arrow left
arrow right
  • TANAZ ZAMANI VS CITY OF REDONDO BEACH ET AL Premises Liability (e.g.slip & fall) (General Jurisdiction) document preview
  • TANAZ ZAMANI VS CITY OF REDONDO BEACH ET AL Premises Liability (e.g.slip & fall) (General Jurisdiction) document preview
						
                                

Preview

@ KENTON E. MOORE, STATE BAR #143645 Sangre hue AF Balifnenia Tie JULIAN S. SMITH, STATE BAR #309241 ‘ounty af Lat Angeles McCUNE & HARBER, LLP AUG 07 2018 zy 515 South Figueroa Street, Suite 1100 Los Angeles, California 90071 Sherri R. Cartel, lerk of Court Telephone: (213) 689-2500 Facsimile: (213) 689-2501 By. » Deputy kmoore@mccuneharber.com and jsmith@mecunehazber.com arlos Hidalgo Attorneys for Defendant and Cross-Complainant, CITY OF REDONDO BEACH [FEE EXEMPT PUBLIC ENTITY, GOVERNMENT CODE § 6103] SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT 10 vs 11 TANAZ ZAMANI, an individual, Case No: BC637727 a Qo Saree a8z [Assigned to Honorable Yolanda Orozco - Dept.7| Ross 312 Plaintiff, (Complaint filed on October 19, 2016) 28. So 988 13 R826 V. DATE: August 20, 2018 S¢E 14 TIME: 10:00 a.m. CITY OF REDONDO BEACH; GILBERT DEPT: 7 COTA; ROSA COTA and DOES 1-20, 15 Inclusive, SEPARATE STATEMENT BY DEFENDANT CITY OF REDONDO BEACH SUPPORTING 16 Defendants. OPPOSITION TO MOTION BY PLAINTIFF TO COMPEL FURTHER DEPOSITION 17 ANSWERS BY MICHAEL KLEIN AND ALL RELATED CROSS ACTIONS. 18 Trial Date: October 18, 2018 FSC Date: October 03, 2018 19 20 21 TO THE COURT, ALL PARTIES, AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: 22 Defendant CITY OF REDONDO BEACH (“City”) hereby submits the following separate 23 statement, pursuant to Rule 3.1345 of the California Rules of Court, in support of the opposition to the 24 motion by plaintiff to compel further deposition answers at the deposition of Michael Klein. 225 26 me 27 -1- JAWPDOCs\Zamani, T v. City of Redondo Beach\Pld\MTC Michael Klein DepoiCity of Redondo Beach's Response to Separate Stmt to P's MTC Depo of Michael Klein.docx 14200032 RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF’S SEPARATE STATEMENT