(Subscribe to View)
September 10, 2018
Los Angeles County, CA
Premises Liablty (e.g. slip & fall (General Jurisdiction)
DOES 1 TO 100 - Defendant/Respondent
MANDELL BARBARA J. ESQ. - Attorney for Defendant/Respondent
MERTZ ROBERT - Defendant and Cross-Defendant
STELING JUSTIN ESQ - Attorney for Plaintiff/Petitioner
STONE GREGORY E. ESQ. - Attorney for Defendant/Respondent
THE VONS COMPANIES INC - Defendant/Respondent
VONS SUPERMARKET - Defendant/Respondent's DBA
WILLIAMS GLEN GEORGE - Plaintiff/Petitioner
Jul 19, 2018
Arsham Melkonian, Et Al. Vs Ophc, Llc Dba Oakpark Healthcare Center, Et Al.
A. Charles Wilson Vs Century City Medical Plaza, L.P., Et Al.
Asif Khan Vs City Of Long Beach
Julian Garcia, Et Al. Vs Heartland Express, Inc., Et Al.
Edmar 1964, Llc Vs Marie Delgadillo
Glenda Johnson Vs Jeremy Newman, Et Al.
Matthew Katz Vs Jay Bernstein, Et Al.
[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND MONETARY SANCTIONS; MOTION OFF-CALENDAR PENDING IDC On October 5, 2017, Plaintiff Glen-George Williams (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants The Vons Companies, Inc. dba Vons Supermarket and Robert Mertz (collectively, “Defendants”) for strict liability (known dangerous propensities), strict liability under Civil Code § 3342, negligence, and premises liability relating to a July 13, 2017 dog bite. Plaintiff moves to compel Defendant’s further responses to requests for production of documents, sets two and three. However, it is the Court’s preference that parties participate in an IDC before hearing the Motion to Compel Further, as an IDC typically facilitates amicable resolution of discovery disputes, avoiding the time and costs incurred on such motions. Further, parties are required to participate in an IDC before motions to compel further re........
You can see and manage all of your alerts under Settings -> Alerts
Please wait a moment while we gather your results.