Complaint filed by Pinger, Lydia A G on 03/17/2022. Filed By: Pinger, Lydia A G(Plaintiff) Refers To: Island Pacific Supermarket(Defendant) | Abacus Buss Capital Inc(Defendant) | Abacus Business Capital Inc(Defendant) March 17, 2022 (2024)

 Preview
 R SCANNING- - RECENVED oR OR COURT F Maurice Javier 162255SUPERIOR COURT OF GAUIFORNIA, COUNTY OF VENTURAATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (tame, State Bar atmber, anc acess): MAR 17 N22 FOR COURTUSE ONLYLaw Offices of Maurice M Javier1401 Commercial Way, Ste 120 AFTER 4:00 PM.Bakersfield, CA 93309veepuoneno: (918) 247-9905 Faxno/opiomy (818) 247-9906Bwacanoress (ono: Javierlaw27@gmail.comATTORNEY FOR (Meow): Plaintiff LYDIA A G PINGERsmreetaporsss 800 S Victoria Avemauxg scores: PO Box 6489, Ventura 93006-6489crvanozecou Ventura, CA 93009srncHiame: Ventura Hall of Justice PLAINTIFF: LYDIA A G PINGERDEFENDANT: ISLAND PACIFIC SDPERMARKET; ABACUS BUSS CAPITAL, INC;OOES 1 To SM.COMPLAINT-Parsonal [njuty, Property Damage, Wrongful DeathC2 AMENDED (Number):Type (check aif that apply):COD MOTOR VEHICLE §=[K] OTHER (specity: Premises LiabilityCC) Property Damage Wrongful Death :(QQ Personal Injury Other Damages (specify): Jurlediction (check al that apply): CASE NUMBER:Cl ACTION Is A LIMITED CIVIL CASEAmountdemanded [_} does not exceed $10,000(L} exceeds $10,000, but does not exceed $25,000(QQ ACTION Is AN UNLIMITED CIVIL CASE (exceetis $25,000)CD ACTION IS RECLASSIFIED by this amended complaintfram Ilmited to unlimitedfrom unlimited to limited 1.eyPlatntift (name ornames): LYDIA A G PINGERalleges causes of action againstdefendant (name or names): ISLAND EACIFIC SUPZRMARKET; ABACDS BUSS CAPITAL, INC?This pleading, including attachments and exhibits. consists of the following number of pages: 5Each plaintif namad above is a competent aduita. C2) except plaintiff (name):(1) CX a corporation qualified fo do business in Califoria2) _] an unincorporated entity (describe):(3) C) a public entity (describe):(4) CQ aminor (CQ anadutt(e) (22 for whom a guardian or conservator of the estate or 2 guardian ad titem has been appainted(b) CD) other (specify): .48) (Cy other (specity):b. (2) excent plaintiff (rama):ay a corporation qualified to do busingss in Calffomiaee an unincorporated entity (descifbe):8 a public entity (describe):4) aminor [] enaduttKy (a) 2) for whom a guardian or conservator of the estate or a guardian ad Item has been appointedYa Information about additional plaintiffs who are not competant aduky is shown in Attachment 3.Fy ferrovael fr Opera] Ure | COMPLAINT-Personal Injury, Property (Coda 0 Gin) Procedure, § 425.12veer Mara CEB | pest ; aes(0) CC} other (specify):(© (2) other (speaty):Damage, Wrongful Death Pinger, LydiaPaget ota: . : PLO-PI001SHORT TITLE: GASE NUMBER.Pinger vs Island Pacific, et al4. LL) Plaintift (name):is doing business under the fictitious name (specify): and has complied with the fictitious business name laws,5. Each defendant named above Is @ naturel persona. Ed except defendant (name): c. (23 except defendant (name):Island Pacific Supermarketqa) a business organization, form unknown q) {.) abusiness organization, form unknown(2) a corporation (2) (J a comoration(3) CE an unincorporated entity (describe): (3) (CY en unincomporated entity (desortbe):4) CD a publicentity (¢eserite): (4) CD a public entity (¢escviba):©) (2) other (speaty): (6) ©) other (speaity):b. (K) except defendant (name): . d. () oxcept defendant (name):Abacus Buss Capital, Ine(1) a ‘@ business crganization, form unknown a) oO business Organization, form unknown(2) EQ) a comoration (2} (] acorporation(3) LC) an unincorporated entity (describe): @) C2) an unincorporated entity (describe):(4) CC) a public entity (describe): : (4) (2) 2 public entity (desenbe):© (QQ aher(speaity): (3) (other (specify):(C2 Information about additional defendants who ara not natura! persons is contained In Attachment 5.6. The true names of defendants sued as Does are unknown to plaintiff.a. [) Doe detendants (spectty Doe numbers): 1 to 25 ___were the agents or employees of othernamed defendants and acted within the scope of that agency or employment.b. (XQ Doe defendants (specify Doe numbers): 26 to 50 ____are persons whose capacities are unknown tofalnttf.70 petendants who are joined under Code of Civil Procedure section 382 are (names):8. This courtis the proper court becausea. (2) atieast one defendant now resides in its jurisdictional area.b. (2) the principal ptace of business of a defendant corporation ar unincorporated association is in its jurisdictional area.c. [X) injury to person or damage to personal property occurred in its junsdictional area,9. CQ other (specify):9. (2) Pletntiffis required te comply with a claims statute, and2. 2) has complied with applicable claims statules, orb. ] is excused from complying because (specify): PLO-PLOM [Rev, darasary 1. 2007] COMPLAINT-Personal Injury, Property Page2zofsGB |e Damage, Wrongful Death Pinger, Lydia- . : PLD-PI004SHORT TITLE: CASE NUMBER:Pinger vs Island Pacific, et al 10. The following causes of action are attached and tha statements above apply to each (aach comp/aint must have one or morecausas of action attached):a. [J Motor Vehicleb. (X] General Negligencece [) intentional Tortd. (2) Products Liabilitye. [Q] Premises Liability£. (CQ Other (specify) :41. Plaintiff has suffared. wago [088(CD toss of use of property(RJ hospital and medical expensesTZ general damage(2) property damage& (2) toss of earning capacityg. (CB other damage (specify) :paoge42. (I The damages claimed for wrongful death and tha relationships of plaintiff to the deceased area. (1D listed in Attachment 12.b. (CD as follows:43. The relief sought In this complaint Is within the jurisdiction af this court.14, Plaintiff prays for Judgment for casts of suit; for such relief as is fair, Just, and equitable; and fora. (1) (Q) compensatory damages(2) CL) punitive damagesThe amount of damages |s fin cases for personal injury or wrongful death, you Must check (1):(1) CX¥ according to proof(2) () in the amount of $45. (X) The paragraphs of this complaint slleged on information and belief are as follows (specify paragm@ph numbers):1,5a,5b,6a,6b; Prem L-1,L-2,L-3,L-4,L-5 a,b; GN-1pate: March 15, 2022 marr ConMaurice Javier »(TYPE OR PRINT NAME) {SIGN PLARTIFF OR ATTORNEY)PLOWPLOO! IRev. Janumry 1, 2007] COMPLAINT-Personal tury, Property Pom SotsCEB Eepentia Damage, Wrongful Death Pinger, LydiaPLD-PI-004(4) SHORT TITLE: CAGE NUMBER,Pinger vs Island Pacific, et al ——Eirst 4... ss CAUSE OF ACTION - Premises Liability Page 4{number}ATTACHMENT TO [XJ Complaint [23 Cross-Complaint(Use a separate ceuse.of action form for each cause of action.)Prem.L-1, Plaintiff (namo): LYDIA A G PINGERalleges the acts of defendants were the legal (proximate) cause of damages to plaintiff,On (date): May 7, 2020 plaintiff was injured on the following premfses in the foflowingfashion (description of premises end circ*mstances of injury):Plaintiff Lydia Pinger was in or near the vegetable aisleinside Island Pacific Supermarket in Oxnard, California whenshe slipped and fell on the wet floor. She was allegedlyverbally warned by some workers about some work they weredoing/something needed fixing but there were no signs orcordoning off of the area. Plaintiff did'nt know orunderstood which area she was not supposed to go.Prem.L-2. (XJ Count One-Negligence The defendants who negligently owned, maintained, managed and operatedthe described premises were (names):Island Pacific Supermarket; Abacus Buss Capital, Inc[XB Does 2 = to_50Prem.L-3. [J Count Two-willtul Failure to Wam [Civil Code section 846] The defendant owners who willfully ormaliciously failed to guard or wam against a dangerous condition, use, structure, or activity were(names. Island Pacific Supermarket; Abacus BussCapital, Inc(I) bos _ 1s to SQL ESPlaintiff, a recreational user, was [_] an invited quest (} a paying guest.Prem.i-4. (() Count Three-Dangeraus Condition of Public Property The defendants who owned public property anwhich a dangerous condition existed were (names):C) Does foa.() Thedefendantpublicentityhad F) actual (2) consteuctirenotice ofthe existence of thedangerous condition in sufficient time prior to the iojury to have corrected itb. 3 The condition was created by employees of the defendant public entity.Prem.L-5. a. (Q] Allegations about Other Defendants The defendants who were the agents and employees of the otherdefendants and acted within the scope of the agency were (names):Island Pacific Supermarket; Abacus Buss Capital, Inc Gy deoss 1 sit SSb. (XJ The defendants who are liable to plaintiffs for other reasons and the reasons for their liability are(C) described tn attachment Prem.L-5.b as follows (names):Island Pacific Supermarket; Abacus Russ Capital, Inc and DOES 1 to 50.Plaintiff will amend this complaint as soon as the other reasons fortheir liability are ascertained.Pageiotteee CAUSE OF ACTION - Premises Liability “ OcoeePLD-PEO01(4) (Rew. January 1, 2007], - 5‘CER \ Beets . Pinger, Lydia: PLD-PI-001{2)SHORT TITLE: .Pinger vs Island Pacific, et al ~_Second _. _ _ CAUSE OF ACTION- General Negligence = page 5(number)ATTACHMENT TO [XQ Comptaint (2) cross-Complaint{Use @ separate cause of action form for each cause of action.)GN-1. Plaintiff (name): LYDIA A G PINGERalleges that defendant (name): IsLaxp PACIFIC SUPERMARKET; ABACUS BUSS CAPITAL, IXCCoes I tSwas the legal (proximate) cause of damages to plaintiff. By the following acts or omissions to ect, defendantnegligently caused the damage to plaintiffon(date!: On or about May 7, 2020 :at (place?) Island Pacific Supermarket at 4833 S Rose Ave, Oxnard, CA(description of reasons for liability) :Defendants, their agents and employees has a general duty totheir invitees to maintain a safe environment and adequatelywarn them of dangerous conditions of the premises thatdefendants and their employess and/or agents could havediscovered with excercise of due diligence and could haveproperly warned plaintiff about said dangerous condition oxrepair going on in the premises. Defendants, and theiremployees failure to property maintain and warn plaintiif of adangerous condition existing on their premises is the legalcause of plaintiff slipping and falling on the west floorthereby causing injuries to plaintiff requirering medicaltreatments, causing permanent disabilties and loss ofenjoyment of life to plaintiff.Page tortFam Approved for Use C ACTION- Gen ice Cote of Civil Procedure 425.1PLO PPS te easy 1 2007] CEB’ | Essential ‘wm, court ea.edheoen | E)Fourne Pinger, Lydia

Related Contentin Ventura County

Case

2024CLOE024045 LEOPOLDO MARTINEZ-BRAVO vs MIKE KELLEY CONSTRUCTION, INC.

Apr 26, 2024 |Henry J. Walsh |Civil Limited |Civil Limited |2024CLOE024045

Case

2024CUPT026839 IN THE MATTER OF: BROOKE ELIZABETH LAMBERT

Jul 12, 2024 |Benjamin F. Coats |Civil Unlimited |Civil Unlimited |2024CUPT026839

Case

2024CUOR026608 ROBERT J KEY, et al. vs LINDA DOAN, et al.

Jul 02, 2024 |Benjamin F. Coats |Civil Unlimited |Civil Unlimited |2024CUOR026608

Case

2024CLCL021115 MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT INC vs EMMANUEL R HERNANDEZ

Feb 13, 2024 |Ronda J. McKaig |Civil Limited |Civil Limited |2024CLCL021115

Case

2024CUBC021199 BRITTANY GONZALES vs OIL CHANGER, INC.

Feb 27, 2024 |Benjamin F. Coats |Civil Unlimited |Civil Unlimited |2024CUBC021199

Case

2023CLCL017673 BENEFICIAL STATE BANK vs FRANCISCO SUAREZ

Case

201300436099PRCP

Aug 27, 2024 |Hearing Re: Annual/Biennial Status Report |201300436099PRCP

Case

2024PRDE026787

Aug 29, 2024 |Hearing on Petition for Letters of Administration |2024PRDE026787

Case

2023PRDE008876

Aug 29, 2024 |Hearing on Petition for First and Final Account and Petition for Its Settlement, Petition for Distribution and. For Allowance of Compensation ect |2023PRDE008876

Ruling

202300575819PRGE

Aug 27, 2024 |Roger L. Lund |Hearing on Petition for First Informal Account of Guardian of the Estate and Petition for Approval ect. |202300575819PRGE

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF VENTURA Probate Notes 202300575819PRGE: in the Matter of Ellianna Lynn Gunnels-Perez 08/27/2024 in Department J6Hearing on Petition for First Informal Account of Guardian of the Estate and Petition for Approval ect.Informal Account filed on 07/08/24 for the period of 12/20/23 – 04/25/24 isreviewed and found deficient.DEFICIENCIES: 1. As of 08/21/24, Notice of Hearing has not been filed. Notice with copy of petition must be mailed to all entitled and proof of service filed with the court. 2. First Informal Account period must encompass the first year of the estate, beginning one day after the date of appointment of 06/09/23, with bank statements attached for each month in the period. Amended account required. 3. Attorney fee declaration addressing CRC 7.751 and 7.702 is not included. Fee award will be denied without proper declaration. (Compensation to prepare amended account and declaration will not be granted.)Amended account to be filed by 09/16/24 and set for hearing on 10/15/24 at9:00AM in Department J6 to be heard concurrently with the status report.Once procedural deficiencies are adequately addressed, the court intends toapprove the account; approve $2,330.00 in fees and $558.41 in costs to attorney.The Court intends to continue to waive formal accounts as long as the estateremains within the limits set by Prob. C. §2628 because the funds are in ablocked account. The court instead requires an “informal account” by submittingVN-267 and the bank statements to the Court.Informal account for the period of 06/10/24 – 06/09/25 shall be filed by 08/01/25and set for hearing on 10/14/25 at 9:00AM in Department J6 to be heardconcurrently with the status report.The clerk shall give notice.__________The Court will be using Zoom exclusively for remote appearances in Department J6. Forinformation on the Zoom procedures, and for general information regarding Judge Lund and hiscourtroom rules and procedures, please visit: http://www.judgerogerlund.com.

Ruling

202200564237PRGE

Aug 27, 2024 |Roger L. Lund |Hearing re: Order to Show Cause Filing of June 2024 statements |202200564237PRGE

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF VENTURA Probate Notes 202200564237PRGE: In the Matter of Shirk Minors 08/27/2024 in Department J6 Hearing re: Order to Show Cause Filing of June 2024 statementsThe June 2024 statements were filed as required on 07/31/24. No appearancesrequired.The June 2025 statements shall be filed by 07/30/25 and set for hearing on08/26/25 at 10:30AM to be reviewed with status reports._______________________The Court uses Zoom exclusively for remote appearances in Department J6. For information onthe Zoom procedures, and for general information regarding Judge Lund and his courtroomrules and procedures, please visit: http://www.judgerogerlund.com.

Ruling

2023CUOE010993 TAMI MAYER, et al. vs GRIFFIN LIVING LLC, et al.

Aug 30, 2024 |Benjamin F. Coats |Motion and Unopposed Motion for Approval of Settlement of Private Attorneys General Act Action |2023CUOE010993

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF VENTURA Tentative Ruling 2023CUOE010993: TAMI MAYER, et al. vs GRIFFIN LIVING LLC, et al. 08/30/2024 in Department 43 Motion and Unopposed Motion for Approval of Settlement of Private Attorneys General Act ActionThe morning calendar in courtroom 43 will normally begin at 8:45. Please arrive for your hearingno later than 8:30 a.m. The door will be opened before the calendar is called.The Court allows appearances by CourtCall and Zoom, but parties must both use the same platformif appearing remotely. The court’s equipment is not capable of handling mixed remoteappearances. Counsel are expected to cooperate in this regard. Refer to the Courtroom 43 webpagefor more information about remote appearances.If appearing by CourtCall, call in no later than 8:30 a.m. If you wish to appear by CourtCall, youmust make arrangements with CourtCall by 4:00 p.m. the court day before your scheduled hearing.Requests for approval of a CourtCall appearance made on the morning of the hearing will not begranted. No exceptions will be made.For Zoom appearances, you must email the court at Courtroom43@ventura.courts.ca.gov with asimultaneous copy to all other counsel/self-represented parties no later than 3:00 p.m. the courtday before the hearing. INCLUDE THE PHRASE "ZOOM APPEARANCE ON (DATE OFHEARING)" IN THE SUBJECT LINE OF YOUR EMAIL. You will receive the login informationfor your appearance in reply to your email. If appearing by Zoom, log into the hearing no laterthan 8:30 a.m. The Court will transfer you to the meeting room when your matter is called.Additional instructions can be found on the Courtroom 43 webpage. IF YOU DO NOT FOLLOWALL OF THESE INSTRUCTIONS, YOU WILL NOT BE PERMITTED TO APPEAR BYZOOM AT THE HEARING. NO EXCEPTIONS WILL BE ALLOWED.With respect to the tentative ruling below, no notice of intent to appear is required. If you wish tosubmit on the tentative ruling you can fax notice to Judge Coats's secretary, Ms. McIntyre at 805-477-5894, stating that you submit on the tentative. Or, you may emailCourtroom43@ventura.courts.ca.gov with all counsel copied on the email. Do not call in lieu ofsending a fax or email. If you submit on the tentative without appearing and the opposing partyappears, the hearing will be conducted in your absence. If you are the moving party and do notcommunicate to the Court that you submit on the tentative or you do not appear at the hearing, theCourt may deny your motion irrespective of the tentative.Unless stated otherwise at the hearing, if a formal order is required but not signed at the hearing,the prevailing party shall prepare a proposed order and comply with CRC 3.1312 subdivisions (a),(b), (d) and (e). The signed order shall be served on all parties and a proof of service filed with thecourt. A "notice of ruling" in lieu of this procedure is not authorized.Motion: Plaintiff’s Motion for Approval of Settlement of Private Attorneys General Act Action. 2023CUOE010993: TAMI MAYER, et al. vs GRIFFIN LIVING LLC, et al.Tentative Ruling: Plaintiff’s Motion for Approval of Settlement of Private Attorneys General ActAction is DENIED without prejudice. Labor Code section 2699 requires civil penalties recoveredto be distributed to the Labor and Workforce Development Agency and to the “aggrievedemployees.” The proposed distribution of the “aggrieved employees” portion of the civil penaltiesonly to Plaintiffs and their attorneys is in violation of the statute.Moving party shall serve notice of the Court’s ruling.Discussion“Representative PAGA actions ‘directly enforce the state's interest in penalizing and deterringemployers who violate California's labor laws.’ [Citation].” (Williams v. Superior Court (2017) 3Cal.5th 531, 548.) Labor Code section 2699, subdivision (a) states: “Notwithstanding any otherprovision of law, any provision of this code that provides for a civil penalty to be assessed andcollected by the Labor and Workforce Development Agency or any of its departments, divisions,commissions, boards, agencies, or employees, for a violation of this code, may, as an alternative,be recovered through a civil action brought by an aggrieved employee on behalf of himself orherself and other current or former employees pursuant to the procedures specified in Section2699.3.”On the issue of settlement, Labor Code section 2699, subdivision (s)(2) states: “The superior courtshall review and approve any settlement of any civil action filed pursuant to this part. The proposedsettlement shall be submitted to the agency at the same time that it is submitted to the court.” (Prev.Labor Code, § 2699, subd. (l)(2), rev. July 1, 2024.)“PAGA settlements are subject to trial court review and approval, ensuring that any negotiatedresolution is fair to those affected.” (Williams v. Superior Court, supra, 3 Cal.5th at p. 549.)“[W]hile PAGA does not require the trial court to act as a fiduciary for aggrieved employees,adoption of a standard of review for settlements that ‘prevents fraud, collusion or unfairness’[citation], and protects the interests of the public and the LWDA in the enforcement of state laborlaws is warranted. Because many of the factors used to evaluate class action settlements bear on asettlement's fairness—including the strength of the plaintiff's case, the risk, the stage of theproceeding, the complexity and likely duration of further litigation, and the settlement amount—these factors can be useful in evaluating the fairness of a PAGA settlement.” (Moniz v. AdeccoUSA, Inc. (2021) 72 Cal.App.5th 56, 77, internal quotations omitted.)Labor Code section 2699, subdivision (m) states: “Except as provided in subdivision (n), civilpenalties recovered by aggrieved employees shall be distributed as follows: 65 percent to the Laborand Workforce Development Agency for enforcement of labor laws, including the administrationof this part, and for education of employers and employees about their rights and responsibilitiesunder this code, to be continuously appropriated to supplement and not supplant the funding to theagency for those purposes; and 35 percent to the aggrieved employees.”Prior to amendment on July 1, 2024, Labor Code section 2699, subdivisions (i) and (j) providedstated that civil penalties recovered are to be divided with 75 percent going to the agency and 25percent to “aggrieved employees.” 2023CUOE010993: TAMI MAYER, et al. vs GRIFFIN LIVING LLC, et al.The settlement before the Court distributes the civil penalties to the Plaintiffs ($1,000 each) andtheir attorneys ($1,750). This is in violation of the plain language of the statute that requires theamounts to be distributed to the “aggrieved employees.” The rationale provided is because therewould be insufficient amounts to be paid to a third-party administrator. Plaintiffs do not cite anyauthority that makes this an exception to compliance with the requirements of the statute.“It is important to note that where plaintiffs bring a PAGA representative claim, they take on aspecial responsibility to their fellow aggrieved workers who are effectively bound by anyjudgment. [Citation]. Such a plaintiff also owes responsibility to the public at large; they act, asthe statute's name suggests, as a private attorney general, and 75% of the penalties go to the LWDA‘for enforcement of labor laws ... and for education of employers and employees about their rightsand responsibilities under this code.’ Cal. Lab. Code § 2699(i). This duty imposed upon the PAGArepresentative is especially significant given that PAGA does not require class action procedures,such as notice and opt-out rights. The Court must be cognizant of the risk that despite thisresponsibility, there may be a temptation to include a PAGA claim in a lawsuit to be used merelyas a bargaining chip, wherein the rights of individuals who may not even be members of the classand the public may be waived for little additional consideration in order to induce the employer toagree to a settlement with the class.” (O’Connor v. Uber Technologies, Inc. (2016) 201 F.Supp.3d1110, 1134.)Because the settlement does not comply with the statute, the motion is denied.

Ruling

2024PRDE026378

Aug 29, 2024 |Roger L. Lund |Hearing on Petition for Letters of Administration |2024PRDE026378

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF VENTURA Probate Notes 2024PRDE026378: IN THE MATTER OF MICHAEL ROSARIO LEONE 08/29/2024 in Department J6 Hearing on Petition for Letters of AdministrationThis was heard on 08/22/24 and continued to 08/29/24. The court orderedpetitioner’s counsel to give notice of the continued hearing. Notice ofContinuance has not been filed as of 08/26/24 at 9:44 a.m.Decedent is survived by petitioner and a 14 year old son. Petitioner filed a BondWaiver (DE-142) signed by herself. This is insufficient. Bond to be set at$158,000.00.The court intends to grant the petition and appoint Nancy Leone administrator ofthe estate of Michael Rosario Leone with full IAEA authority with bond of$158,000.00.The Court uses Zoom exclusively for remote appearances in Department J6. For information on the Zoomprocedures, and for general information regarding Judge Lund and his courtroom rules and procedures, please visit:http://www.judgerogerlund.com.

Ruling

CONSERVATORSHIP OF AARON MAX CLAUSE

Aug 27, 2024 |Roger L. Lund |Hearing Re: Annual/Biennial Status Report |P080188

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF VENTURA Probate Notes P080188: CONSERVATORSHIP OF AARON MAX CLAUSE 08/27/2024 in Department J6 Hearing Re: Annual/Biennial Status Report Due 06/27/24The biennial status report was due by 06/27/24. As of 08/15/24, it has not beenfiled. Unless the status report is filed before the hearing, the Court intends to setan OSC re Failure to File Status Report on 09/24/24 at 10:30AM in DepartmentJ6.The court orders the mandatory appearance of the Conservator. Appearance byZoom permitted.The Court Investigator’s report was filed on 07/03/24. The Court has reviewedthe report. It is complete.Based on the Court Investigator’s Report and PC§1851(f), this matter qualifiesfor a biennial review schedule. If granted, the next Court Investigator’s Reportshall be due by 06/26/26.The next biennial status report shall be filed by 06/26/26 and set for a hearing on08/04/26 at 10:30 AM in Department J6.The clerk shall give notice._______________________The Court uses Zoom exclusively for remote appearances in Department J6. For information onthe Zoom procedures, and for general information regarding Judge Lund and his courtroomrules and procedures, please visit: http://www.judgerogerlund.com.

Ruling

202100553626PRLP

Aug 27, 2024 |Roger L. Lund |Hearing Re: Annual/Biennial Status Report |202100553626PRLP

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF VENTURA Probate Notes 202100553626PRLP: In the Matter of Rachel D. Rinaldi 08/27/2024 in Department J6 Hearing Re: Annual/Biennial Status Report Due 7/18/24The status report was filed on 07/05/24. The Court has reviewed the statusreport. It is complete. No appearance required.The Court Investigator’s report was filed on 07/16/24. The Court has reviewedthe report. It is complete.The next biennial status report shall be filed by 07/17/26 and set for a hearing on08/25/26 at 10:30 AM in Department J6.A Notice of Filing (VN257) shall be served on those parties entitled to notice andfiled with the court pursuant to Local Rule 10.02(J). A proof of mailing shall beattached to the Notice of Filing.The clerk shall give notice._______________________The Court uses Zoom exclusively for remote appearances in Department J6. For information onthe Zoom procedures, and for general information regarding Judge Lund and his courtroomrules and procedures, please visit: http://www.judgerogerlund.com.

Ruling

201300435767PRLP

Aug 27, 2024 |Roger L. Lund |Hearing Re: Annual/Biennial Status Report |201300435767PRLP

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF VENTURA Probate Notes 201300435767PRLP: In the Matter of Travis Goldberg 08/27/2024 in Department J6 Hearing Re: Annual/Biennial Status Report Due 07/29/24The status report was filed on 07/24/24. The Court has reviewed the statusreport. It is complete. No appearance required.The Court Investigator’s report was filed on 08/15/24. The Court has reviewedthe report. It is complete.The next biennial status report and Court Investigator’s Report shall be filed by07/29/26 and set for a hearing on 08/25/26 at 10:30 AM in Department J6.A Notice of Filing (VN257) shall be served on those parties entitled to notice andfiled with the court pursuant to Local Rule 10.02(J). A proof of mailing shall beattached to the Notice of Filing.The clerk shall give notice._______________________The Court uses Zoom exclusively for remote appearances in Department J6. For information onthe Zoom procedures, and for general information regarding Judge Lund and his courtroomrules and procedures, please visit: http://www.judgerogerlund.com.

Ruling

201700494097PRLS

Aug 29, 2024 |Roger L. Lund |Court's Order to Show Cause Re Filing Petition |201700494097PRLS

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF VENTURA Probate Notes 201700494097PRLS: In the Matter of Michael Samuel Varat 08/29/2024 in Department J6 Court's Order to Show Cause Re Filing PetitionThe court intends to grant the petition. (Probate Code §12251)The Court uses Zoom exclusively for remote appearances in Department J6. For information on the Zoomprocedures, and for general information regarding Judge Lund and his courtroom rules and procedures, please visit: ttp:// www judgerogerlund.com.

Document

Abraham vs. Foppoli

Dec 21, 2022 |Honigsberg, Christopher M. |23: Unlimited Other PI/PD/WD |Civil |SCV-272299

Document

BAQUIRAN -v- JONES et al Print

Aug 14, 2024 |Donald Alvarez |Auto PI/PD/WD Unlimited |Auto PI/PD/WD Unlimited |CIVSB2425323

Document

AMES ET AL VS LAS ROSAS, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY ET AL

Oct 02, 2023 |Pulskamp, Gregory |10-CV Construction Defect - Civil Unlimited |BCV-23-103286

Document

Federico Arrospide vs Lewis and Tibbits Inc.

Aug 26, 2024 |Other PI/PD/WD Unlimited (23) |Other PI/PD/WD Unlimited (23) |24CV445961

Document

PROGRESSIVE WEST INSURANCE COMPANY -v- POLLOCK et al Print

Aug 14, 2024 |Khymberli S Apaloo |Auto PI/PD/WD $10,000.01 - $35,000 Limited |Auto PI/PD/WD $10,000.01 - $35,000 Limited |CIVSB2425332

Document

HAFER VS DHALIWAL

Jan 11, 2021 |Barmann, Bernard C., Jr. |22-CV Auto - Civil Unlimited |BCV-21-100072

Document

May 20, 2019 |Douglas, Danielle K |35: Unlimited Other non-PI/PD/WD Tort |35: Unlimited Other non-PI/PD/WD Tort |CIVMSC19-00879

Document

Krisha Poe-Plaugher vs Brittany Bowers, et al

May 14, 2024 |Schmal, Timothy |(23) Unlimited Other PI / PD / WD |24CV01392