On March 12, 2018 a
Motion-Secondary
was filed
involving a dispute between
Combs Dismissed 1 10 19 Crystal Lee,
Hom Alexander Kwong Tomizo,
Rogers Gini Wong,
Navarro Kasey,
Weisberg Dismissed 1 29 19 Steven,
Weisberg Dismissed 1 29 19 Terry,
and
Combs Dismissed 1 10 19 Crystal Lee,
Hom Alexander Kwong Tomizo,
Rogers Gini Wong,
for Premise Liability (e.g., dangerous conditions of property, slip/trip and fall, dog attack, etc.) (General Jurisdiction)
in the District Court of Los Angeles County.
Preview
Electronically FILED by Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles on 09/07/2021 11:50 AM Sherri R. Carter, Executive Officer/Clerk of Court, by M. Vargas,Deputy Clerk
1 Steven Weisberg, Esq. (SBN 73102)
LAW OFFICES OF STEVEN WEISBERG
2 16133 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1180
Encino, CA 91436
3 Tel. (8l8) 342-0l80
4 Daniel J. Cheren, Esq. (SBN: 175475)
CHEREN AND ASSOCIATES
5 16055 Ventura Blvd., Suite 525
Encino, California 91436
6 Telephone: (818) 990-7700; Fax: (818) 990-9888
EMAIL: daniel@cherenlaw.com
7 Attorneys for Plaintiff KASEY NAVARRO
8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9 FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
10
11 STEVEN WEISBERG; TERRY ) CASE NO. BC697668
WEISBERG; KASEY NAVARRO, ) Civil Unlimited Jurisdiction
12 )
Plaintiff(s), ) PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO
13 ) DEFENDANT’S MOTION IN
v. ) LIMINE #1 (09/03/2021) –
14 ) PRECLUDING USE OF “GOLDEN
ALEXANDER KWONG TOMIZO HOM; ) RULE” ARGUMENTS
15 GINI WONG ROGERS; CRYSTAL LEE )
COMBS and DOES 1 to 50, inclusive, ) FSC: September 10, 2021
16 ) Time: 8:30 a.m.
Defendant(s). ) Dept.: F-47
17 ___________________________________ )
)
18 )
AND ALL RELATED CROSS-ACTIONS )
19 )
)
20
21 TO THE PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
22 Plaintiff, KASEY NAVARRO (hereinafter, PLAINTIFF), hereby opposed Defendant
23 ALEXANDER KWONG TOMIZO HOM’s (hereinafter, DEFENDANT) Motion in Limine #1 (filed
24 on or about September 3, 2021)1 – precluding the use and argument of the “Golden Rule” during voir
25 dire and trial as vague and ambiguous and calling for speculation.
26
27
1/
HOM previously filed Motions in Limine on February 20, 2020. Oppositions to those
28 Motions in Limine were filed by PLAINTIFF on or about September 3, 2021. On or about
September 3, HOM filed a new set of eight Motions in Limine – this is a response to that new set.
1
Plaintiff’s OPPOSITION to Defendant’s 9/3/21 Motion in Limine #1 – Golden Rule
Document Filed Date
September 07, 2021
Case Filing Date
March 12, 2018
Category
Premise Liability (e.g., dangerous conditions of property, slip/trip and fall, dog attack, etc.) (General Jurisdiction)
Status
Court-Ordered Dismissal - Other (Other) 12/16/2021
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.