Preview
1 OMID KHORSHIDI, ESQ., Bar No. 220799
KHORSHIDI LAW FIRM
2 A Professional Law Corporation
8822 W. Olympic Boulevard
3 Beverly Hills, California 90211
Telephone: (310) 273-2211
4 Facsimile: (310) 273-2240
5 Attorneys for Plaintiff,
JOSE ANGEL MENDOZA HERNANDEZ
6
7
8 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
9 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
10
11 JOSE ANGEL MENDOZA HERNANDEZ ) CASE NO.:
Plaintiff, )
12 )
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
13 )
vs. ) Negligence
14 ) Premises Liability
)
KHORSHIDI LAW FIRM, APC
TACOS LOS CARNALES 1, INC., A
Ph.: (310) 273-2211 / Fax: (310) 273-2240
15 CALIFORNIA CORPORATION; AND DOES ) DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
1 THROUGH 100, INCLUSIVE. )
16
8822 W. Olympic Boulevard Blvd.
)
Beverly Hills, California 90211
17 Defendants. )
)
18
19 COMES NOW PLAINTIFF, JOSE ANGEL MENDOZA HERNANDEZ, AND FOR HIS
20 CAUSES OF ACTION AGAINST THE DEFENDANTS AND EACH OF THEM, ALLEGES
21 AS FOLLOWS:
22 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
23 1. All the acts complained of herein occurred in the City of Los Angeles, County of Los
24 Angeles, State of California.
25 2. That the true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate or otherwise,
26 of defendants DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, are unknown to plaintiff at this time, who
27 therefore sues said defendants by such fictitious names, and that when the true names and
28 capacities of said defendants are ascertained, plaintiff will amend this Complaint
Complaint - Mendoza v.
Tacos.wpd
1
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 accordingly; plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that each of the
2 defendants designated herein as DOE is responsible in some manner for the events and
3 happening herein referred to and caused injuries and damages proximately thereby to
4 plaintiff, as herein alleged.
5 3. Plaintiff is, and at all times herein mentioned was, a resident of the County of Los
6 Angeles, State of California.
7 4. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that defendants, and each of them
8 and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, are and at all times herein mentioned were, a
9 corporation duly licensed authorized to do business in the County of Los Angeles, State
10 of California.
11 5. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that defendants, and each of them
12 and DOES 11 through 20, inclusive, were the agents or employees of other named
13 defendants and acted within the scope of that agency or employment.
14 6. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that defendants, and each of them
KHORSHIDI LAW FIRM, APC
Ph.: (310) 273-2211 / Fax: (310) 273-2240
15 and DOES 21 through 100, inclusive, are persons whose capacities are unknown to
16 plaintiff.
8822 W. Olympic Boulevard Blvd.
Beverly Hills, California 90211
17 7. At all times herein mentioned, each defendant was the agent, servant, and employee of
18 the remaining co-defendants, and in doing the acts as alleged herein, was acting within
19 the course and scope of such agency, employment, with the knowledge, consent and
20 permission of the remaining co-defendants.
21 8. At all times herein mentioned defendants, and each of them, negligently, carelessly,
22 recklessly, and/or otherwise unlawfully owned, fabricated, designed, constructed, leased,
23 installed flooring and other component parts, employed, maintained, controlled, cleaned,
24 repaired, managed, inspected, operated, serviced, and/or otherwise exercised dominion
25 over the business premises known as Tacos Los Carnales, located at 4370 South Central
26 Avenue, in the City of Los Angeles, County of Los Angeles, State of California 90011.
27 //
28 //
Complaint - Mendoza v.
Tacos.wpd
2
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 9. That on or about July 24, 2022 at approximately 6:34 p.m., plaintiff was lawfully on
2 defendants' premises for the mutual benefit of plaintiff and the defendants, and each of
3 them.
4 10. At the aforementioned time and place, defendants, and each of them, so negligently
5 maintained, owned, managed, controlled and cleaned the premises so as to allow the
6 accumulation of a hazardous and dangerous condition, i.e. slippery substance on the
7 business ground. The condition of the premises was foreseeably unsafe and created a risk
8 of predisposing a person to fall.
9 11. The slippery substance, and/or foreign substance on the floor was a dangerous condition
10 known, or in, the exercise of ordinary and reasonable care should have been known, to
11 defendants, and each of them, in adequate time for a reasonable prudent person to have
12 removed or properly warned persons, including plaintiff, of the dangerous condition.
13 12. Defendants had a duty of care to warn persons such as plaintiff of the dangerous
14 condition by placing a cone, a mat, or other warning sign near the slippery substance, or
KHORSHIDI LAW FIRM, APC
Ph.: (310) 273-2211 / Fax: (310) 273-2240
15 other foreign substance on the business ground.
16 13. Plaintiff further alleges that Defendants, including but not limited to TACOS LOS
8822 W. Olympic Boulevard Blvd.
Beverly Hills, California 90211
17 CARNALES 1, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION; AND DOES 1 THROUGH
18 100, INCLUSIVE., negligently, carelessly, recklessly, and/or otherwise unlawfully
19 owned, designed, constructed, leased, occupied, operated, controlled, managed,
20 maintained, repaired, inspected, and/or otherwise exercised dominion over the business
21 premises at the Tacos Los Carnales where Plaintiff fell.
22 14. As a proximate result of said negligence of the defendants, and each of them, the ground
23 at the business premises was slippery and plaintiff did slip and fall due to the slippery
24 substance, or other foreign substance on the business ground, while walking in the
25 defendant's premises within an area designed, constructed, installed by and controlled by
26 the defendant, sustaining severe injuries and damages.
27 //
28 //
Complaint - Mendoza v.
Tacos.wpd
3
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 15. The said fall and injury of plaintiff were legally caused by the negligence, carelessness
2 and breach of duty of Defendants, and each of them, in that Defendants and each of them
3 failed to guard or protect patrons on the premises from falling on the business grounds;
4 failed to give adequate warning to plaintiff; and failed to comply with statutory codes or
5 other regulating requirements regarding the safety of the business premises.
6 16. That as a proximate and direct result of the negligence, recklessness and carelessness of
7 the defendants, and each of them, plaintiff has sustained, and in the future in certain to
8 sustain disabling, serious and permanent injuries, pain, suffering and mental anguish in
9 connection therewith, all to her general damages in a sum according to proof at trial.
10 17. Defendants, and each of them, failed to remedy and/or adequately warn of said
11 aforementioned dangerous, defective, deteriorated, and/or otherwise unsafe condition on
12 the business grounds, although they knew, or in the exercise of due care should have
13 known, of same.
14 18. Plaintiff is informed and believe and thereon alleges that Defendants TACOS LOS
KHORSHIDI LAW FIRM, APC
Ph.: (310) 273-2211 / Fax: (310) 273-2240
15 CARNALES 1, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION; AND DOES 1 THROUGH
16 100, INCLUSIVE., had a duty to exercise due care in the selection, training, instruction,
8822 W. Olympic Boulevard Blvd.
Beverly Hills, California 90211
17 supervision, and hiring of their staff and Does 1 through 100, in order to protect Plaintiff
18 from injury on July 24, 2022.
19 19. Further, Defendants TACOS LOS CARNALES 1, INC., A CALIFORNIA
20 CORPORATION; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 100, INCLUSIVE. owed a duty of care to
21 hire contractors and other persons who were duly licensed and who performed their
22 services in a reasonable and workmanlike fashion.
23 //
24 //
25 //
26 //
27 //
28 //
Complaint - Mendoza v.
Tacos.wpd
4
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 20. As a proximate result of the negligence, carelessness and unlawfulness of Defendants and
2 each of them, Plaintiff JOSE ANGEL MENDOZA HERNANDEZ was hurt and injured
3 in his health, strength and activity, sustaining injury to his body and shock and injury to
4 his nervous system, all of which said injuries have caused and continued to cause said
5 Plaintiff great mental, physical and nervous pain and suffering. Plaintiff is informed and
6 believes, and thereon alleges that said injuries will result in some permanent disability to
7 said Plaintiff, all to his general damage in a sum to be specified according to law.
8 21. That as a proximate and direct result of the negligence, recklessness and carelessness of
9 the defendants, and each of them, plaintiff has sustained, and in the future is certain to
10 sustain disabling, serious and permanent injuries, pain, suffering and mental anguish in
11 connection therewith, all to her general damages in a sum according to proof at trial.
12 22. As a further, proximate result of said negligence of Defendants, JOSE ANGEL
13 MENDOZA HERNANDEZ was required to, and did, incur bills for physicians, surgeons,
14 drugs, medicines, x-rays, and other medical technicians and medical personnel, and other
KHORSHIDI LAW FIRM, APC
Ph.: (310) 273-2211 / Fax: (310) 273-2240
15 related expenses, all to his damage in a presently unascertained amount, the allegations of
16 which Plaintiff prays leave to insert herein when the same are finally determined.
8822 W. Olympic Boulevard Blvd.
Beverly Hills, California 90211
17
18 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL:
19 Plaintiff hereby demands a jury trial on all claims for relief alleged in, and on all issues
20 raised by, this Complaint.
21 //
22 //
23 //
24 //
25 //
26 //
27 //
28 //
Complaint - Mendoza v.
Tacos.wpd
5
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 PRAYER:
2 WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays for judgment against the defendants, and each of them, as
3 follows:
4 1. For general damages according to proof;
5 2. For special damages for X-ray, medical and sundry expenses, according to proof;
6 3. For the costs of suit incurred herein; and
7 4. For such other and further relief as the court may deem just and proper.
8
9 DATED: April 29, 2024 KHORSHIDI LAW FIRM, APC
10
11 By: _______________________
Khorshidi Law Firm, APC
OMID KHORSHIDI
Ph.: (310) 273-2211 / Fax: (310) 273-2240
12 Attorney for Plaintiff,
Beverly Hills, California 90211
JOSE ANGEL MENDOZA
8822 W. Olympic Blvd.
13 HERNANDEZ
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Complaint - Mendoza v.
Tacos.wpd
6
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Preview
1 OMID KHORSHIDI, ESQ., Bar No. 220799 KHORSHIDI LAW FIRM 2 A Professional Law Corporation 8822 W. Olympic Boulevard 3 Beverly Hills, California 90211 Telephone: (310) 273-2211 4 Facsimile: (310) 273-2240 5 Attorneys for Plaintiff, JOSE ANGEL MENDOZA HERNANDEZ 6 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 9 COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 10 11 JOSE ANGEL MENDOZA HERNANDEZ ) CASE NO.: Plaintiff, ) 12 ) COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 13 ) vs. ) Negligence 14 ) Premises Liability ) KHORSHIDI LAW FIRM, APC TACOS LOS CARNALES 1, INC., A Ph.: (310) 273-2211 / Fax: (310) 273-2240 15 CALIFORNIA CORPORATION; AND DOES ) DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 1 THROUGH 100, INCLUSIVE. ) 16 8822 W. Olympic Boulevard Blvd. ) Beverly Hills, California 90211 17 Defendants. ) ) 18 19 COMES NOW PLAINTIFF, JOSE ANGEL MENDOZA HERNANDEZ, AND FOR HIS 20 CAUSES OF ACTION AGAINST THE DEFENDANTS AND EACH OF THEM, ALLEGES 21 AS FOLLOWS: 22 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 23 1. All the acts complained of herein occurred in the City of Los Angeles, County of Los 24 Angeles, State of California. 25 2. That the true names and capacities, whether individual, corporate, associate or otherwise, 26 of defendants DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, are unknown to plaintiff at this time, who 27 therefore sues said defendants by such fictitious names, and that when the true names and 28 capacities of said defendants are ascertained, plaintiff will amend this Complaint Complaint - Mendoza v. Tacos.wpd 1 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 accordingly; plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that each of the 2 defendants designated herein as DOE is responsible in some manner for the events and 3 happening herein referred to and caused injuries and damages proximately thereby to 4 plaintiff, as herein alleged. 5 3. Plaintiff is, and at all times herein mentioned was, a resident of the County of Los 6 Angeles, State of California. 7 4. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that defendants, and each of them 8 and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, are and at all times herein mentioned were, a 9 corporation duly licensed authorized to do business in the County of Los Angeles, State 10 of California. 11 5. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that defendants, and each of them 12 and DOES 11 through 20, inclusive, were the agents or employees of other named 13 defendants and acted within the scope of that agency or employment. 14 6. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that defendants, and each of them KHORSHIDI LAW FIRM, APC Ph.: (310) 273-2211 / Fax: (310) 273-2240 15 and DOES 21 through 100, inclusive, are persons whose capacities are unknown to 16 plaintiff. 8822 W. Olympic Boulevard Blvd. Beverly Hills, California 90211 17 7. At all times herein mentioned, each defendant was the agent, servant, and employee of 18 the remaining co-defendants, and in doing the acts as alleged herein, was acting within 19 the course and scope of such agency, employment, with the knowledge, consent and 20 permission of the remaining co-defendants. 21 8. At all times herein mentioned defendants, and each of them, negligently, carelessly, 22 recklessly, and/or otherwise unlawfully owned, fabricated, designed, constructed, leased, 23 installed flooring and other component parts, employed, maintained, controlled, cleaned, 24 repaired, managed, inspected, operated, serviced, and/or otherwise exercised dominion 25 over the business premises known as Tacos Los Carnales, located at 4370 South Central 26 Avenue, in the City of Los Angeles, County of Los Angeles, State of California 90011. 27 // 28 // Complaint - Mendoza v. Tacos.wpd 2 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 9. That on or about July 24, 2022 at approximately 6:34 p.m., plaintiff was lawfully on 2 defendants' premises for the mutual benefit of plaintiff and the defendants, and each of 3 them. 4 10. At the aforementioned time and place, defendants, and each of them, so negligently 5 maintained, owned, managed, controlled and cleaned the premises so as to allow the 6 accumulation of a hazardous and dangerous condition, i.e. slippery substance on the 7 business ground. The condition of the premises was foreseeably unsafe and created a risk 8 of predisposing a person to fall. 9 11. The slippery substance, and/or foreign substance on the floor was a dangerous condition 10 known, or in, the exercise of ordinary and reasonable care should have been known, to 11 defendants, and each of them, in adequate time for a reasonable prudent person to have 12 removed or properly warned persons, including plaintiff, of the dangerous condition. 13 12. Defendants had a duty of care to warn persons such as plaintiff of the dangerous 14 condition by placing a cone, a mat, or other warning sign near the slippery substance, or KHORSHIDI LAW FIRM, APC Ph.: (310) 273-2211 / Fax: (310) 273-2240 15 other foreign substance on the business ground. 16 13. Plaintiff further alleges that Defendants, including but not limited to TACOS LOS 8822 W. Olympic Boulevard Blvd. Beverly Hills, California 90211 17 CARNALES 1, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 18 100, INCLUSIVE., negligently, carelessly, recklessly, and/or otherwise unlawfully 19 owned, designed, constructed, leased, occupied, operated, controlled, managed, 20 maintained, repaired, inspected, and/or otherwise exercised dominion over the business 21 premises at the Tacos Los Carnales where Plaintiff fell. 22 14. As a proximate result of said negligence of the defendants, and each of them, the ground 23 at the business premises was slippery and plaintiff did slip and fall due to the slippery 24 substance, or other foreign substance on the business ground, while walking in the 25 defendant's premises within an area designed, constructed, installed by and controlled by 26 the defendant, sustaining severe injuries and damages. 27 // 28 // Complaint - Mendoza v. Tacos.wpd 3 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 15. The said fall and injury of plaintiff were legally caused by the negligence, carelessness 2 and breach of duty of Defendants, and each of them, in that Defendants and each of them 3 failed to guard or protect patrons on the premises from falling on the business grounds; 4 failed to give adequate warning to plaintiff; and failed to comply with statutory codes or 5 other regulating requirements regarding the safety of the business premises. 6 16. That as a proximate and direct result of the negligence, recklessness and carelessness of 7 the defendants, and each of them, plaintiff has sustained, and in the future in certain to 8 sustain disabling, serious and permanent injuries, pain, suffering and mental anguish in 9 connection therewith, all to her general damages in a sum according to proof at trial. 10 17. Defendants, and each of them, failed to remedy and/or adequately warn of said 11 aforementioned dangerous, defective, deteriorated, and/or otherwise unsafe condition on 12 the business grounds, although they knew, or in the exercise of due care should have 13 known, of same. 14 18. Plaintiff is informed and believe and thereon alleges that Defendants TACOS LOS KHORSHIDI LAW FIRM, APC Ph.: (310) 273-2211 / Fax: (310) 273-2240 15 CARNALES 1, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 16 100, INCLUSIVE., had a duty to exercise due care in the selection, training, instruction, 8822 W. Olympic Boulevard Blvd. Beverly Hills, California 90211 17 supervision, and hiring of their staff and Does 1 through 100, in order to protect Plaintiff 18 from injury on July 24, 2022. 19 19. Further, Defendants TACOS LOS CARNALES 1, INC., A CALIFORNIA 20 CORPORATION; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 100, INCLUSIVE. owed a duty of care to 21 hire contractors and other persons who were duly licensed and who performed their 22 services in a reasonable and workmanlike fashion. 23 // 24 // 25 // 26 // 27 // 28 // Complaint - Mendoza v. Tacos.wpd 4 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 20. As a proximate result of the negligence, carelessness and unlawfulness of Defendants and 2 each of them, Plaintiff JOSE ANGEL MENDOZA HERNANDEZ was hurt and injured 3 in his health, strength and activity, sustaining injury to his body and shock and injury to 4 his nervous system, all of which said injuries have caused and continued to cause said 5 Plaintiff great mental, physical and nervous pain and suffering. Plaintiff is informed and 6 believes, and thereon alleges that said injuries will result in some permanent disability to 7 said Plaintiff, all to his general damage in a sum to be specified according to law. 8 21. That as a proximate and direct result of the negligence, recklessness and carelessness of 9 the defendants, and each of them, plaintiff has sustained, and in the future is certain to 10 sustain disabling, serious and permanent injuries, pain, suffering and mental anguish in 11 connection therewith, all to her general damages in a sum according to proof at trial. 12 22. As a further, proximate result of said negligence of Defendants, JOSE ANGEL 13 MENDOZA HERNANDEZ was required to, and did, incur bills for physicians, surgeons, 14 drugs, medicines, x-rays, and other medical technicians and medical personnel, and other KHORSHIDI LAW FIRM, APC Ph.: (310) 273-2211 / Fax: (310) 273-2240 15 related expenses, all to his damage in a presently unascertained amount, the allegations of 16 which Plaintiff prays leave to insert herein when the same are finally determined. 8822 W. Olympic Boulevard Blvd. Beverly Hills, California 90211 17 18 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL: 19 Plaintiff hereby demands a jury trial on all claims for relief alleged in, and on all issues 20 raised by, this Complaint. 21 // 22 // 23 // 24 // 25 // 26 // 27 // 28 // Complaint - Mendoza v. Tacos.wpd 5 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 PRAYER: 2 WHEREFORE, plaintiff prays for judgment against the defendants, and each of them, as 3 follows: 4 1. For general damages according to proof; 5 2. For special damages for X-ray, medical and sundry expenses, according to proof; 6 3. For the costs of suit incurred herein; and 7 4. For such other and further relief as the court may deem just and proper. 8 9 DATED: April 29, 2024 KHORSHIDI LAW FIRM, APC 10 11 By: _______________________ Khorshidi Law Firm, APC OMID KHORSHIDI Ph.: (310) 273-2211 / Fax: (310) 273-2240 12 Attorney for Plaintiff, Beverly Hills, California 90211 JOSE ANGEL MENDOZA 8822 W. Olympic Blvd. 13 HERNANDEZ 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Complaint - Mendoza v. Tacos.wpd 6 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES