and treatment to the plaintiff.
12

13 Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure §2034.31 0(a), Plaintiffs hereby

14 reserves the right to call all experts listed and deposed by or on behalf of the parties in this
15 litigation in those lists of experts who could be supplied by those other parties. Thus, this
16 Plaintiff incorporates by this reference, as though fully setforth, all information supplied by
17 those other parties as to their experts in their lists of expert witnesses to be supplied by the
1
18 other parties.

19
20 Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure §2034.31 0(b), Plaintiffs hereby

21 reserves the right to call all experts who had been called rebuttal witnesses to testify to the
22 falsity or nonexistence of any facts used as the foundation of an expert opinion by any

23 witness called by any other party.

24
25 Plaintiff reserves the right to name and call any other expert witness as provided by
26 California Code of Civil Procedure §2034.

27
28 Plaintiff has retained these experts to testify based upon contentions made known
3
E-SCANNED

PLAINTIFF'S WRITTEN EXCHANGE OF REQUIRED EXPERT INFORMATION [C.C.P
§2034.260],AND EXPERT WITNESS DECLARATIONS [C.C.P. §2034.260(c)]
1 to him by Defendants or by any other party. Should new contentions be made, Plaintiffs
2 reserve the right to nominate or call at the time of trial, such further experts as they may
3 deem advisable or appropriate. Defendants or any other parties herein are invited to make
4 known their contentions not previously set forth.
5
6 Plaintiff reserves the right to ask opinion questions or expert witness questions of
7 any and all witnesses who, although experts, are percipient to any issue heretofore or
8 hereafter raised· in this action. Such categories of witnesses may include, but are not
9 necessarily limited to, each and every party heretofore identified concerning the subject
10 within their own' knowledge or expertise, any and all expert witnesses heretofore or
11 hereafter identified by any party in this action, and each and every physician, therapist,
12 nurse or other practitioner who has at any time treated or examined Plaintiff for any reason
13 whatsoever.
14

15 DATED: August 30, 2018 RAYMOND G ERMEZIAN, A
PROFESSIONAL A CORPORATION
16

20
21
22
23

26
27

28
4
PLAINTIFF'S WRITTEN EXCHANGE OF REQUIRED EXPERT INFORMATION [C.C.P
E-SCANNED

§2034.260] AND EXPERT WITNESS DECLARATIONS [C.C.P.

Case Info

Judge

Stephen I. Goorvitch Track Judge’s New Case

Case No.

(Subscribe to View)

Document Filed Date

October 01, 2018

Case Filing Date

January 20, 2017

County

Parties

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Motion,Ex Parte: MARIA CARDONA VS SAM'S WEST INC ET AL

Preview

Related Topics

Case Info

Parties