Beatriz castro, Plaintiff, v. shruja hospitality Inc., Defendant.
Case No.: BC681079
Hearing Date: December 1, 2020
[TENTATIVE] order RE:
plaintiff’s MOTION for a nunc pro tunc order
Plaintiff Beatriz Castro (“Plaintiff”) against Defendant Shruja Hospitality, Inc. (“Defendant”) alleging that her hand became wedged and stuck in an elevator at Defendant’s premises. Plaintiff alleges that the accident occurred on October 18, 2015, and she filed this action on October 24, 2017. The Court held a final status conference on April 9, 2019, during which it advanced and vacated the trial date and set an Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal for failure to serve Defendant. On April 30, 2019, approximately 18 months after the complaint was filed, Plaintiff filed a motion for an order nunc pro tunc to deem the complaint has having been filed on October 18, 2017. The Court denied the motion without prejudice to Plaintiff re-filing the motion after Defendant was served. Plaintiff served Defendant on
Hearing Date
December 01, 2020
Type
Premises Liability (e.g.slip & fall) (General Jurisdiction)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Beatriz castro, Plaintiff, v. shruja hospitality Inc., Defendant.
Case No.: BC681079
Hearing Date: December 1, 2020
[TENTATIVE] order RE:
plaintiff’s MOTION for a nunc pro tunc order
Plaintiff Beatriz Castro (“Plaintiff”) against Defendant Shruja Hospitality, Inc. (“Defendant”) alleging that her hand became wedged and stuck in an elevator at Defendant’s premises. Plaintiff alleges that the accident occurred on October 18, 2015, and she filed this action on October 24, 2017. The Court held a final status conference on April 9, 2019, during which it advanced and vacated the trial date and set an Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal for failure to serve Defendant. On April 30, 2019, approximately 18 months after the complaint was filed, Plaintiff filed a motion for an order nunc pro tunc to deem the complaint has having been filed on October 18, 2017. The Court denied the motion without prejudice to Plaintiff re-filing the motion after Defendant was served. Plaintiff served Defendant on