No. 18-424

Judith M. Brown-Williams, et vir v. Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County, et al.

Lower Court: California
Docketed: 2018-10-03
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Response Waived
Tags: civil-procedure civil-rights consumer-warranty court-sanctions due-process excusable-neglect fraud rico standing vexatious-litigant vexatious-litigation warranty
Key Terms:
Securities Jurisdiction JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference: 2018-11-30
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Did the Petitioner prevail in the Song Beverly Consumer Warranty Act violation?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Did the Petitioner prevail in the Song Beverly Consumer Warranty Act violation of (Code of Civil Procedure Section 1790 et seq.) 2. Did Respondent file the Judgment entered And signed by the trial Court on April 27, 2009? 3. Was the April 27, 2009 judgment filed by the Respondents incorrect and false? 4. Did Petitioners prove with the specificity required that the Respondents in concert committed the worst species of “fraud upon the Court” and RICO Violations? 5. Did Petitioners have good cause to file the several Actions that caused Petitioners to be deemed vexatious? 6. Where the Petitioners sanctioned by the trial due To inadvertence surprise and excusable neglect? j/ ii

Docket Entries

2018-12-03
Petition DENIED.
2018-11-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/30/2018.
2018-10-16
Waiver of right of respondents Bradley & Gmelich to respond filed.
2018-10-16
Waiver of right of respondent Bentley Motors, Inc. Rusnak/Pasadena to respond filed.
2018-07-25
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due November 2, 2018)

Attorneys

Bentley Motors, Inc. Rusnak/Pasadena
Nathaniel K. FisherSquire Patton Boggs (US) LLP, Respondent
Nathaniel K. FisherSquire Patton Boggs (US) LLP, Respondent
Bradley & Gmelich
Mark SchaefferNemecek & Cole, Respondent
Mark SchaefferNemecek & Cole, Respondent
Judith M. Brown-Williams, et vir
Judith M. Brown-Williams — Petitioner
Judith M. Brown-Williams — Petitioner