Motion,Ex Parte: SHERLENE WONG, et al vs. STILLWATER INSURANCE COMPANY, et al

• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                1    HERSHENSON ROSENBERG-WOHL
                  A Professional Corporation
             2
                  DAVID M. ROSENBERG-WOHL (SBN 132924)
             3    315 Montgomery St., 10th Fl.                                                       2/25/2021
                  San Francisco, California 94104
             4    Telephone: (415) 829-4330
                  david@hrw-law.com
             5

             6
                  Attorneys for Plaintiffs, Sherlene and Lawrence Wong

             7                                      SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA

             8                                      FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
             9
                   SHERLENE AND LAWRENCE WONG, )                                Case No. 19CIV01195
                                                                                              )
            10                                                         )                      )
                                     Plaintiffs,                      )         NOTICE OF     )   MOTION AND
            11              vs.                                       )         MOTION )TO RECONSIDER ORDER
            12
                                                                       )        GRANTING      )  SUMMARY JUDGMENT
                   STILLWATER INSURANCE                                )        AGAINST PLAINTIFFS:
            13     COMPANY, and DOES 1 through 20,                    )         (1)  TO RECONSIDER AND REVERSE
                   inclusive,                                         )              THE BASIS FOR ITS ORDER
            14                                                        )              GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT
            15
                                     Defendants.                      )              (CCP 1008); AND ALTERNATIVELY
                                                                                (2)  TO RECONSIDER AND HOLD IN
            16                                                                       ABEYANCE ITS ORDER GRANTING
                                                                                     SUMMARY JUDGMENT PENDING
            17                                                                       HEARING ON MOTION PLAINTIFFS
            18
                                                                                     MAY MAKE PERMITTING “LATE”
                                                                                     DISCLOSURE (CCP 2034.710; 720
            19                                                                       AND CCP 1008)
            20                                                                  SEPARATELY: MPA; DRW DEC ISO
            21
                                                                                SAME; [PROP] ORDER

            22                                                                  Date:     March 30, 2021        5/18/2021
                                                                                Time:     2:00 pm
            23                                                                  Dep’t:    Judge Fineman (4)
            24

            25

            26

            27

            28
                  NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO RECONSIDER
             1             TO DEFENDANT, TO ITS ATTORNEYS OF RECORD, AND THIS COURT:
             2
                           Please take notice that, on March 30, 2021, at 2:00 pm, in Dept. 4, Plaintiffs will and
             3
                  hereby do more for reconsideration of this Court’s order granting summary judgment against
             4
                  them as follows.1
             5

             6             (1)  to reconsider and reverse the basis for its order granting summary judgment, namely

             7                 its determination that Plaintiffs are precluded as a matter of law from introducing at
             8
                               trial the expert testimony of Dr. Anand Kasbekar due to failure to disclose him as a
             9
                               testifying expert as required by CCP 2034.260(a). Such motion will be made under
            10
                               CCP 1008(a) which permits a court to reconsider, modify, amend or revoke a prior
            11

            12                 order “based upon new or different facts, circumstances, or law”; and, in the

            13                 alternative,
            14
                           (2)  to reconsider and hold in abeyance its order granting summary judgment pending
            15
                               hearing on a motion Plaintiffs may make to seek an order permitting “late” disclosure
            16
                               of Dr. Kasbekar under CCP 2034.710 and CCP 2034.720, along with CCP 1008(a).
            17

            18
                  DATED:      February 16, 2021                                  HERSHENSON ROSENBERG-WOHL,
            19                                                                   A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
            20
                                                                              By:
            21                                                                David M. Rosenberg-Wohl
                                                                              Attorneys for Plaintiffs,
            22                                                                SHERLENE AND LAWRENCE WONG
            23

            24

            25

            26

            27
                  1
                           The parties have met and conferred in advance of this motion. See accompanying
            28    Declaration of David M. Rosenberg-Wohl, at ¶ 24.
                  NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO RECONSIDER