Source: https://trellis.law/ca/motion-type/motion-to-intervene-87
Timestamp: 2020-02-20 10:24:25
Document Index: 531766592

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 387', '§ 387', '§ 387', '§ 387', '§ 387', '§ 452', '§ 387', '§ 3852', '§ 473', '§ 1005', '§ 1281', '§ 387', '§ 387', '§ 3852']

Intervention is the procedure whereby someone not named as a party to an action (or ordered joined as a party) may nevertheless become a party. Code of Civ. Proc., § 387. “The purpose of allowing intervention is to promote fairness by involving all parties potentially affected by a judgment.” Simpson Redwood Co. v. State of California (1987) 196 Cal.App.3d 1192, 1199.
Joining a plaintiff in claiming what is sought by the complaint.
Uniting with a defendant in resisting the claims of a plaintiff.”
Code of Civ. Proc., § 387(b).
Mandatory and Permissive Interventions
There are two types of interventions (mandatory and permissive), both of which require that the party seeking to intervene have an interest in the action. Hodge v. Kirkpatrick Development, Inc. (2005) 130 Cal.App.4th 540, 546, 554.
With regards to mandatory intervention, “[t]he court shall, upon timely application, permit a nonparty to intervene in the action or proceeding if either of the following conditions is satisfied:
A provision of law confers an unconditional right to intervene.
The person seeking intervention claims an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action and that person is so situated that the disposition of the action may impair or impede that person’s ability to protect that interest, unless that person’s interest is adequately represented by one or more of the existing parties.”
Code of Civ. Proc., § 387(d)(1).
Permissive Interventions
In contrast, permissive intervention allows that “[t]he court may, upon timely application, permit a nonparty to intervene in the action or proceeding if the person has an interest in the matter in litigation, or in the success of either of the parties, or an interest against both.” Code of Civ. Proc., § 387(d)(2); Fireman’s Fund Ins. Co. v. Gerlach (1976) 56 Cal.App.3d 299, 303-305; U.S. Ecology, Inc. v. State of Calif. (2001) 92 Cal.Ap.4th 113, 140; City & County of San Francisco v. State of Calif. (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 1030, 1037.
To establish a direct and immediate interest in the litigation for purposes of permissive intervention, a non-party seeking intervention must show that he or she stands to gain or lose by direct operation of the judgment, even if no specific interest in the property or transaction at issue exists. Simpson Redwood Co. v. State of California (1987) 196 Cal.App.3d 1192, 1201. The party need not have any pecuniary interest in the dispute. Simpson Redwood Co. v. State of Calif. (1987) 196 Cal.App.3d 1192, 1201.
“[T]he trial court has discretion to permit a nonparty to intervene where the following factors are met:
the nonparty has a direct and immediate interest in the action;
the intervention will not enlarge the issues in the litigation; and
the reasons for the intervention outweigh any opposition by the parties presently in the action.”
Reliance Ins. Co. v. Super. Ct., 84 Cal.App.4th 383, 386 (2000).
“A person has a direct interest justifying intervention in litigation where the judgment in the action of itself adds to or detracts from his legal rights without reference to rights and duties not involved in the litigation.” City and County of San Francisco v. State (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 1030, 1037.
“In order that a party may be permitted to intervene it is not necessary that his interest in the action be such that he will inevitably be affected by the judgment. It is enough that there be a substantial probability that his interests will also be so affected.” Timberidge Enterprises, Inc. v. City of Santa Rosa (1978) 86 Cal.App.3d 873, 881-82. Even where intervention is permissive, the statute is to be liberally construed in favor of intervention. See Lindelli v. Town of San Anselmo, 139 Cal.App.4th 1499, 1505 (2006).
However, a trial court has discretion to deny intervention even when a “direct interest” is shown, if the interests of the original litigants outweigh the intervenor’s concerns. Marriage of Kerr (1986) 185 Cal.App.3d 130, 134; City of Malibu v. California Coastal Comm’n. (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 897, 906. But a proposed intervenor’s interest is insufficient “when the action in which intervention is sought does not directly affect it although the results of the action may indirectly benefit or harm its owner.” Lindelli v. Town of San Anselmo (2006) 139 Cal.App.4th 1499, 1505].
Whether intervention is mandatory and permissive, the party seeking to intervene must make “timely” application to the court. Code of Civ. Proc., § 387(a). “Aside from the statutory limitation... it is the general rule that a right to intervene should be asserted within a reasonable time and that the intervener must not be guilty of an unreasonable delay after knowledge of the suit.” Allen v. Cal. Water & Tel. Co. (1947) 31 Cal.2d 104, 108. However, “[t]imeliness is hardly a reason to bar intervention when a direct interest is demonstrated and the real parties in interest have not shown any prejudice other than being required to prove their case.” See Truck Ins. Exch. v. Super. Ct. (1997) 60 Cal.App.4th 342, 351. “[T]he timeliness of a motion to intervene under section 387 should be determined based on the date the proposed interveners knew or should have known their interests in the litigation were not being adequately represented.” Ziani Homeowners Assn. v. Brookfield Ziani LLC (2015) 243 Cal.App.4th 274, 282.
Most Useful Motion to Intervene Examples
JAMES PAGANO VS GRAEBEL VAN LINES HOLDINGS LLC ET AL
MOVING PARTY: Proposed intervenor Arch Insurance Co. RESPONDING PARTY: None Motion to Intervene The court considered the moving papers. BACKGROUND On August 24, 2017, plaintiff James Pagano filed a complaint against defendants Graebel Van Lines Holdings, LLC, Graebel Van Lines, Graebel Van Line...
...shall, upon timely application, permit a nonparty to intervene in the action or proceeding if either of the following conditions is satisfied: (A) A provision of law confers an unconditional right to intervene. (B) The person seeking intervention claims an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action and that person is so situated that the disposition of the action may ...
RAMON VALENTIM ET AL VS TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS AMERICA INC E
VALENTIM v. TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS AMERICA, INC. MOTION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE IN ACTION TENTATIVE RULING Grant motion for leave to intervene; require Sophia Valentim to file and serve her proposed complaint-in-intervention forthwith DISCUSSION I. Background This wrongful death case was part of the Actos litigation. Afonso Valentim died ...
...final order. The Court apparently did not receive any proposed stipulated order. In the instant motion, Sophia Valentim seeks an order permitting her to intervene as a party in the litigation. Motion to intervene A. Standards governing intervention Intervention is the procedure whereby someone not named as a party to an action (or ordered joined as a party) may nevertheless become a party. An intervention ta...
BRENNAN VS. BRENNAN
HEARING ON MOTION FOR ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO INTERVENE & STAY FILED BY GREGORY KLEIN, LAURENCE KLEIN * TENTATIVE RULING: * The motion for leave to intervene is denied without prejudice. All requests for judicial notice are unopposed and granted. I. Background Daniel and Kathleen Brennan are defendants in this title action, brought by their son David, co...
...against Daniel’s interest in the property. In anticipation of being allowed to intervene, they have also opposed David’s motion for judgment on the pleadings. II. Motion to Intervene A non-party may intervene if they “claim[] an interest relating to the property or transaction that is the subject of the action” and are “so situated that the disposition of the action may impair or impede that person’s abili...
...al. MOTION TO INTERVENE Moving Party: Third Party John M. Gerro, Trustee of the Gerro Revocable Family 1992 Trust Responding Party: Plaintiff Arsen Mesropyan RELIEF REQUESTED: Order granting leave to intervene in this matter FACTUAL and PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND: Plaintiff Arsen Mesropyan alleges he is the pastor of the Armenian Light and Life Church which is currently a tenant of three parcels of property in...
...million, and that as a consequence of the breaches, plaintiff’s church may have to relocate, and plaintiff suffer actual damages of the costs of the move. On June 7, 2019, the court heard a Motion to Intervene and Expunge Lis Pendens brought by the moving third party, John M. Gerro, Trustee of the Gerro Revocable Family 1992 Trust. The court published its tentative ruling, which was to deny the motion witho...
BRODERICK MORRIS ET AL VS JOHN BRANCA ET AL
...Third-party Katherine Jackson (“Mrs. Jackson”) Resp. Party: Defendants John Branca and John McClain, executors of the Estate of Michael J. Jackson (“defendants”) The motion by Mrs. Katherine Jackson to intervene is DENIED. Defendants’ Request for Judicial Notice is GRANTED. (See Evid. Code, § 452(d).) BACKGROUND: Plaintiffs Broderick Morris and Qadree El-Amin commenced this action on 5/7/13 against defen...
...(“Jackson”), specifically, the formation of a new company, The Michael Jackson Company (“TMJC”). There is a dispute as to the parties’ ownership interests in TMJC. On 4/14/14, the Court granted defendants’ motion for abatement. The instant action was abated until there was a final adjudication in the Probate Court of an 850 petition in BP117321. On March 27, 2017, the Probate Court issued its ruling on the sec...
Community West Bank NA vs Rossana Figuerola
Nature of Proceedings: Motion to Intervene Motion to Intervene Ruling The court denies Figuerola Group, Inc.’s motion to intervene in this action. Background This is an action for breach of contract and money had and received arising out of a commercial guaranty. Plaintiff Community West Bank, N.A., loaned money to Figuerola Gr...
...Defendant answered the complaint. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is set for hearing on April 23, 2013. Trial is set for July 30, 2013. Motion to Intervene Figuerola Group, Inc. (“FGI”) moves to intervene in this action. FGI argues: Intervention is appropriate because FGI is allegedly a party to a promissory note and any judgment regarding the note will affect FGI. If it cannot intervene, FGI cannot be...
Recent Examples of Motion to Intervene
Randall S. Stamen
NELSON GONZALEZ VS GUILLERMO RODRIGUEZ, ET AL.
Angel Lopez v. LAD-MB, LLC dba Downtown LA Motors, et al. CASE NO.: 19STCV37671 MOTION TO COMPEL ARBITRATION MOVING PARTY: Defendants LAD-MB, LLC dba Downtown LA Motors and Lithia Motors, Inc. RESPONDING PARTY(S): Plaintiff Angel Lopez STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS AND/OR PROCEEDINGS: ...
...disability discrimination and related claims. Defendants LAD-MB, LLC and Lithia Motors move to compel arbitration. TENTATIVE RULING: Defendants LAD-MB, LLC dba Downtown LA Motors and Lithia Motors, Inc.’s motion to compel arbitration is GRANTED. The action is stayed pending conclusion of the arbitration. Any and all future dates are advanced and vacated. A Status Conference/OSC re: Dismissal is set for Febru...
JOSE GUEVARA VS THE ARCHITECTS COLLECTIVE INC ET AL
...THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT JOSE GUEVARA, etc., Plaintiff, vs. THE ARCHITECTS COLLECTIVE, INC., etc., et al., Defendants. CASE NO.: BC718366 [TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: MOTION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE Date: February 19, 2020 Time: 8:30 a.m. Dept. 56 FSC: October 20, 2020 Jury Trial: October 26, 2020 MOVING PARTY: Midwest Employers Cas. Co. (“MEC”) RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff Jose Guevara Th...
...negligence against Defendants. MEC filed a motion for an order granting it leave to intervene by filing its complaint and an order deeming that pleading filed and served. MEC asserts that it has a right to intervene so that its claims for reimbursement of the workers compensation benefits can be heard in this one action. The Court finds that Plaintiff’s opposition is void of any argument or legal authority as to...
BATES V. SINGH
Intervenor ACCO Engineered Systems, Inc.’s unopposed motion for leave to intervene in this action is GRANTED. (Code Civ. Proc., § 387, subd. (b); Lab. Code, §§ 3852, 3853.) If no hearing is requested, this tentative ruling is effective immediately. No formal order pursuant to Califo...
County Yolo County, CA
Judge Sonia Cortés
DE GUZMAN VS FRANI
Tentative Rulings on Four Motions to Compel Discovery DeGuzman v. Frani, Case No. 2018-59861 February 21, 2020, 1:30 p.m., Dept. 72 1. Overview and Procedural Posture. This is a partition action apparently arising out of a long r...
...47-52. Plaintiff answered the FAC, and cross-complained for breach of contract. ROA 53-54. Plaintiff has answered the cross-complaint. ROA 58. Defendant filed, in early January 2020, four discovery motions. ROA 63-67. She seeks the imposition of monetary sanctions. Plaintiff filed a "response" on January 21, 2020 in which he disputes the timing of his receipt of the discovery requests, claims an interv...
...HEALTH SYSTEMS – SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA d.b.a. PROVIDENCE TARZANA MEDICAL CENTER, etc., et al., Defendants. CASE NO.: 19STCV05230 [TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: DEMURRERS TO PLAINTIFF’S THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT; MOTIONS TO STRIKE Date: February 18, 2020 Time: 8:30 a.m. Dept. 56 FSC: April 6, 2020 Jury Trial: April 20, 2020 MOVING PARTIES: Defendant Providence Health Systems—Southern California d.b.a. Providenc...
...filed a demurrer to the first, second, fourth, fifth, and sixth causes of action in the TAC. Reyes filed a demurrer to the first and sixth causes of action in the TAC. PHS and Reyes also filed respective motions to strike MEET AND CONFER Both PHS and Reyes have met the meet and confer requirement. JUDICIAL NOTICE The Court GRANTS Reyes’ request for judicial notice. PHS’ DEMURRER “A demurrer tests the s...
...DISTRICT SEAN ROSS PAUL, Plaintiff, vs. TISHMAN SPEYER ARCHSTONE-SMITH OAKWOOD TOLUCA HILLS, etc., et al., Defendants. CASE NO.: BC724056 [TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: DEMURRER TO PLAINTIFF’S SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT; MOTION TO STRIKE Date: February 18, 2020 Time: 8:30 a.m. Dept. 56 FSC: October 6, 2020 Jury Trial: October 19, 2020 MOVING PARTIES: Defendants AvalonBay Communities, Inc. (“AvalonBay”) and Archstone Oa...
...with respect to a construction project at Plaintiff’s apartment complex where he was a tenant. Defendants filed a demurrer to the third and eighth causes of action in the SAC. Defendants also filed a motion to strike portions of the SAC. MEET AND CONFER The meet and confer requirement has been met. DEMURRER “A demurrer tests the sufficiency of a complaint as a matter of law.” (Durell v. Sharp Healthc...
COLVIS VS. GARAVENTA
HEARING ON MOTION TO VACATE DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE FILED BY JOSEPH L. GARAVENTA * TENTATIVE RULING: * The motion of plaintiff Joseph Garaventa (joined by Linda Garaventa Colvis) to vacate the dismissal of this entire case is granted. To call a spade a spade, this is a blatant attempt by defendants’ counsel to pu...
...the only remedy available to the remaining plaintiffs would’ve been a motion for relief under Code of Civil Procedure § 473(b), and therefore unavailable now because of the six-month time limit on such motions. As the conspiracy theorists like to say, it is doubtless “no coincidence” that defendants’ own discovery of the facial overbreadth of the dismissal came to light just outside that six-month deadline...
Judge Charles S. Treat
ZAMORA VS. SPECIALIZED LOAN
...default as of October 2009, which was before there was any issue concerning plaintiff’s receipt of monthly statements. This could prove fatal to the breach of contract cause of action in the context of a motion for summary judgment or at trial. With regard to the alleged breach of failing to send monthly statements, the issue of whether plaintiff has adequately alleged causation is a closer call. Defendant,...
DIANA HOLLOWAY ET AL VS JOYCE EISENBERG KEEFER MEDICAL CENTE
...Neglect (Covina Rehabilitation Center only) Professional Negligence Violation of Patient’s Bill of Rights Wrongful Death Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress Defendant brings this demurrer and motion to strike. First Cause of Action, Elder Abuse: OVERRULED To trigger the enhanced remedies provided by the Elder Abuse Act, the Plaintiffs must allege and prove facts demonstrating physical abuse or...
...distress in California is typically analyzed by reference to two ‘theories’ of recovery: the ‘bystander’ theory and the ‘direct victim’ theory. We have repeatedly recognized that the negligent causing of emotional distress is not an independent tort, but the tort of negligence. The traditional elements of duty, breach of duty, causation and damages apply. Whether a defendant owes a duty of care is a question ...
COURTNEY AMOS VS. EDUCATION MANAGEMENT CORPORATION
...Federal court guidance to determine whether a motion to intervene is timely. See Ziani Homeowners Assn. v. Brookfield Ziani LLC, 243 Cal. 4th 274, 281 (2015). The Ninth Circuit has held that a motion to intervene is timely when it is filed one or two months after the intervenor discovers that its interests are no longer being adequately represented in a matter. Officers for Justice v. Civil Service Comm. of Ci...
...filed his motion to intervene one month after the POA changed its position, we conclude Calabro's motion was timely."); Legal Aid Soc. Of Alameda Co. v. Dunlop, 618 F. 2d 48, 50 (9th Cir. 1980) (finding motion to intervene filed two months change in position forced the intervention .was timely)." (Reply at p. 6:13-26.) National Union claims an interest in the success of Defendants Education Management Corp...
... motion for leave to intervene and to file its complaint in intervention in the Geiger Action, and proof being made to the satisfaction of the Court and good cause appearing, the Court GRANTS Colony's motion. The Court will sign the proposed order.
SOCAL LIEN SOLUTIONS LLC VS TAMMY STARNES, ET AL.
SOCAL LIEN SOLUTIONS LLC; Plaintiff, vs. tAMMY STARNES, et al.; Defendants. Case No.: 19STCV27506 Hearing Date: February 13, 2020 [TENTATIVE] order RE: PLAINTIFF’s motion for JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS to DEFENDANT TAMMY STARNES’S ANSWER; Background On August 5, 2019, Plaintiff SoCal Lien Solutions, LLC, (“Plaintiff”) brought the instant action against Defendants Tamm...
...judgment on the pleadings challenging Defendant’s answer. On January 30, 2020, Defendant filed an opposition. On February 10, 2020, Plaintiff filed an untimely reply. Timeliness “All papers opposing a motion so noticed shall be filed with the court and a copy served on each party at least nine court days, and all reply papers at least five court days before the hearing.” (CCP § 1005(b), [emphasis added].)...
JESUS SALGUERO VS DELIV, INC.
...(2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 943, 947.) The party moving to compel arbitration must establish the existence of a written arbitration agreement between the parties. (Code of Civ. Proc. § 1281.2.) In ruling on a motion to compel arbitration, the court must first determine whether the parties actually agreed to arbitrate the dispute, and general principles of California contract law help guide the court in making thi...
...verbatim or a copy must be physically or electronically attached to the petition and incorporated by reference”].) Once such a document is presented to the court, the burden shifts to the party opposing the motion to compel, who may present any challenges to the enforcement of the agreement and evidence in support of those challenges. [Citation]” (Baker v. Italian Maple Holdings, LLC (2017) 13 Cal.App.5th 1152,...
...ORDER Intervenor Scottsdale Insurance Company’s unopposed motion for an order granting leave to intervene is GRANTED. Moving Party to give NOTICE. Intervenor Scottsdale Insurance Company moves for leave to intervene pursuant to CCP § 387(c). CCP § 387(c) provides that a “nonparty shall petition the court for leave to intervene by noticed motion or ex parte application. The petition shall include a copy of the pr...
...time of the incident, Crime Stoppers held liability insurance with Scottsdale. Good cause exists to grant leave to intervene because Scottsdale’s interests are at stake. As there is no opposition, the motion is GRANTED.Moving Party to give NOTICE.
WEST ADAM PROPERTY LLC VS MOSES, JACK
...demurrer against the FAC primarily arguing lack of standing. On January 15, 2020, Plaintiffs filed an opposition. On January 22, 2020, Defendant replied. On January 29, 2020, the Court continued the motion to allow Defendant to file a meet and confer declaration. On February 4, 2020, Defendant filed the required declaration. Legal Standard Meet and Confer Requirement CCP Section 430.41(a) requires th...
...Plaintiff Fedida Defendant contends that there is a misjoinder as to Plaintiff Fedida because Plaintiff Fedida was not a plaintiff to the original complaint and has not petitioned the court for leave to intervene. Demurrers on the ground of misjoinder lie only when the defect appears on the face of the complaint or matters judicially noticed. (Royal Surplus Lines Ins. Co., Inc. v. Ranger Ins. Co. (2002) 100 C...
...all other causes of action. Defendants Bright Horizons Family Solutions, Bright Horizons Children’s Centers, Paramount Pictures Corporation, Mary Jane Escorpiso, Margaret Wood, and Jan Marie Johnson’s Motion to Strike Portions of the Complaint is GRANTED without leave to amend as to the prayer for punitive and other damages associated with the Sixth Cause of Action, and otherwise DENIED. DEMURRER A demu...
...filed. (See 7/18/2019 and 11/19/2019 Orders.) The demurrer is thus not untimely. Defendants also preceded their motion with several meet-and-confer letters explaining the objections now raised in their motions. (See Laurent Decl. Exhs. A, C, E.) Although Alonzo objects that Defendants did not meet and confer in person, this failure furnishes no basis to overrule the demurrer, and the court has little basis...
Tentative Ruling on Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement Bochenek v. M2 Media Group LLC, Case No. 2019-25568 February 14, 2020, 1:30 p.m., Dept. 72 1. Overview and Procedural Posture. This is a Consumer...
...continue the CMC for about a month. ROA 30. At the December 6, 2019 CMC, the parties announced a settlement. ROA 39. They now seek preliminary approval of a class action settlement. ROA 40-44. By design, the motion is unopposed. The court has reviewed the papers. The case is also set for a continued CMC. ROA 38. 2. Applicable Standards for Class Certification. "Under Code of Civil Procedure section 382, a clas...
VRH, AARON VS. STANISLAUS COUNTY JAIL
Defendants Raymond Herr MD and Natalyn Bergman RN’s Motion for Summary Judgment –CONTINUED, on the Court’s own motion, to February 14, 2020, at 8:30 a.m. in Department 22. CV-18-000302 – AMMAR, NEAL VS. HANTASH, BASIL M, MD – Plaintiff’s Motion to Lift Stay Entered in Civil Proceedings – CONTINUED, on the Court’s own...
...Court’s own motion, to February 14, 2020, at 8:30 a.m. in Department 22. CV-19-001233 – PAINTER, JOHN VS. WESTERN TELESIS CORPORATION – Third Party Security National Insurance Company’s Motion for Leave to Intervene – GRANTED, and unopposed.
County Stanislaus County, CA
RONALD ASHLEY, ET AL VS. KENNETH L, HURWITZ, ET AL
NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: MOTION TO COMPEL — ARBITRATION AND TO STAY PROCEEDINGS [DEFT] GAIL H. HURWITZ [DEFT] KENNETH L. HURWITZ RULlNG Defendants’ motion to compel arbitration and stay action is granted, In St. Agnes Medical Center v. PacifiCare of California (2003) 31 Cal.4‘l1 1187, 1195-1 196, the court wrote regarding waiver of the right to arbitra...
...Hurwitzes would somehow prefer to incur the expense of litigation rather than the expense of mediation and arbitration. ,..” (Smith decl. 1|5i) Defendants’ request for fees and costs is denied “A notice of motion must state in the opening paragraph the nature of the order being sought and the grounds for issuance of the orderi” (Cali Rule of Court 3.1110(a).) Defendants do not request fees and costs in their n...
LIA HEIN VS ASHTON SQUARE HOA
Hein v. Ashton Square HOA Motion for Leave to Intervene by County of Los Angeles is GRANTED pursuant to Labor Code § 3852. Intervenor paid benefits to the Plaintiff/employee for injuries suffered because of Defendant’s alleged negligence. Declaration of Je...
LUZ D'LUNA QUINTEROS ET AL VS CA HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER ET
...CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT LUZ D’LUNA QUINTEROS, etc., et al., Plaintiffs, vs. CALIFORNIA HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER, et al., Defendants. CASE NO.: BC608973 [TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: MOTION TO DETERMINE DHCS LIEN CLAIM Date: February 6, 2020 Time: 8:30 a.m. Dept. 56 MOVING PARTIES: Plaintiff Luz D’Luna Quinteros, by and through her guardian ad litem, Carolina Quinteros (“Ms. Quintero...
...respect to Plaintiff’s settlement. (Id.) DHCS is requesting payment in the amount of $477,264.04 to satisfy the personal injury lien. Plaintiff, by and through her guardian ad litem, Ms. Quinteros filed a motion pursuant to for an order: (1) to determine that DHCS’s lien claim on Plaintiff’s action should be zero dollars; or (2) if DHCS does in fact have a valid lien, to determine that the lien claim is no mo...