On November 03, 2021 a
Motion-Secondary
was filed
involving a dispute between
Doe, John Vnr,
and
Brown, Eric Lynn,
Does 1-100,
Victor Valley Union High School District,
for Other PI/PD/WD Unlimited
in the District Court of San Bernardino County.
Preview
Ra mond F. Dolen SBN 130534
D LEN TUCKER TIERNEY & ABRAHAM sum F I L
WFORM
E
°F
17 1 0 Plum Lane, Suite A com958s°ié25 F
Redlands, CA 92374 SA" EWWWWO 015mm
Ph: 951-683-6014 .
..
Fax: 95 1-683-03 14 MAY 1 I 2022
rdolen@redlands—law.com
Our File N0: 12-303b BY ~
(fl
VICTORIA SANCHEZ,
PUIF;
Attorne s for Defendant,
\OocuoxmthH
VICTO VALLEY UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
JOHN VBK DOE, an individual; CASE NO: CIVSB 2200478
I _
Assigned Judge : Wilfred J. Schneider
Plalntlff, Department : S-32
Complaint Filed : January 7, 2022
VS.
[Fee Exempt per Gov. Code §6103]
VICTOR VALLEY UNION HIGH
SCHOOL DISTRICT, a business entity of OBJECTION OF DEFENDANT
form unknown; ERIC LYNN BROWN, an VICTOR VALLEY UNION HIGH
individual, and DOES 1 through 100, SCHOOL DISTRICT TO
PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR
Defendants. JUDICIAL NOTICE RE: RULINGS
NNNNNNNNNn—Ir—Iu—Hr—IHHD—t—np—I
MADE IN A SEPARATE ACTION
OO\IQM#WNHO\OOO\IO\Ul-5UJNHO
Date:May 24, 2022
Time: 9:00 a.m.
Department: S-32
TO: Plaintiff JOHN VBK DOE and t0 his attorneys 0f record:
Defendant VICTOR VALLEY UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT objects t0
plaintiff s request for judicial notice filed in opposition to this defendant’s demurrer set to
be heard on May 24, 2022. Plaintiff asks the court to judicially notice a minute order of
the Honorable Khymberli S. Apaloo in the case ofDoe v. Victor Valley Union High
School District, Case No. CIVSB 213 1418 defendant objects to the request on the
grounds set forth below.
/ / /
-1-
OBJECTION OF DEFENDANT VICTOR VALLEY UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT TO PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR
JUDICIAL NOTICE OF RULINGS MADE IN A SEPARATE ACTION, TO WIT, CIVSB 213 1418
w
\v \r
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS & AUTHORITIES
I.
In her declaration, Cristina J. Nolan, refers to the minute order as having been
issued by the Honorable Wilfred J. Schneider, Jr. but it was not. It was issued by Judge
\OOONONUIAWNH
Apaloo. Case N0. CIVSB 213 1418 is not consolidated with or coordinated with the
instant action. In her declaration, counsel argues that a court may judicially notice
documents in the file of the case. The minute order attached to the request for judicial
notice is not a document in the file of this case.
<
H O California Rules ofCourt, Rule 8.1 1 15 reads, in part, as follows:
>—-l
H “(a) Unpublished opinion. Except as provided in (b), an opinion of a
p—t
N California Court of Appeal or superior court appellate division
p—A
L»)
that is not certified for publication or ordered published must not
H $ be cited or relied on by a court or a party in any other action.
:—t LII
(b) Exceptions. An unpublished opinion may be cited or relied on:
H ON (1) When the opinion is relevant under the doctrines of
H fl law ofthe case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel; or
v—i 0°
(2) When the opinion is relevant to a criminal or disciplinary
b—d
\O action because it states reasons for a decision affecting the
NO same defendant or respondent in another such action.
N t—|
NN (d) When a published opinion may be cited. A published California
V
N DJ opinion may be'cited or relied on as soon as it is certified for
N 4> publication or ordered published.”
N kl]
The minute order referenced in plaintiff’s request for judicial notice is not an
N ON opinion of a Court 0f Appeal, nor is it an opinion of the Appellate Division 0f the
Nfl Superior Court. In fact, it is hot an opinion at all. Judge Apaloo sets forth no reasoning
N OO for her rulings. It is a judicial order overruling defendant’s demurrer in a separate case.
-2-
OBJECTION OF DEFENDANT VICTOR VALLEY UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT TO PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR
JUDICIAL NOTICE OF RULINGS MADE IN A SEPARATE ACTION, TO WIT, CIVSB 213 1418
Document Filed Date
May 17, 2022
Case Filing Date
November 03, 2021
Category
Other PI/PD/WD Unlimited
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
Ra mond F. Dolen SBN 130534 D LEN TUCKER TIERNEY & ABRAHAM sum F I L WFORM E °F 17 1 0 Plum Lane, Suite A com958s°ié25 F Redlands, CA 92374 SA" EWWWWO 015mm Ph: 951-683-6014 . .. Fax: 95 1-683-03 14 MAY 1 I 2022 rdolen@redlands—law.com Our File N0: 12-303b BY ~ (fl VICTORIA SANCHEZ, PUIF; Attorne s for Defendant, \OocuoxmthH VICTO VALLEY UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO JOHN VBK DOE, an individual; CASE NO: CIVSB 2200478 I _ Assigned Judge : Wilfred J. Schneider Plalntlff, Department : S-32 Complaint Filed : January 7, 2022 VS. [Fee Exempt per Gov. Code §6103] VICTOR VALLEY UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT, a business entity of OBJECTION OF DEFENDANT form unknown; ERIC LYNN BROWN, an VICTOR VALLEY UNION HIGH individual, and DOES 1 through 100, SCHOOL DISTRICT TO PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR Defendants. JUDICIAL NOTICE RE: RULINGS NNNNNNNNNn—Ir—Iu—Hr—IHHD—t—np—I MADE IN A SEPARATE ACTION OO\IQM#WNHO\OOO\IO\Ul-5UJNHO Date:May 24, 2022 Time: 9:00 a.m. Department: S-32 TO: Plaintiff JOHN VBK DOE and t0 his attorneys 0f record: Defendant VICTOR VALLEY UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT objects t0 plaintiff s request for judicial notice filed in opposition to this defendant’s demurrer set to be heard on May 24, 2022. Plaintiff asks the court to judicially notice a minute order of the Honorable Khymberli S. Apaloo in the case ofDoe v. Victor Valley Union High School District, Case No. CIVSB 213 1418 defendant objects to the request on the grounds set forth below. / / / -1- OBJECTION OF DEFENDANT VICTOR VALLEY UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT TO PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE OF RULINGS MADE IN A SEPARATE ACTION, TO WIT, CIVSB 213 1418 w \v \r MEMORANDUM OF POINTS & AUTHORITIES I. In her declaration, Cristina J. Nolan, refers to the minute order as having been issued by the Honorable Wilfred J. Schneider, Jr. but it was not. It was issued by Judge \OOONONUIAWNH Apaloo. Case N0. CIVSB 213 1418 is not consolidated with or coordinated with the instant action. In her declaration, counsel argues that a court may judicially notice documents in the file of the case. The minute order attached to the request for judicial notice is not a document in the file of this case. < H O California Rules ofCourt, Rule 8.1 1 15 reads, in part, as follows: >—-l H “(a) Unpublished opinion. Except as provided in (b), an opinion of a p—t N California Court of Appeal or superior court appellate division p—A L») that is not certified for publication or ordered published must not H $ be cited or relied on by a court or a party in any other action. :—t LII (b) Exceptions. An unpublished opinion may be cited or relied on: H ON (1) When the opinion is relevant under the doctrines of H fl law ofthe case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel; or v—i 0° (2) When the opinion is relevant to a criminal or disciplinary b—d \O action because it states reasons for a decision affecting the NO same defendant or respondent in another such action. N t—| NN (d) When a published opinion may be cited. A published California V N DJ opinion may be'cited or relied on as soon as it is certified for N 4> publication or ordered published.” N kl] The minute order referenced in plaintiff’s request for judicial notice is not an N ON opinion of a Court 0f Appeal, nor is it an opinion of the Appellate Division 0f the Nfl Superior Court. In fact, it is hot an opinion at all. Judge Apaloo sets forth no reasoning N OO for her rulings. It is a judicial order overruling defendant’s demurrer in a separate case. -2- OBJECTION OF DEFENDANT VICTOR VALLEY UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT TO PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE OF RULINGS MADE IN A SEPARATE ACTION, TO WIT, CIVSB 213 1418