arrow left
arrow right
  • STEVEN WEISBERG ET AL VS ALEXANDER KWONG TOMIZO HOM ET AL Premise Liability (e.g., dangerous conditions of property, slip/trip and fall, dog attack, etc.) (General Jurisdiction) document preview
  • STEVEN WEISBERG ET AL VS ALEXANDER KWONG TOMIZO HOM ET AL Premise Liability (e.g., dangerous conditions of property, slip/trip and fall, dog attack, etc.) (General Jurisdiction) document preview
						
                                

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