On February 02, 2021 a
Motion-Secondary
was filed
involving a dispute between
Doe, Jane,
and
Does 1 Through 40,
Rialto Unified School District,
for Other PI/PD/WD Unlimited
in the District Court of San Bernardino County.
Preview
x. OREGH‘QAL V
FAXE®
RYAN D. MILLER (SBN 256799)
BARBARA M. MOORE (SBN 140613)
CUMMINGS. M(‘CLOREY. DAVIS. A(‘Ho & ASSOCIATES. P.C. La .
8 W
380l University Avenue. Suite 560
Riverside.
(95 I)
CA 92501
276-4420
By: "J‘m
gh‘ M.
17.11;?"
?'L
(95 1) 276-4405 fax
OOWVOUIALHN~
EXEMPT PER GOV. CODE § 6103
Attorneys for Defendant.
Rialto Unified School District
SUPERIOR COURT 0F THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
JANE DOE, an individual, ) Case No.: CIV882100860
) Judge: Hon. Brian S. McCarville
)
Plaintiff,
) DEFENDANT RIALTO UNIFIED
V.
) SCHOOL DISTRICT’S MEMORANDUM
) OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES [N
) OPPOSITION TO EX PARTE
RIALTO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, )
APPLICATION TO MOVE HEARING
a public entity; and DOES 1 to 40, Inclusive, )
DATE; DECLARATION OF RYAN D.
)
MILLER
)
Defendants. )
)
)
Date: August 9, 2023
NNNNNNNN——a————————_
) Time: 8:30 am
) Dept: 830
NOMALNN—OOOONO‘MAWN—
)
3
)
Complaint Filed: 2/2/2021
)
Defendant Rialto Unified School District (hereinafter the “District“) opposes the instant
ex parte application as it does not meet the procedural hurdle of an emergency 0r other
authorizing statute. The District submits the following memorandum 0f points and authorities,
which details the legal reasons why the relief sought. ex pane. is inappropriate.
///
///
28
Cummings. .‘ld'lorey.
Dlvia. Acho
& Asmiam. P.(‘.
180] l'nnersm Mcnuc.
Suite ‘00
Riverside‘ (‘A 92‘01
Telephone (9‘ I
) 2764420
Facsimile [9‘1] 270.440‘ DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S EX PARTE APPLICATION
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
l.
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff‘s claims in this litigation are false. She admitted they were false to employees
oomflomhb-IN—
of the District in 2002. When the statute of limitations was removed by A8218. she saw an
opportunity. and took it. perhaps believing there were no witnesses to her prior admissions.
On July 3. 2023. counsel for the District contacted counsel for plaintiffregarding a legal
issue that serves the basis for the pending motion for judgment on the pleadings (hereinafter
"MJOP“). ln that conversation. plaintiff‘s counsel informed counsel for the District that she
would be on vacation from July 21. 2023. to August 4. 2023. and asked t0 have the hearing in
September of 2023. Because ofthe money this case was costing my client. l informed her I was
unwilling to move the hearing to September but agreed to move the hearing date t0 no sooner
than August 18. 2023. so that she would have at least 6 business days after her vacation to
prepare an opposition (not t0 mention she already had the motion and could have already
prepared it.) At no time did plaintiff‘s counsel mention she would be attending the CAALA
Convention from August 3| to September 3. 2023.
On July ll. 2023. the District filed its motion for judgment 0n the pleadings. with a
hearing date set for August 23. 2023. consistent with the agreement. Plaintiffwas electronically
NNNNNNNN——————.—___
served the motion forjudgment on the pleadings 0n July l0. 2023. On July 18. 2023. plaintiff‘s
\IO‘U’IbWN—‘OOOONONUIAWN—
counsel sent correspondence to counsel for the District. requesting a short continuance 0f the
hearing date. Plaintiff‘s counsel represented that the opposition would take her “[m]any. many
hours.“ As a further courtesy. counsel for the District agreed t0 continue the hearing date for
five additional days and a stipulation was prepared and filed for the same. Again. there was no
mention 0fthe CAALA Conference.
On July l9. 2023. the Coun signed the stipulation and set the hearing date for the MJOP
0n September I, 2023. at 8:30 a.m. On August 7. 2023. plaintiff‘s counsel asked t0 continue the
hearing yet again. to accommodate her attending the CAALA Conference in Las Vegas. On
28 September l. 2023. CAALA presentations begin at 9:00 a.m. (See Exhibit 5 to the Declaration
('umminp. \Id'Iore).
Du‘is. Acho
& Associlles. P.('.
180] l'nnersm Menu: -2-
Sun: ‘60
Rnersldc. (‘A 92““
Telephone 19* l j 270-4420
Fustmnle 19‘ I ) 270-440‘ DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION
Document Filed Date
August 08, 2023
Case Filing Date
February 02, 2021
Category
Other PI/PD/WD Unlimited
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
x. OREGH‘QAL V FAXE® RYAN D. MILLER (SBN 256799) BARBARA M. MOORE (SBN 140613) CUMMINGS. M(‘CLOREY. DAVIS. A(‘Ho & ASSOCIATES. P.C. La . 8 W 380l University Avenue. Suite 560 Riverside. (95 I) CA 92501 276-4420 By: "J‘m gh‘ M. 17.11;?" ?'L (95 1) 276-4405 fax OOWVOUIALHN~ EXEMPT PER GOV. CODE § 6103 Attorneys for Defendant. Rialto Unified School District SUPERIOR COURT 0F THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO JANE DOE, an individual, ) Case No.: CIV882100860 ) Judge: Hon. Brian S. McCarville ) Plaintiff, ) DEFENDANT RIALTO UNIFIED V. ) SCHOOL DISTRICT’S MEMORANDUM ) OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES [N ) OPPOSITION TO EX PARTE RIALTO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT, ) APPLICATION TO MOVE HEARING a public entity; and DOES 1 to 40, Inclusive, ) DATE; DECLARATION OF RYAN D. ) MILLER ) Defendants. ) ) ) Date: August 9, 2023 NNNNNNNN——a————————_ ) Time: 8:30 am ) Dept: 830 NOMALNN—OOOONO‘MAWN— ) 3 ) Complaint Filed: 2/2/2021 ) Defendant Rialto Unified School District (hereinafter the “District“) opposes the instant ex parte application as it does not meet the procedural hurdle of an emergency 0r other authorizing statute. The District submits the following memorandum 0f points and authorities, which details the legal reasons why the relief sought. ex pane. is inappropriate. /// /// 28 Cummings. .‘ld'lorey. Dlvia. Acho & Asmiam. P.(‘. 180] l'nnersm Mcnuc. Suite ‘00 Riverside‘ (‘A 92‘01 Telephone (9‘ I ) 2764420 Facsimile [9‘1] 270.440‘ DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S EX PARTE APPLICATION MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES l. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff‘s claims in this litigation are false. She admitted they were false to employees oomflomhb-IN— of the District in 2002. When the statute of limitations was removed by A8218. she saw an opportunity. and took it. perhaps believing there were no witnesses to her prior admissions. On July 3. 2023. counsel for the District contacted counsel for plaintiffregarding a legal issue that serves the basis for the pending motion for judgment on the pleadings (hereinafter "MJOP“). ln that conversation. plaintiff‘s counsel informed counsel for the District that she would be on vacation from July 21. 2023. to August 4. 2023. and asked t0 have the hearing in September of 2023. Because ofthe money this case was costing my client. l informed her I was unwilling to move the hearing to September but agreed to move the hearing date t0 no sooner than August 18. 2023. so that she would have at least 6 business days after her vacation to prepare an opposition (not t0 mention she already had the motion and could have already prepared it.) At no time did plaintiff‘s counsel mention she would be attending the CAALA Convention from August 3| to September 3. 2023. On July ll. 2023. the District filed its motion for judgment 0n the pleadings. with a hearing date set for August 23. 2023. consistent with the agreement. Plaintiffwas electronically NNNNNNNN——————.—___ served the motion forjudgment on the pleadings 0n July l0. 2023. On July 18. 2023. plaintiff‘s \IO‘U’IbWN—‘OOOONONUIAWN— counsel sent correspondence to counsel for the District. requesting a short continuance 0f the hearing date. Plaintiff‘s counsel represented that the opposition would take her “[m]any. many hours.“ As a further courtesy. counsel for the District agreed t0 continue the hearing date for five additional days and a stipulation was prepared and filed for the same. Again. there was no mention 0fthe CAALA Conference. On July l9. 2023. the Coun signed the stipulation and set the hearing date for the MJOP 0n September I, 2023. at 8:30 a.m. On August 7. 2023. plaintiff‘s counsel asked t0 continue the hearing yet again. to accommodate her attending the CAALA Conference in Las Vegas. On 28 September l. 2023. CAALA presentations begin at 9:00 a.m. (See Exhibit 5 to the Declaration ('umminp. \Id'Iore). Du‘is. Acho & Associlles. P.('. 180] l'nnersm Menu: -2- Sun: ‘60 Rnersldc. (‘A 92““ Telephone 19* l j 270-4420 Fustmnle 19‘ I ) 270-440‘ DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION