The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutConsent Calendar #3 8-17-87 8-17-87 m lntel*-Com AUGUST 5, 1987 HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIIr///- '~' -'~ FROH: CITy ATTORNEY SUSJ [CT: CLAIMANT: CHIZHIK, SVETLANA; D/L: 12/4/86; DATE FILED ~,~ W/CITY: 7/20/87; CLAIN NO: 87,20; CARL WARREN FILE After investigation and review it is recommended that the above- referenced claim be rejected and the City Clerk directed to give proper notice of the rejection to the claimant and to the claimant's attorney. City Attorney JGR (F4 .'se) Enclosure: Copy of Claim I.AW OFFICES OF 5TOCKDALE. PECKHAM ~ WEKNEK 17671 IRVINE BOULEVARD. SUITE 214 OTHER OFF~CES TUSTIN. C.~.IFORNIA 92680 1520 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD, SUITE 800 LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA, ~0017 JOHN E. STOCKDALE' (714) 8~-1131 (213) 4~4-2303 JOHN HENRY PECKHAM TELEX-678625-$TOCKDAi-E TELEX-678625:STOCKOALE DAVID C. WERNER FA~ (213) 413-6238 DELPHR.~LSON July 15, 1987 ANDRB~V P. BANKS* CHAR~S H. STOKE~=, JR. EDOR G. ANDERSON III CARROL A. ATZEFF Certified Mail BriAR! E. NOKE$ Return sted JAMES D. GABRIEL RONALD A. CHAVEZ JULIE M. SOOEN City Clerk' s office JU-,^c. HAVE,S City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way " ~ =-~'~ Tustin, CA 92680. Attention: Mary Wynn RE: Svetlana Chizhik vs. City of Tustin Dear Ms. Wynn: This office represents Svetlana Chizhik with respect to a lawsuit entitled FiSher vs. County of Oranger et al., orange county Superior Court Case Number 52 10 33. A copy of that lawsuit is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". The allegations in that lawsuit purport to take recovery against Svetlana ~b~zhik, among others, for alleged acts of negligent driving. It is the contention of Svetlana Chizhik that the City of Tustin was negligent in the design, maintenance and lighting of the inter- section of Holt and Wellington, referred to in the police report (attached hereto as Exhibit "B") and, therefore, is responsible in whole or in part for the injuries alleged in the complaint. Svetlana Chizhik was served with the lawsuit on May 6, 1987, and now presents the instant claim against the City of Tustin for indemni- fication. If there is any further information needed to document this ~ITY CLERKtS OFPICE CHIZHIK VS. TUSTIN JULY 15, 1987 PAGE 2 claim, please contact the undersigned and advise of the insuffi- ciency. Very truly yours, STOCKDALE, PECKHAM & WERNER MRM/jat Enclosures Applicant: Svetlana Chizhik 17672 Anglin Lane Tustin, CA 92680 · A~¥ ~ PA~ ~T~C~JT A~£'T' ~ ~a~ ~ ~£~$): TL~C~[: F~ C~T US[ ~Y 333 Civic Center L..ve West Santa Ana, CA 92701 ~O~N[v~O~("*U[): Plaintiff AT%O~NE¥ san - 41867 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA. COUNTY OF ORANGE 700 Ci~ C~n~ Od~ Writ ~All AM, CA 92702-0~38 ~INTIFF; c ' LE~ ~LARIE FISHER, by and through her Guardian ~A~ .' Ad Litem, G~G FISHER CO~TY OF O~NGE, CITY OF TUSTIN, SVET~NA CHIZHIK AND DEAN CATO ~ DO~S ~ ~O 50 CASE ~ CO~P~lNT--Personal In]uu, Pro~dy Damage, Wrongful Death ~ MOTOR VEHICLE ~O~ER(specllr): Pre-judgment Jntc~re t ~Prope~ Damage ~ Wrongtul'Deeth . ~personal InJuU ~ Other Damago~ (,pecl/y): 1. This plea~ng, including attachments and exhibils, consisls of Ihe tollow~n0 number el pa~e[ . . 2. I. Each plaintiff named above Is a competent adult ~ Except plaintiff (name): LEAH ~'~RIE FISHER ~ a corporation qualified to do business in CaliJornia ~ an unlncorpora{ed enlity (describe): ~ a public entity (describe): ~a minor ~ an adull ~ for whom a guardian or conservator of the estate or a guardian ad lilem nas been appomleO ~ other (spec#y): ~ other (specity): ~ Except plaintiff (name): ~a COrporalion Qualilied to do business in Calilornia ~ an unincorporated entity (~escribe): ~ a public entity (describe): ~a minor ~ an adult ~ for whom a guardian or conservalor OI the estate or a guardian ad litem has been appomteO ~ other (=pecify): -- ~ other (spbcify): " 5 b. ~ Plaintiff (name): ~ is Ooing business under the licl~tioul name el (::pecify): .......... and has complied with the fictitious business name laws. C. ~ tnlormation about additional plaintiffs who are not core,runt adults is shown in Complaint-- a A~achment 2c. ~ (COnllnue~) ~ ~5?~.~.".~.?~'t~ COMP~lNT, Por~onal Inlu~. Prope~ Damoge. Exhibit Al ;HORT TITLE: {,,...~?.;.~. · (~.j..,~7:, cAs£ ,uua£n:_ [:'];$11~R VS. COUN?¥ O~" O. NCT. I CoMPLAINT--Personal Injury, Propert7 Damage, Wrongful Dealh p,~'~ ,,,e ;3. a. Each defendant named above is a natural person ~ Except defendant (name): COUNTY bi? O['~.[',~[{'~"~ Elcepl de~endant bus · OrOanization. Iorm unknown ~ a business organization, form unknown ~ a co~oration ~ a corooration ~ an umncorporated enhty (describe): ~ an unincorporated enl~ty (describe): ~'= ~ a ou~hc entily (aescribe)~ ~OUR[~ ~ a public enlily (descnDe): ~ otAer (sperry)' ~ other ~ Except defendant (name): ~ a business organization, form unknown r-~ a business organization, form unknown ~ a corporahon ~ an unincorporated entily (describe): ~ an unincorporated entily (describe): ~ a public entity (dosct~Oo)~ ~ other (specify),* ':' "*' b. The true names and capac~tms bi defendants suod as Does are unknown to plaintiff. c. E~ Intormalion about additional delen~anls who are not natural persons is contained in Complaint-- Attachment d, ['~ Delendants who are joined pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 382 are (names): 4. ~ Plaintiff is required to comply w~th a claims statute, and a [-~ plaintifl has complied with applicable claims statutes, or b. ~ plaintiff is excused from complying because (specify): This court is the proper court because ~ al least one defendant now resides in ils jurisdictional area. ['-"-] abe principal place of business of a corporation or unincorporated association is in ~ts jurisdictional a~ea, ~ tniu~ to person or damage Io personal property occurred in its jurisdictional area. ~ ot~r (specify): '-" _] The following paragraphs o! this complaint are alleged on information and belief(~pec~lyparagrapn numbers): (Continued) SHc)RT TITLE: FISHER VS. COUNTY OF ORANGE, et al. COMPLAINT--Personal Injury, Property Damage. Wrongful Death (Continued) 7. ~ Yhe damages claimed for wrongful death and the relal,onships ~-"] listed in Complaint--Attachment 7 8. Plaintiff has suffered L--'.] wage loss ,F--') loss of use of p~'operty ~ hospital and medical expenses ~'.__] general damage r-~ property c~amage ~--.] loss of earning capacity ~ omar damage ($pecity): Pre-j udgment interest 9. Relief sougl~l in this complmnt is wilhin the jurisdicbon ol II,is court 10. PLAINTIFF PRAYS For judgment tot costs el suit; lot such roliel as is I,',.ir. iust. and equitable, and for ~X'~ compensatory damages ~'('] (Superfor Court] according Io prool. ~J (Municipal and Justice Court) in tho amount gl $ ~ other (specHy}: 1 1. The following cau{es of action are attached and II'~e statements above apply to each (Each complaint ~nu$! have one or nlo/e causes of act/on attached.) [ ~. Motor Vehicle ~ t~ General Negligence ~ Intentional Tort ~ ProduCts Liabihty [~ Premises Liabilily .; ~ giber ~$pecdy): .... lie AND I[U DAVID G. URE v~/\, COMPLAINT-- Personal lnlurv, Properly. Damage, I SHORT TITLE:. c^:;E Nu~.au£n FISX{ER VS. C0~NTY OF ORANGE, ET AL. FIRST _ CAUSE OF ACTION--Motor Vehicle Page . .4 Lm.h,n~er ) - ATTACHMENT TO~ ["~Complain! {'--]Cross-Complaint (Use a separate cause o! action form for each cause of action.) ~ Plaintiff(name): LEAH ~iARIE FISHER by and throuqh her C, uardi, an Ad Litem, . GREG FISHER MV-I. Plaintiff ,lieges the acts o! defendants were negligent; the acts were the le,Jal (proximale) cause o! injur,e; !' and clamages to plaintilf; the acts occurred .. onCe, ate): December 4, 1986 atCplaceJ: At the intersection of IIolt Avenue and Wellington Avenue in · the County of Orange. MV-2. DEFENDANTS · a. F~]. The defendants who operated a motor vehicle are (na,ne$): SVETLANA CHIZHIK, DEAN CATO ~ Does 1 ..to. 5 _. b. [-~7] The de~endants who employed the persons who operated a motor vehicle in the course el their employment are (name=J: SVETLANA CHIZHIK, DEAN CATO ~ Does 6.__to 1 0 _ c. ~'The defendants who owned the motor vehicle which was opernted wilh thc:ir permis.';ion SVETLANA CHIZHIK, DEAN CATO ~ Does 11 ._ ~o 15 d. ~ The det(..~dants who ontrusta~ tho motor vehicle are (names): SVETLANA CHIZHIK, DEAN CATO ~ Does !6 to 20 e. [--~ The defendants who were tho agents and umployeos of the other delenrJ~rlt.5 and ac[ed wlthi~ the scope o! the agency were SVETLANA CIIIZIIIK, DEAN CATO ~Does 2L.__Io_25 . f. ~ The deiendanls who are liable [o plaintiffs for other rea:,:)ns and the reasons for the liability are ['~llisted in AtJachmenl MV-2f ['--']as Iollows: ' [---'} Does ......... to ........ 5 2 Ju(~,C~.I Coun¢,l OI C&lllOtm& 7GC;02 $'HORT TITLE: '~" :*" k_:'.." FISHER VS. COUNTY OF ORANGE, et al. SECOND CAUSE OF ACTiON--General Negligence Page 5 (..mt~,) .- ATTACHMENT TO ~--~C0mplain! ~-qCr0$$-C0mploint (Use '~$eparate cause o! action form for oech c',use of action.) ON-I. Plaintiff(name): LEAH )%ARIE FISIIER by and through hat ¢;uardian ad Litam GREG FISHER , a)~egesthatdeiendanl(same): COUNTY OF ORANGE, CITY OF TUSTIH, SVETLAHA CIIIZHIK DEAN CATO ' was the legal (proximate) cause o! damages to ph6ntdf. Dy tho tallowing acts or om~=s~orts to ecl dofonCant negligently cause~ the aamage to ~laintill on(~ete): Dece~er 4, 1986 ~'. at(place): The intersection of Itolt Avenue and Wellington Avenue in the County of Orange. (description of reasons for liability): The intersection as well as the street, roadway and surroundinq area involved was designed, maintained, managed and supervised, overseen, monitored and in all other ways done so in a negligeht manner which created an unreasonable risk o~ harm to individuals using the street, roadway and crosswalks. Furthermore, the defendants, and each of them, have created an unreasonable condition, a dangerous condition and a trap for 'the unweary using said street and /or roadway. """ ~"~ '~:) CAUSE OF ACTION--Ge.ernt Negligence -' ~HP 555--Pa~ 1 IRev 8-~} OPI ~2 ~ ~st 4~ Exhibit B (Rev 6-84) OP! 042 ARRATIVE/SUPPLEM ENTAL ~?'- ............. ~'" ')'5-~ ............ :'7~>' '