DECLARATION IN RESPONSE

Esther Tendo Atam

13621 Arcturus Ave.

Gardena, CA 90249

Natashchan1@yahoo.com

Plaintiff in Pro Per

 

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

 
ESTHER ATAM,

Plaintiff

vs.

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PERMANENTE MEDICAL GROUP (SCPMG), et al.,

Defendants

 Case No.: 22STCV37929

 

DECLARATION IN RESPONSE TO NUNC PRO TUNC MINUTE ORDER

 

I ESTHER ATAM, declare the following:

  1. I am the Plaintiff in this case.
  2. I am over eighteen years old.
  3. I am of sound mind.
  4. I am therefore competent to swear on the matters said herein.
  5. I write this declaration in response to the Court’s Nunc Pro Tunc Minute Order issued by this Court on June 8, 2023.
  6. On June 12, 2023, I received a certificate of mailing from the court, notifying me of the Minute order dated June 8, 2023. The Minute order purported to correct the Court’s Order dated May 9, 2023 that ordered the Defendant to post a $10,000 security with the court within 30 days. The June 8th Order therefore stated that the May 9th Order was corrected to state that: “Plaintiff is ordered to post a $10,000 security with the court within 30 days.”
  7. I understand that Courts have ” inherent power to exercise reasonable control over all proceedings connected with the litigation before it.” See Mowrer v. Superior Court (1969) 3 Cal.App.3d 223, 230, 83 Cal.Rptr. 125.). However, the improper exercise of said power amounts to an abuse of the Court’s discretion. “The appropriate test for abuse of discretion is whether the trial court exceeded the bounds of reason.” Shamblin v. Brattain, 44 Cal.3d 474, 478 (Cal. 1988).
  8. Here, the Minute Order issued on May 9th directed the Defendant to post security within 30 days. 30 days from May 9th would lapse on June 8, 2023. However, I received and/or was notified of the June 8th Minute Order via mail on June 12, 2023, which is beyond the 30 days specified in the May 9th It follows; the Court’s June 8th Order is void, since Defendant already failed to post security as directed.
  9. Failure of the Court to amend and further seek to enforce a void order is unreasonable and is an abuse of the Court’s power.

 

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief.

 

Dated: ______________

 

_____________________  

ESTHER TENDO ATAM

Plaintiff, in Pro Per

 

 

 

 

 

 

State of California County of _______________

 

 

Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me on this ______ day of _____________, 20___, by _______________________ ___________________________________________________, proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) who appeared before me.

 

 

 

(Seal)                                                                                                   Signature______________________

 

 

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 )

 

 

Verified by MonsterInsights