Preview
CM-110
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar number, and address):
FOR COURT USE ONLY
Laurie J. Elza, Esq., SBN 284903
LAW OFFICES OF JOHN A. HAUSER
One Pointe Dr., 6th Floor, Brea, CA 92821
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 2282, Brea, CA 92822
TELEPHONE NO.: (714) 371-2311 FAX NO. (Optional): (877) 369-5799
E-MAIL ADDRESS: laurie.elza@thehartford.com
ATTORNEY FOR (Name): Defendant and Cross-Complainant, NTN PROPERTIES LLC
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF MONTEREY
STREET ADDRESS: 1200 Aguajito Road
MAILING ADDRESS: 1200 Aguajito Road
CITY AND ZIP CODE: Monterey, CA 93940
BRANCH NAME:
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: LOUIS MONTANO, JR., et al.
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: CITY OF SALINAS, et al.
CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT CASE NUMBER:
(Check one): UNLIMITED CASE LIMITED CASE 21CV003635 [LEAD]
(Amount demanded (Amount demanded is $25,000
exceeds $25,000) or less)
A CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE is scheduled as follows:
Date: December 5, 2023 Time: 9:00 a.m. Dept.: 14 Div.: Room:
Address of court (if different from the address above):
Notice of Intent to Appear by Telephone, by (name): Laurie J. Elza, Esq.
INSTRUCTIONS: All applicable boxes must be checked, and the specified information must be provided.
1. Party or parties (answer one):
a. This statement is submitted by party (name): Defendant and Cross-Complainant NTN PROPERTIES LLC
b. This statement is submitted jointly by parties (names):
2. Complaint and cross-complaint (to be answered by plaintiffs and cross-complainants only)
a. The complaint was filed on (date):
b. The cross-complaint, if any, was filed on (date): 7/14/2022 (*In MONTANO matter only)
3. Service (to be answered by plaintiffs and cross-complainants only)
a. All parties named in the complaint and cross-complaint have been served, have appeared, or have been dismissed.
b. The following parties named in the complaint or cross-complaint
(1) have not been served (specify names and explain why not):
(2) have been served but have not appeared and have not been dismissed (specify names):
(3) have had a default entered against them (specify names):
c. The following additional parties may be added (specify names, nature of involvement in case, and date by which
they may be served):
4. Description of case
a. Type of case in complaint cross-complaint (Describe, including causes of action):
Consolidated matter with all pending lawsuits arising from the incident at issue; currently, NTN Properties is named as a
Defendant in the Complaints filed by Plaintiffs Montano, Middaugh, Ortega & Garcia, Smith, Rosett & Arellano. All complaints
will have been answered by the CMC date.
Page 1 of 5
Form Adopted for Mandatory Use Cal. Rules of Court,
Judicial Council of California
CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT rules 3.720–3.730
CM-110 [Rev. September 1, 2021] www.courts.ca.gov
CM-110
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: LOUIS MONTANO, JR., et al. CASE NUMBER:
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: CITY OF SALINAS, et al. 21CV003635 [LEAD]
4. b. Provide a brief statement of the case, including any damages. (If personal injury damages are sought, specify the injury and
damages claimed, including medical expenses to date [indicate source and amount], estimated future medical expenses, lost
earnings to date, and estimated future lost earnings. If equitable relief is sought, describe the nature of the relief.)
Negligence, premises liability matter arising from a vehicle being pursued by police crashing into a vehicle, and then entering
the premises of Gino's Restaurant in Salinas, CA; striking the outdoor patio and a tented temporary dining area.
(If more space is needed, check this box and attach a page designated as Attachment 4b.)
5. Jury or nonjury trial
The party or parties request a jury triaI a nonjury trial. (If more than one party, provide the name of each party
requesting a jury trial):
6. Trial date
a. The trial has been set for (date):
b. No trial date has been set. This case will be ready for trial within 12 months of the date of the filing of the complaint (if
not, explain):
c. Dates on which parties or attorneys will not be available for trial (specify dates and explain reasons for unavailability):
Trials: 2.22.24; 5.30.24; 8.26.24; 9.23.24; 10.7.24
7. Estimated length of trial
The party or parties estimate that the trial will take (check one):
a. days (specify number): 10-15 days
b. hours (short causes) (specify):
8. Trial representation (to be answered for each party)
The party or parties will be represented at trial by the attorney or party listed in the caption by the following:
a. Attorney:
b. Firm:
c. Address:
d. Telephone number: f. Fax number:
e. E-mail address: g. Party represented:
Additional representation is described in Attachment 8.
9. Preference
This case is entitled to preference (specify code section):
10. Alternative dispute resolution (ADR)
a. ADR information package. Please note that different ADR processes are available in different courts and communities; read
the ADR information package provided by the court under rule 3.221 of the California Rules of Court for information about the
processes available through the court and community programs in this case.
(1) For parties represented by counsel: Counsel has has not provided the ADR information package identified
in rule 3.221 to the client and reviewed ADR options with the client.
(2) For self-represented parties: Party has has not reviewed the ADR information package identified in rule 3.221.
b. Referral to judicial arbitration or civil action mediation (if available).
(1) This matter is subject to mandatory judicial arbitration under Code of Civil Procedure section 1141.11 or to civil action
mediation under Code of Civil Procedure section 1775.3 because the amount in controversy does not exceed the
statutory limit.
(2) Plaintiff elects to refer this case to judicial arbitration and agrees to limit recovery to the amount specified in Code of
Civil Procedure section 1141.11.
(3) This case is exempt from judicial arbitration under rule 3.811 of the California Rules of Court or from civil action
mediation under Code of Civil Procedure section 1775 et seq. (specify exemption):
CM-110 [Rev. September 1, 2021] Page 2 of 5
CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
CM-110
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: LOUIS MONTANO, JR., et al. CASE NUMBER:
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: CITY OF SALINAS, et al. 21CV003635 [LEAD]
10. c. Indicate the ADR process or processes that the party or parties are willing to participate in, have agreed to participate in, or
have already participated in (check all that apply and provide the specified information):
The party or parties completing If the party or parties completing this form in the case have agreed to
this form are willing to participate in or have already completed an ADR process or processes,
participate in the following ADR indicate the status of the processes (attach a copy of the parties' ADR
processes (check all that apply): stipulation):
Mediation session not yet scheduled
Mediation session scheduled for (date): March 20, 2024
(1) Mediation
Agreed to complete mediation by (date):
Mediation completed on (date):
Settlement conference not yet scheduled
(2) Settlement Settlement conference scheduled for (date):
conference Agreed to complete settlement conference by (date):
Settlement conference completed on (date):
Neutral evaluation not yet scheduled
Neutral evaluation scheduled for (date):
(3) Neutral evaluation
Agreed to complete neutral evaluation by (date):
Neutral evaluation completed on (date):
Judicial arbitration not yet scheduled
(4) Nonbinding judicial Judicial arbitration scheduled for (date):
arbitration Agreed to complete judicial arbitration by (date):
Judicial arbitration completed on (date):
Private arbitration not yet scheduled
(5) Binding private Private arbitration scheduled for (date):
arbitration Agreed to complete private arbitration by (date):
Private arbitration completed on (date):
ADR session not yet scheduled
ADR session scheduled for (date):
(6) Other (specify):
Agreed to complete ADR session by (date):
ADR completed on (date):
CM-110 [Rev. September 1, 2021] Page 3 of 5
CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
CM-110
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: LOUIS MONTANO, JR., et al. CASE NUMBER:
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: CITY OF SALINAS, et al. 21CV003635 [LEAD]
11. Insurance
a. Insurance carrier, if any, for party filing this statement (name): Sentinel Insurance Company, Ltd.
b. Reservation of rights: Yes No
c. Coverage issues will significantly affect resolution of this case (explain):
12. Jurisdiction
Indicate any matters that may affect the court's jurisdiction or processing of this case and describe the status.
Bankruptcy Other (specify):
Status:
13. Related cases, consolidation, and coordination
a. There are companion, underlying, or related cases.
(1) Name of case: Consolidated w/Case Nos. 22CV002531; 22CV003206; 22CV003261; 22CV003443; and 22CV003598
(2) Name of court:
(3) Case number:
(4) Status:
Additional cases are described in Attachment 13a.
b. A motion to consolidate coordinate wiII be filed by (name party):
14. Bifurcation
The party or parties intend to file a motion for an order bifurcating, severing, or coordinating the following issues or causes of
action (specify moving party, type of motion, and reasons):
15. Other motions
The party or parties expect to file the following motions before trial (specify moving party, type of motion, and issues):
16. Discovery
a. The party or parties have completed all discovery.
b. The following discovery will be completed by the date specified (describe all anticipated discovery):
Party Description Date
NTN PROPERTIES LLC Written Discovery 1.15.2024
c. The following discovery issues, including issues regarding the discovery of electronically stored information, are
anticipated (specify):
Defendant will be completing no discovery other than written discovery regarding the plaintiffs' claimed injuries and damages. If
the case does not resolve at mediation and Defendant's policy limits tender to all plaintiffs is not accepted, then Defendant will
need approximately nine months to obtain complete the depositions of all plaintiffs except for the Montanos, subpoena
treatment and other records, depose health care providers, and retained experts.
CM-110 [Rev. September 1, 2021] Page 4 of 5
CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
CM-110
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: LOUIS MONTANO, JR., et al. CASE NUMBER:
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: CITY OF SALINAS, et al. 21CV003635 [LEAD]
17. Economic litigation
a. This is a limited civil case (i.e., the amount demanded is $25,000 or less) and the economic litigation procedures in Code
of Civil Procedure sections 90-98 will apply to this case.
b. This is a limited civil case and a motion to withdraw the case from the economic litigation procedures or for additional
discovery will be filed (if checked, explain specifically why economic litigation procedures relating to discovery or trial
should not apply to this case):
18. Other issues
The party or parties request that the following additional matters be considered or determined at the case management
conference (specify):
19. Meet and confer
a. The party or parties have met and conferred with all parties on all subjects required by rule 3.724 of the California Rules
of Court (if not, explain):
b. After meeting and conferring as required by rule 3.724 of the California Rules of Court, the parties agree on the following
(specify):
20. Total number of pages attached (if any):
I am completely familiar with this case and will be fully prepared to discuss the status of discovery and alternative dispute resolution,
as well as other issues raised by this statement, and will possess the authority to enter into stipulations on these issues at the time of
the case management conference, including the written authority of the party where required.
Date: November 6, 2023
Laurie J. Elza, Esq. (SBN 284903)
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF PARTY OR ATTORNEY)
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF PARTY OR ATTORNEY)
Additional signatures are attached.
CM-110 [Rev. September 1, 2021] Page 5 of 5
CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
PROOF OF SERVICE
1 LOUIS MONTANO, JR.; et al. v. CITY OF SALINAS; et al.
Case No. 21CV003635 [LEAD]
2 [Consolidated w/Case Nos. 22CV002531; 22CV003206; 22CV003261; 22CV003443; and 22CV003598]
3
I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to this action. My business address is:
4 Law Offices of John A. Hauser, One Pointe Drive, 6th Floor, Brea, CA 92821; email address:
maureen.merriles@thehartford.com.
5
6 On November 6, 2023, I served a true and correct copy of the following document(s), on
the interested party/parties identified on the attached Service List:
7
CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT (NTN Properties)
8
9 BY U.S. MAIL
I placed the subject document(s) in a sealed envelope or package addressed to the interested
10 party/parties on the attached Service List with postage fully prepaid. I placed the envelope
for collection and mailing, following our firm’s ordinary business practices. I am readily
11
familiar with this firm’s practice for collecting and processing correspondence for mailing.
12 On the same day that correspondence is placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited in
the ordinary course of business with the United States Postal Service.
13 BY OVERNIGHT MAIL
14 I placed the subject document(s) in a sealed envelope or package provided by an overnight
delivery carrier addressed to the interested party/parties on the attached Service List. I
15 placed the envelope or package for collection and overnight delivery at a regularly utilized
drop box of the overnight delivery carrier.
16 BY MESSENGER
17 I placed the subject document(s) in a sealed envelope or package addressed to the interested
party/parties on the attached Service List and provided them to a professional messenger
18 service.
BY FACSIMILE to MAYR LAW FIRM *ONLY*
19 Based on an agreement of the parties to accept service by fax transmission, I faxed the
20 document(s) on the interested party/parties on the attached Service List. No error was
reported by the fax machine I used. A copy of the record of the fax transmission, which I
21 printed, is attached.
BY ELECTRONIC SERVICE
22 Based on applicable law or statute, including California Rule of Court 2.251(C)(3) and/or
23 Code of Civil Procedure § 1010.6), or an agreement of the parties to accept service by
electronic transmission, I electronically served the document(s) on the interested
24
party/parties on the attached Service List.
25
26
27
28
1
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
PROOF OF SERVICE
CERTIFIED MAIL – RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
1
I placed the subject document(s) in a sealed envelope or package addressed to the interested
2 party/parties on the attached Service List with postage fully prepaid with a return receipt
requested to be signed by the addressee that the documents were received. I placed the
3 envelope for collection and mailing, following our firm’s ordinary business practices. I am
4 readily familiar with this firm’s practice for collecting and processing correspondence for
mailing. On the same day that correspondence is placed for collection and mailing, it is
5 deposited in the ordinary course of business with the United States Postal Service.
6 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above
7 is true and correct.
8 Date: November 6, 2023
9
10 __________________________________
MAUREEN MERRILES
11
12
For purposes of serving documents on the Law Offices of John A. Hauser, please use
13 the email address for the attorney of record (Laurie.Elza@thehartford.com) and
LawOfficesHauser@thehartford.com.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
PROOF OF SERVICE
SERVICE LIST
1 LOUIS MONTANO, JR.; et al. v. CITY OF SALINAS; et al.
Case No. 21CV003635 [LEAD]
2 [Consolidated w/Case Nos. 22CV002531; 22CV003206; 22CV003261; 22CV003443; and 22CV003598]
3
Emily A. Ruby, Esq. Richard C. Alpers, Esq.
4 Sergio R. Cardenas, Esq. ALPERS LAW GROUP, INC.
GREENBERG AND RUBY INJURY P.O. Box 1540
5 ATTORNEYS, APC Aptos, CA 95001
400 Continental Blvd., Ste. 320 T: 855-808-1174 / F: 855-870-1129
6 El Segundo, CA 90245 E: rca@alperslawgroup.com
7 T: 323-782-0535 / F: 323-782-0543 Co-Counsel for Plaintiffs, LOUIS MONTANO,
E: eruby@caltrialpros.com; JR.; LOUIE MONTANO III; MICHAEL
8 scardenas@caltrialpros.com; MONTANO
kdobroth@caltrialpros.com;
9 records@caltrialpros.com
Attorneys for Plaintiffs, LOUIS MONTANO,
10
JR.; LOUIE MONTANO III; MICHAEL
11 MONTANO
Christopher A. Callihan, Esq. William R. Price, Esq.
12 OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY D. Scott Dodd, Esq.
200 Lincoln Ave. LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM R. PRICE
13 Salinas, CA 93901 12636 High Bluff Dr., Ste. 400
14 T: 831-758-7256 / F: 831-758-7257 San Diego, CA 92130
E: chrisc@ci.salinas.ca.us T: 831-758-7256 / F:
15 Attorneys for Defendant/Cross-Complainant, E: wprice@williamrprice.com;
CITY OF SALINAS sdodd@williamrprice.com;
16 dhartsough@williamrprice.com;
obarnes@williamrprice.com
17
Co-Counsel for Defendant/Cross-Complainant,
18 CITY OF SALINAS
Cynthia Shambaugh, Esq. Rodney N. Mayr, Esq.
19 Chandrani Mandal, Esq. MAYR LAW FIRM
LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH 1010 W. Taylor St.
20 LLP San Jose, CA 95126
21 2185 N. California Blvd., Ste. 300 T: 408-331-7606 / F: 669-266-5612
Walnut Creek, CA 94596 E: rodney@mayrlawfirm.com;
22 T: 925-357-3456 / F: 925-478-3260 emiliano@mayrlawfirm.com
E: cynthia.shambaugh@lewisbrisbois.com; Attorneys for Defendants/Cross-Defendants,
23 joan.whipple@lewisbrisbois.com; ROSAURA ARCOS PANIAGUA and AUSTIN
chandrani.mandal@lewisbrisbois.com; ALARCON
24
izie.hudson@lewisbrisbois.com
25 Attorneys for Defendants/Cross-Defendants, *SERVE VIA FACSIMILE ALSO –
GINO’S RESTAURANT, INC.; GINO’S FINE CONSISTENT PROBLEMS WITH THEIR
26 ITALIAN FOOD, INC. and NGOCHAO THI EMAIL*
NGUYEN
27
28
3
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
PROOF OF SERVICE
Joseph J. Babich, Esq. Bryan D. Pyles, Esq.
1
Sean D. Wisman, Esq. FORD, WALKER, HAGGERTY & BEHAR, LLP
2 DREYER BABICH BUCCOLA WOOD One World Trade Center, 27th Floor
CAMPORA, LLP Long Beach, CA 90831
3 20 Bicentennial Circle T: 562-983-2568/ F: 562-590-3571
Sacramento, CA 95826 E: bpyles@fwhb.com; jprado@fwhb.com;
4 T: 916-379-3500 / F: 916-379-3599 rlrservice@fwhb.com
5 E: jbabich@dbbwc.com; Attorneys for Defendants/Cross-Complainants,
swisman@dbbwc.com; tstevens@dbbwc.com; AUSTIN ALARCON and ARTURO MORANDA
6 DBBWC-ESERVICE@dbbwc.com ALARCON– Monterey Superior Court,
Attorneys for Plaintiff, MAIRA ARELLANO – 22CV002531; Maira Arellano vs. Austin Alarcon,
7 Monterey Superior Court, Case # 22CV002531; et al.
Maira Arellano vs. Austin Alarcon, et al.
8
9 Neil P. Berman, Esq. Shahin “Shawn” Kahroba, Esq.
RUCKA, O'BOYLE, LOMBARDO & SHERIDAN & RUND, KAHROBA PC
10 MCKENNA 270 Coral Circle
245 W. Laurel Dr. El Segundo, CA 90245
11 Salinas, CA 93906 T: 310-640-1200 / F: 310-640-0200
12 T: 831-443-1051 / F: 831-443-6419 E: shawn@srlawyers.com
E: nberman@rolmlaw.com; Attorneys for Plaintiff, ROBERT ROSSETT –
13 spena@rolmlaw.com; janie@rolmlaw.com Monterey Superior Court, Case # 22CV003261;
Attorneys for Plaintiff, DIANE MIDDAUGH – Robert Rossett vs Austin Alarcon, et al.
14 Monterey Superior Court, Case # 22CV003206;
Diane Middaugh vs BLFA Properties LLC, et
15 al.
16
Robert D. Ponce, Esq. Owili K. Eison, Esq.
17 LAW OFFICE OF ROBERT D. PONCE Yen-Yu “Renee” Liu, Esq.
400 Camino Aguajito, Ste. 100 BD&J, PC
18 Monterey, CA 93940 9701 Wilshire Blvd., 12th Floor
19 T: 831-649-0515 / F: 831-649-3397 Beverly Hills, CA 90212
E: rponce@redshift.com; T: 310-887-1818 / F: 310-887-1880
20 sgarcia@redshift.com; E: oe@bhattorneys.com; ryl@bhattorneys.com;
mbejsovec@redshift.com eservet1@bhattorneys.com; rrg@bhattorneys.com;
21 Attorney for Plaintiff, KEVIN SMITH – lcc@bhattorneys.com
Monterey Superior Court, Case # 22CV003443; Attorneys for Plaintiffs, DANIEL ORTEGA and
22 YOSELYN GARCIA – Monterey Superior Court,
Kevin Smith vs Gino's Fine Italian Food, Inc., et
23 al. Case # 22CV003598; Daniel Ortega, et al. vs.
Austin Alarcon, et al.
24
25
26
27
28
4
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
PROOF OF SERVICE
Gina D. Huettel, Esq.
1
WILLIAMS, PINELLI & CULLEN
2 1960 The Alameda, Ste. 195
San Jose, CA 95126
3 T: 408-288-3868 x 109 / F: 408-288-3860
E: ghuettel@wpclaw.com;
4 amagana@wpclaw.com
5 Attorneys for Defendant, BRYAN
CABALLERO TENA – Monterey Superior
6 Court, Case # 22CV003598; Daniel Ortega, et
al. vs. Austin Alarcon, et al.
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
PROOF OF SERVICE
Preview
CM-110 ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar number, and address): FOR COURT USE ONLY Laurie J. Elza, Esq., SBN 284903 LAW OFFICES OF JOHN A. HAUSER One Pointe Dr., 6th Floor, Brea, CA 92821 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 2282, Brea, CA 92822 TELEPHONE NO.: (714) 371-2311 FAX NO. (Optional): (877) 369-5799 E-MAIL ADDRESS: laurie.elza@thehartford.com ATTORNEY FOR (Name): Defendant and Cross-Complainant, NTN PROPERTIES LLC SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF MONTEREY STREET ADDRESS: 1200 Aguajito Road MAILING ADDRESS: 1200 Aguajito Road CITY AND ZIP CODE: Monterey, CA 93940 BRANCH NAME: PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: LOUIS MONTANO, JR., et al. DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: CITY OF SALINAS, et al. CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT CASE NUMBER: (Check one): UNLIMITED CASE LIMITED CASE 21CV003635 [LEAD] (Amount demanded (Amount demanded is $25,000 exceeds $25,000) or less) A CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE is scheduled as follows: Date: December 5, 2023 Time: 9:00 a.m. Dept.: 14 Div.: Room: Address of court (if different from the address above): Notice of Intent to Appear by Telephone, by (name): Laurie J. Elza, Esq. INSTRUCTIONS: All applicable boxes must be checked, and the specified information must be provided. 1. Party or parties (answer one): a. This statement is submitted by party (name): Defendant and Cross-Complainant NTN PROPERTIES LLC b. This statement is submitted jointly by parties (names): 2. Complaint and cross-complaint (to be answered by plaintiffs and cross-complainants only) a. The complaint was filed on (date): b. The cross-complaint, if any, was filed on (date): 7/14/2022 (*In MONTANO matter only) 3. Service (to be answered by plaintiffs and cross-complainants only) a. All parties named in the complaint and cross-complaint have been served, have appeared, or have been dismissed. b. The following parties named in the complaint or cross-complaint (1) have not been served (specify names and explain why not): (2) have been served but have not appeared and have not been dismissed (specify names): (3) have had a default entered against them (specify names): c. The following additional parties may be added (specify names, nature of involvement in case, and date by which they may be served): 4. Description of case a. Type of case in complaint cross-complaint (Describe, including causes of action): Consolidated matter with all pending lawsuits arising from the incident at issue; currently, NTN Properties is named as a Defendant in the Complaints filed by Plaintiffs Montano, Middaugh, Ortega & Garcia, Smith, Rosett & Arellano. All complaints will have been answered by the CMC date. Page 1 of 5 Form Adopted for Mandatory Use Cal. Rules of Court, Judicial Council of California CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT rules 3.720–3.730 CM-110 [Rev. September 1, 2021] www.courts.ca.gov CM-110 PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: LOUIS MONTANO, JR., et al. CASE NUMBER: DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: CITY OF SALINAS, et al. 21CV003635 [LEAD] 4. b. Provide a brief statement of the case, including any damages. (If personal injury damages are sought, specify the injury and damages claimed, including medical expenses to date [indicate source and amount], estimated future medical expenses, lost earnings to date, and estimated future lost earnings. If equitable relief is sought, describe the nature of the relief.) Negligence, premises liability matter arising from a vehicle being pursued by police crashing into a vehicle, and then entering the premises of Gino's Restaurant in Salinas, CA; striking the outdoor patio and a tented temporary dining area. (If more space is needed, check this box and attach a page designated as Attachment 4b.) 5. Jury or nonjury trial The party or parties request a jury triaI a nonjury trial. (If more than one party, provide the name of each party requesting a jury trial): 6. Trial date a. The trial has been set for (date): b. No trial date has been set. This case will be ready for trial within 12 months of the date of the filing of the complaint (if not, explain): c. Dates on which parties or attorneys will not be available for trial (specify dates and explain reasons for unavailability): Trials: 2.22.24; 5.30.24; 8.26.24; 9.23.24; 10.7.24 7. Estimated length of trial The party or parties estimate that the trial will take (check one): a. days (specify number): 10-15 days b. hours (short causes) (specify): 8. Trial representation (to be answered for each party) The party or parties will be represented at trial by the attorney or party listed in the caption by the following: a. Attorney: b. Firm: c. Address: d. Telephone number: f. Fax number: e. E-mail address: g. Party represented: Additional representation is described in Attachment 8. 9. Preference This case is entitled to preference (specify code section): 10. Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) a. ADR information package. Please note that different ADR processes are available in different courts and communities; read the ADR information package provided by the court under rule 3.221 of the California Rules of Court for information about the processes available through the court and community programs in this case. (1) For parties represented by counsel: Counsel has has not provided the ADR information package identified in rule 3.221 to the client and reviewed ADR options with the client. (2) For self-represented parties: Party has has not reviewed the ADR information package identified in rule 3.221. b. Referral to judicial arbitration or civil action mediation (if available). (1) This matter is subject to mandatory judicial arbitration under Code of Civil Procedure section 1141.11 or to civil action mediation under Code of Civil Procedure section 1775.3 because the amount in controversy does not exceed the statutory limit. (2) Plaintiff elects to refer this case to judicial arbitration and agrees to limit recovery to the amount specified in Code of Civil Procedure section 1141.11. (3) This case is exempt from judicial arbitration under rule 3.811 of the California Rules of Court or from civil action mediation under Code of Civil Procedure section 1775 et seq. (specify exemption): CM-110 [Rev. September 1, 2021] Page 2 of 5 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT CM-110 PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: LOUIS MONTANO, JR., et al. CASE NUMBER: DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: CITY OF SALINAS, et al. 21CV003635 [LEAD] 10. c. Indicate the ADR process or processes that the party or parties are willing to participate in, have agreed to participate in, or have already participated in (check all that apply and provide the specified information): The party or parties completing If the party or parties completing this form in the case have agreed to this form are willing to participate in or have already completed an ADR process or processes, participate in the following ADR indicate the status of the processes (attach a copy of the parties' ADR processes (check all that apply): stipulation): Mediation session not yet scheduled Mediation session scheduled for (date): March 20, 2024 (1) Mediation Agreed to complete mediation by (date): Mediation completed on (date): Settlement conference not yet scheduled (2) Settlement Settlement conference scheduled for (date): conference Agreed to complete settlement conference by (date): Settlement conference completed on (date): Neutral evaluation not yet scheduled Neutral evaluation scheduled for (date): (3) Neutral evaluation Agreed to complete neutral evaluation by (date): Neutral evaluation completed on (date): Judicial arbitration not yet scheduled (4) Nonbinding judicial Judicial arbitration scheduled for (date): arbitration Agreed to complete judicial arbitration by (date): Judicial arbitration completed on (date): Private arbitration not yet scheduled (5) Binding private Private arbitration scheduled for (date): arbitration Agreed to complete private arbitration by (date): Private arbitration completed on (date): ADR session not yet scheduled ADR session scheduled for (date): (6) Other (specify): Agreed to complete ADR session by (date): ADR completed on (date): CM-110 [Rev. September 1, 2021] Page 3 of 5 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT CM-110 PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: LOUIS MONTANO, JR., et al. CASE NUMBER: DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: CITY OF SALINAS, et al. 21CV003635 [LEAD] 11. Insurance a. Insurance carrier, if any, for party filing this statement (name): Sentinel Insurance Company, Ltd. b. Reservation of rights: Yes No c. Coverage issues will significantly affect resolution of this case (explain): 12. Jurisdiction Indicate any matters that may affect the court's jurisdiction or processing of this case and describe the status. Bankruptcy Other (specify): Status: 13. Related cases, consolidation, and coordination a. There are companion, underlying, or related cases. (1) Name of case: Consolidated w/Case Nos. 22CV002531; 22CV003206; 22CV003261; 22CV003443; and 22CV003598 (2) Name of court: (3) Case number: (4) Status: Additional cases are described in Attachment 13a. b. A motion to consolidate coordinate wiII be filed by (name party): 14. Bifurcation The party or parties intend to file a motion for an order bifurcating, severing, or coordinating the following issues or causes of action (specify moving party, type of motion, and reasons): 15. Other motions The party or parties expect to file the following motions before trial (specify moving party, type of motion, and issues): 16. Discovery a. The party or parties have completed all discovery. b. The following discovery will be completed by the date specified (describe all anticipated discovery): Party Description Date NTN PROPERTIES LLC Written Discovery 1.15.2024 c. The following discovery issues, including issues regarding the discovery of electronically stored information, are anticipated (specify): Defendant will be completing no discovery other than written discovery regarding the plaintiffs' claimed injuries and damages. If the case does not resolve at mediation and Defendant's policy limits tender to all plaintiffs is not accepted, then Defendant will need approximately nine months to obtain complete the depositions of all plaintiffs except for the Montanos, subpoena treatment and other records, depose health care providers, and retained experts. CM-110 [Rev. September 1, 2021] Page 4 of 5 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT CM-110 PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: LOUIS MONTANO, JR., et al. CASE NUMBER: DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: CITY OF SALINAS, et al. 21CV003635 [LEAD] 17. Economic litigation a. This is a limited civil case (i.e., the amount demanded is $25,000 or less) and the economic litigation procedures in Code of Civil Procedure sections 90-98 will apply to this case. b. This is a limited civil case and a motion to withdraw the case from the economic litigation procedures or for additional discovery will be filed (if checked, explain specifically why economic litigation procedures relating to discovery or trial should not apply to this case): 18. Other issues The party or parties request that the following additional matters be considered or determined at the case management conference (specify): 19. Meet and confer a. The party or parties have met and conferred with all parties on all subjects required by rule 3.724 of the California Rules of Court (if not, explain): b. After meeting and conferring as required by rule 3.724 of the California Rules of Court, the parties agree on the following (specify): 20. Total number of pages attached (if any): I am completely familiar with this case and will be fully prepared to discuss the status of discovery and alternative dispute resolution, as well as other issues raised by this statement, and will possess the authority to enter into stipulations on these issues at the time of the case management conference, including the written authority of the party where required. Date: November 6, 2023 Laurie J. Elza, Esq. (SBN 284903) (TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF PARTY OR ATTORNEY) (TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF PARTY OR ATTORNEY) Additional signatures are attached. CM-110 [Rev. September 1, 2021] Page 5 of 5 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT PROOF OF SERVICE 1 LOUIS MONTANO, JR.; et al. v. CITY OF SALINAS; et al. Case No. 21CV003635 [LEAD] 2 [Consolidated w/Case Nos. 22CV002531; 22CV003206; 22CV003261; 22CV003443; and 22CV003598] 3 I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to this action. My business address is: 4 Law Offices of John A. Hauser, One Pointe Drive, 6th Floor, Brea, CA 92821; email address: maureen.merriles@thehartford.com. 5 6 On November 6, 2023, I served a true and correct copy of the following document(s), on the interested party/parties identified on the attached Service List: 7 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT (NTN Properties) 8 9 BY U.S. MAIL I placed the subject document(s) in a sealed envelope or package addressed to the interested 10 party/parties on the attached Service List with postage fully prepaid. I placed the envelope for collection and mailing, following our firm’s ordinary business practices. I am readily 11 familiar with this firm’s practice for collecting and processing correspondence for mailing. 12 On the same day that correspondence is placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course of business with the United States Postal Service. 13 BY OVERNIGHT MAIL 14 I placed the subject document(s) in a sealed envelope or package provided by an overnight delivery carrier addressed to the interested party/parties on the attached Service List. I 15 placed the envelope or package for collection and overnight delivery at a regularly utilized drop box of the overnight delivery carrier. 16 BY MESSENGER 17 I placed the subject document(s) in a sealed envelope or package addressed to the interested party/parties on the attached Service List and provided them to a professional messenger 18 service. BY FACSIMILE to MAYR LAW FIRM *ONLY* 19 Based on an agreement of the parties to accept service by fax transmission, I faxed the 20 document(s) on the interested party/parties on the attached Service List. No error was reported by the fax machine I used. A copy of the record of the fax transmission, which I 21 printed, is attached. BY ELECTRONIC SERVICE 22 Based on applicable law or statute, including California Rule of Court 2.251(C)(3) and/or 23 Code of Civil Procedure § 1010.6), or an agreement of the parties to accept service by electronic transmission, I electronically served the document(s) on the interested 24 party/parties on the attached Service List. 25 26 27 28 1 _____________________________________________________________________________________________ PROOF OF SERVICE CERTIFIED MAIL – RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED 1 I placed the subject document(s) in a sealed envelope or package addressed to the interested 2 party/parties on the attached Service List with postage fully prepaid with a return receipt requested to be signed by the addressee that the documents were received. I placed the 3 envelope for collection and mailing, following our firm’s ordinary business practices. I am 4 readily familiar with this firm’s practice for collecting and processing correspondence for mailing. On the same day that correspondence is placed for collection and mailing, it is 5 deposited in the ordinary course of business with the United States Postal Service. 6 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above 7 is true and correct. 8 Date: November 6, 2023 9 10 __________________________________ MAUREEN MERRILES 11 12 For purposes of serving documents on the Law Offices of John A. Hauser, please use 13 the email address for the attorney of record (Laurie.Elza@thehartford.com) and LawOfficesHauser@thehartford.com. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 _____________________________________________________________________________________________ PROOF OF SERVICE SERVICE LIST 1 LOUIS MONTANO, JR.; et al. v. CITY OF SALINAS; et al. Case No. 21CV003635 [LEAD] 2 [Consolidated w/Case Nos. 22CV002531; 22CV003206; 22CV003261; 22CV003443; and 22CV003598] 3 Emily A. Ruby, Esq. Richard C. Alpers, Esq. 4 Sergio R. Cardenas, Esq. ALPERS LAW GROUP, INC. GREENBERG AND RUBY INJURY P.O. Box 1540 5 ATTORNEYS, APC Aptos, CA 95001 400 Continental Blvd., Ste. 320 T: 855-808-1174 / F: 855-870-1129 6 El Segundo, CA 90245 E: rca@alperslawgroup.com 7 T: 323-782-0535 / F: 323-782-0543 Co-Counsel for Plaintiffs, LOUIS MONTANO, E: eruby@caltrialpros.com; JR.; LOUIE MONTANO III; MICHAEL 8 scardenas@caltrialpros.com; MONTANO kdobroth@caltrialpros.com; 9 records@caltrialpros.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs, LOUIS MONTANO, 10 JR.; LOUIE MONTANO III; MICHAEL 11 MONTANO Christopher A. Callihan, Esq. William R. Price, Esq. 12 OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY D. Scott Dodd, Esq. 200 Lincoln Ave. LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM R. PRICE 13 Salinas, CA 93901 12636 High Bluff Dr., Ste. 400 14 T: 831-758-7256 / F: 831-758-7257 San Diego, CA 92130 E: chrisc@ci.salinas.ca.us T: 831-758-7256 / F: 15 Attorneys for Defendant/Cross-Complainant, E: wprice@williamrprice.com; CITY OF SALINAS sdodd@williamrprice.com; 16 dhartsough@williamrprice.com; obarnes@williamrprice.com 17 Co-Counsel for Defendant/Cross-Complainant, 18 CITY OF SALINAS Cynthia Shambaugh, Esq. Rodney N. Mayr, Esq. 19 Chandrani Mandal, Esq. MAYR LAW FIRM LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH 1010 W. Taylor St. 20 LLP San Jose, CA 95126 21 2185 N. California Blvd., Ste. 300 T: 408-331-7606 / F: 669-266-5612 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 E: rodney@mayrlawfirm.com; 22 T: 925-357-3456 / F: 925-478-3260 emiliano@mayrlawfirm.com E: cynthia.shambaugh@lewisbrisbois.com; Attorneys for Defendants/Cross-Defendants, 23 joan.whipple@lewisbrisbois.com; ROSAURA ARCOS PANIAGUA and AUSTIN chandrani.mandal@lewisbrisbois.com; ALARCON 24 izie.hudson@lewisbrisbois.com 25 Attorneys for Defendants/Cross-Defendants, *SERVE VIA FACSIMILE ALSO – GINO’S RESTAURANT, INC.; GINO’S FINE CONSISTENT PROBLEMS WITH THEIR 26 ITALIAN FOOD, INC. and NGOCHAO THI EMAIL* NGUYEN 27 28 3 _____________________________________________________________________________________________ PROOF OF SERVICE Joseph J. Babich, Esq. Bryan D. Pyles, Esq. 1 Sean D. Wisman, Esq. FORD, WALKER, HAGGERTY & BEHAR, LLP 2 DREYER BABICH BUCCOLA WOOD One World Trade Center, 27th Floor CAMPORA, LLP Long Beach, CA 90831 3 20 Bicentennial Circle T: 562-983-2568/ F: 562-590-3571 Sacramento, CA 95826 E: bpyles@fwhb.com; jprado@fwhb.com; 4 T: 916-379-3500 / F: 916-379-3599 rlrservice@fwhb.com 5 E: jbabich@dbbwc.com; Attorneys for Defendants/Cross-Complainants, swisman@dbbwc.com; tstevens@dbbwc.com; AUSTIN ALARCON and ARTURO MORANDA 6 DBBWC-ESERVICE@dbbwc.com ALARCON– Monterey Superior Court, Attorneys for Plaintiff, MAIRA ARELLANO – 22CV002531; Maira Arellano vs. Austin Alarcon, 7 Monterey Superior Court, Case # 22CV002531; et al. Maira Arellano vs. Austin Alarcon, et al. 8 9 Neil P. Berman, Esq. Shahin “Shawn” Kahroba, Esq. RUCKA, O'BOYLE, LOMBARDO & SHERIDAN & RUND, KAHROBA PC 10 MCKENNA 270 Coral Circle 245 W. Laurel Dr. El Segundo, CA 90245 11 Salinas, CA 93906 T: 310-640-1200 / F: 310-640-0200 12 T: 831-443-1051 / F: 831-443-6419 E: shawn@srlawyers.com E: nberman@rolmlaw.com; Attorneys for Plaintiff, ROBERT ROSSETT – 13 spena@rolmlaw.com; janie@rolmlaw.com Monterey Superior Court, Case # 22CV003261; Attorneys for Plaintiff, DIANE MIDDAUGH – Robert Rossett vs Austin Alarcon, et al. 14 Monterey Superior Court, Case # 22CV003206; Diane Middaugh vs BLFA Properties LLC, et 15 al. 16 Robert D. Ponce, Esq. Owili K. Eison, Esq. 17 LAW OFFICE OF ROBERT D. PONCE Yen-Yu “Renee” Liu, Esq. 400 Camino Aguajito, Ste. 100 BD&J, PC 18 Monterey, CA 93940 9701 Wilshire Blvd., 12th Floor 19 T: 831-649-0515 / F: 831-649-3397 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 E: rponce@redshift.com; T: 310-887-1818 / F: 310-887-1880 20 sgarcia@redshift.com; E: oe@bhattorneys.com; ryl@bhattorneys.com; mbejsovec@redshift.com eservet1@bhattorneys.com; rrg@bhattorneys.com; 21 Attorney for Plaintiff, KEVIN SMITH – lcc@bhattorneys.com Monterey Superior Court, Case # 22CV003443; Attorneys for Plaintiffs, DANIEL ORTEGA and 22 YOSELYN GARCIA – Monterey Superior Court, Kevin Smith vs Gino's Fine Italian Food, Inc., et 23 al. Case # 22CV003598; Daniel Ortega, et al. vs. Austin Alarcon, et al. 24 25 26 27 28 4 _____________________________________________________________________________________________ PROOF OF SERVICE Gina D. Huettel, Esq. 1 WILLIAMS, PINELLI & CULLEN 2 1960 The Alameda, Ste. 195 San Jose, CA 95126 3 T: 408-288-3868 x 109 / F: 408-288-3860 E: ghuettel@wpclaw.com; 4 amagana@wpclaw.com 5 Attorneys for Defendant, BRYAN CABALLERO TENA – Monterey Superior 6 Court, Case # 22CV003598; Daniel Ortega, et al. vs. Austin Alarcon, et al. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 5 _____________________________________________________________________________________________ PROOF OF SERVICE