Esther Tendo Atam
13621 Arcturus Ave.
Gardena, CA 90249
Plaintiff in Pro Per
| SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
|
NOTICE TO DEFENDANTS AND TO THEIR ATTORNEY(S) OF RECORD AND SPECIAL NOTICE TO THIS HONORABLE COURT:
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on 03/05/2024 at 08:30 am or soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in Department 26 of this court located at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012, Plaintiff, ESTHER TENDO ATAM (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) will, and hereby does, move for an Order for sanctions against all Defendants.
This Motion is made pursuant to Code Civ. Proc., § 128.5 (a) on the grounds that Defendant filed a frivolous motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint.
Defendants’ frivolous conduct is targeted at impairing Plaintiff’s rights and threatens Plaintiff’s access to justice.
This Motion is based on this Notice, the attached Memorandum of Points and Authorities, the pleadings herein, and on such further oral and/or documentary evidence as may be presented or judicially noticed at the hearing of this Motion.
Respectfully submitted,
____________________________
ESTHER TENDO ATAM
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT
STATEMENT OF FACTS
On 2/06/2023, Defendant filed an Ex Parte Application (Defendant’s Ex Parte Application for Order Dismissing Plaintiff’s Complaint Pursuant to CCP 391.3 (b)).
The Defendant had based their motion on the wrong citation of the law. It is notable that the Defendant filed the motion pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 391.3. No noticed motion was ever filed to dismiss this case. The Defendants also lied in the motion to dismiss. Notably, Defendants argued that Plaintiff was not an employee of Kaiser Foundation Hospitals. Defendants further argued that Plaintiff is already declared a vexatious litigant hence should not be allowed to proceed with the matter, and that her Complaint raises no cause of action.
Particulars of sanctionable conduct
- Defendant has lied to the Court.
- Defendant has also made frivolous arguments.
LEGAL ARGUMENT
- DEFENDANTS SHOULD BE SANCTIONED FOR DELIBERATELY OBTRUCTING JUSTICE
A motion for sanctions requests that a trial court “order a party, the party’s attorney, or both, to pay the reasonable expenses, including attorney’s fees, incurred by another party as a result of actions or tactics, made in bad faith, that are frivolous or solely intended to cause unnecessary delay.” Code Civ. Proc., § 128.5 (a). “Frivolous” is defined as “totally and completely without merit or for the sole purpose of harassing an opposing party.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 128.5(b)(2).) The “bad faith requirement of section 128.5 does not impose a determination of evil motive. The concept of ‘harassment’ includes vexatious tactics which, although literally authorized by statute or rule, go beyond that which is by any standard appropriate under the circumstances.” In re Marriage of Sahafzadeh-Taeb & Taeb (2019) 39 Cal.App.5th 124, 145-46 (Taeb).
In the instant action, the Defendants are abusing the Court’s process. First, they seek to dismiss Plaintiff’s case based on the wrong citation of the law. Code of Civil Procedure Section 391.3 provides for an Order requiring plaintiff to furnish security; order dismissing litigation. Besides, Code of civ code 391.3 (b) is an order NOT A REQUEST, to dismiss the case; while 391.3 (a) is an order NOT REQUEST to furnish security. On the other hand, Section 391.1 provides for a Motion for order requiring plaintiff furnish security or dismissal of litigation.
To provide further emphasis of the foregoing, Kaiser can only apply 391.1 to request or motion the court for orders. It follows; orders pursuant to civ code 391.3 (b) and civ code 391.3 (a) do not apply to plaintiff’s case.
In consideration of the foregoing, the court cannot possibly find under section 391.3 (a) that plaintiff has no reasonable possibility of prevailing in the litigation against defendant because, again, no request was made to dismiss litigation or furnish security. It is Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant should have cited 391.1, which is the noticed motion for plaintiff to furnish security or dismissal of litigation.
Further, Defendant argued that Plaintiff was not employed by Kaiser Foundation Hospitals. It is Plaintiff’s understanding that a contract of employment is a contract by which one, who is the employer, engages another, who is the employee, to do something for the benefit of the employer or a third person. Here, SCPMG is a Southern Californian based health care provider that employs nurses, 25 doctors and other health care specialists that provide services to patients at Kaiser foundations 26 hospitals, a not-for-profit hospital. Besides, documents already before this Court’s record proves that Plaintiff was an employee of the Kaiser Foundation Hospitals.
Also, a request for RN records on March 14, 2023 made to Kaiser resulted in the production of fraudulent RN records March 17, 2023.
Such conduct amounts to frivolous conduct that warrants court sanctions, as described above. Defendants are therefore not entitled to any of their prayers in their motion. On the contrary, Defendants should be sanctioned for abusing the Court process by filing a frivolous motion to dismiss. Defendant’s counsel has been engaging in frivolous objections on procedural issues, which have made shifted the court from the merits of the case.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff respectfully requests that this Court enter an Order of sanctions against Defendants that:
- Defendant pays sanctions for deliberately obstructing justice.
- Defendant pays sanctions as Plaintiff’s litigation expenses in connection with this instant Motion.
- Plaintiff also prays for such other and further relief that this court deems just and proper.
DATED: ________________
Respectfully submitted,
__________________________ ______
ESTHER TENDO ATAM
Esther Tendo Atam
13621 Arcturus Ave.
Gardena, CA 90249
Plaintiff in Pro Per
| SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
|
I, ESTHER TENDO ATAM, declare that:
- I am the Plaintiff in the above-titled matter.
- Defendants filed a Motion to dismiss my case based on the wrong citation of the law.
- The motion was based on section 391.3 (a), which does not warrant the Defendants a dismissal of my case. Defendant should have cited 391.1, which is the noticed motionfor plaintiff to furnish security or dismissal of litigation.
- Defendant also argued that I was not employed by Kaiser Foundation Hospitals.
- It is my understanding that a contract of employment is a contract by which one, who is the employer, engages another, who is the employee, to do something for the benefit of the employer or a third person.
- Here, SCPMG is a Southern Californian based health care provider that employs nurses, 25 doctors and other health care specialists that provide services to patients at Kaiser foundations 26 hospitals, a not-for-profit hospital.
- Besides, documents already before this Court’s record proves that I was an employee of the Kaiser Foundation Hospitals.
- Also, a request for RN records on March 14, 2023 made to Kaiser resulted in the production of fraudulent RN records March 17, 2023.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
Dated: ___________
Respectfully submitted,
________ _______________________
ESTHER TENDO ATAM
Esther Tendo Atam
13621 Arcturus Ave.
Gardena, CA 90249
Plaintiff in Pro Per
| SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
|
The motion of Plaintiff, ESTHER TENDO ATAM (“the Plaintiff”), for an order providing sanctions against Defendants for deliberately obstructing justice and engaging in frivolous conduct. This matter having come on regularly for hearing before the undersigned on 03/05/24 upon notice duly and regularly given, the Plaintiff appearing, and oral and documentary evidence having been received and the matter having been submitted, and good cause appearing therefore,
The Court hereby finds that the order providing sanctions against the Defendants is justified by the conduct or circumstance showing that Defendant is sanctionable.
It is hereby ordered that:
- Defendant pays $_________ for deliberately obstructing justice.
- Defendant pays $_________ as Plaintiff’s litigation expenses in connection with this instant Motion.
It is so ordered.
Date: _____________
________________________________
Hon. _______________
At Legal writing experts, we would be happy to assist in preparing any legal document you need. We are international lawyers and attorneys with significant experience in legal drafting, Commercial-Corporate practice and consulting. In the last few years, we have successfully undertaken similar assignments for clients from different jurisdictions. If given this opportunity, The LegalPen will be able to prepare the legal document within the shortest time possible. You can send us your quick enquiry ( here )