Esther Tendo Atam

13621 Arcturus Ave.

Gardena, CA 90249

Natashchan1@yahoo.com

Plaintiff in Pro Per

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

I, ESTHER TENDO ATAM, declare that:

1. I am the Plaintiff in the above-titled matter.
2. I am an adult of sound mind, hence capable of making this declaration.
3. I make this Affidavit in response to the notice of ruling filed by defendants on 04/14/2023.

The discovery process has been abused, to my detriment

4. Under California Code of Civil Procedure §2025.420, the court, for good cause shown, may make any order that justice requires to protect any party, deponent, or other natural person or organization from unwarranted annoyance, embarrassment, or oppression, or undue burden and expense. “One of the powers which has always been recognized as inherent in courts, which are protected in their existence, their powers and jurisdiction by constitutional provisions, has been the right to control its order of business and to so conduct the same that the rights of all suitors before them might be safeguarded.” Rice v. Superior Court (1982) 136 Cal.App.3d 81, 90. “We have often recognized the ‘inherent powers of the court … to insure the orderly administration of justice.”’ Walker v. Superior Court (1991) 53 Cal. 3d 257, quoting Hays v. Superior Court (1940) 16 Cal.2d 260, 264.
5. This Court ought to protect me from the blatant abuse of the discovery process in this case.
6. Kaiser failed to respond to Request for Admission that was due January 9, 2023.
7. In addition to the foregoing, Judge Elaine Lu stayed discovery during the hearing held on February 16, 2023. Staying the discovery process is unfair to me since the information requested in the discovery would provide pertinent facts and/or evidence, which would establish my claims against the Defendants. Also, failure of Judge Lu to find Defendants in abuse of the discovery process shows how Judge Lu is biased.
8. March 17^th, 2023, Judge Small vacated all the hearings in this case, including the May 9^th hearing to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint, and said action automatically voided this Court’s Order to Stay Discovery until after the hearing on the Motion to Dismiss on May 9^th.
9. From March 17^th until the case management hearing on March 28^th, 2023, the motion to dismiss filed by defendants for May 9^th, 2023, was off the docket with no re-set date.
10. May 9^th then became available and I reserved May 9^th for a hearing on sanctions.
11. I then filed a motion for sanctions in dept 26, which was accepted by the court and on docket for May 9^th, 2023.
12. Accordingly, I again sent out second Requests for Admission on March 28^th,2023. The interrogatories was delivered March 31, 2023 (see Proof of Service). Therefore, a response is due by May 1, 2023.
13. Next, I mailed out interrogatories to Defendants on March 28^th , 2023. The interrogatories was delivered March 31, 2023 (see Proof of Service). Therefore, a response is due by May 1, 2023.
14. I also re-issued subpoenas to defendants to the hearing for sanctions, on docket for May 9^th, 2023.
15. Finally, I re-sent a second request for RN records to Kaiser National HR services on March 28, 2023. A response was due by March 31, 2023. It is notable that Kaiser has a 72- hours response policy, which it failed to adhere to. Kaiser has not produced the requested RN records.

The Court unjustly removed upcoming hearings

16. I am facing a threat of all future hearings being put off-calendar. The Minute Order that was issued by this court has the effect of putting off all future hearings off-calendar. The following pending upcoming hearings were therefore struck off: hearing to show cause, case management conference, status conference, motion to strike affirmative defense, and motion to deem facts admitted. It is notable that I had already made filings with respect to each hearing. My good faith efforts would therefore go to the drain in the event this Court upholds its decision to strike off the hearings.

Judge Elaine Lu is colluding with Judge Small

17. On March 17^th, 2023, Judge Small vacated all scheduled pending hearings in this case. The only hearing on docket in this case was a Case Management hearing, which was scheduled for March 28, 2023. The said hearing was initially on docket for April 10, 2023- the same day for which Plaintiff had subpoenaed the psychologist and the other SCPMG Defendants. It follows; with no more pending hearings in this case after March 28, 2023, the case was closed.
18. Judge Elaine Lu colludes with Judge Michael Small at Department 57, to further curtail my rights. For instance, the Case Management Statement filed in Departments 26 and 57 in anticipation of the Case Management hearing on March 28, 2023, clearly presented the fraudulent RN records produced by Kaiser. Judge Small failed to acknowledge this in his Minute Order on March 28, 2023. Then on March 29, 2023, Judge Small again vacated plaintiffs motion for sanctions on docket in Department 26. Judge Small then replaced plaintiff’s motion for sanctions, with a motion to dismiss, and moved said hearing to dept 57. Judge Small also vacated all pending Reservation Ids already reserved by me and not even filed with the court. This included Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint in Department 26, and Motion to Disqualify Elaine Lu.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.

Dated: 04/15/2023

Respectfully submitted,

_______ESTHER ATAM_____

ESTHER TENDO ATAM

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 )