Supreme Court
Docket (Register of Actions)
SASS v. COHEN
Division SF
Division SF
Case Number S255262
| Date | Description | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| 04/16/2019 | Petition for review filed |
Plaintiff and Respondent: Deborah Sass |
| 04/16/2019 | Record requested | Court of Appeal record imported and available electronically. |
| 04/22/2019 | Received Court of Appeal record | One doghouse. |
| 05/06/2019 | Answer to petition for review filed |
Defendant and Appellant: Theodore Cohen |
| 05/16/2019 | Reply to answer to petition filed |
Plaintiff and Respondent: Deborah Sass |
| 05/22/2019 | Petition for review granted; issues limited |
The petition for review is granted. The issues to be briefed and argued are limited to the following: (1) In a complaint that seeks an accounting of specified assets, is the plaintiff required to plead a specific amount of damages to support a default judgment, or is it sufficient for purposes of Code of Civil Procedure section 580 to identify the assets that are in defendant's possession and request half of their value? (2) Should the comparison of whether a default judgment exceeds the amount of compensatory damages demanded in the operative pleadings examine the aggregate amount of non-duplicative damages or instead proceed on a claim-by-claim or item-by-item basis? Votes: Cantil-Sakauye, C.J,. Chin, Corrigan, Liu, Cuéllar, Kruger and Groban, JJ. |
| 06/05/2019 | Certification of interested entities or persons filed |
Deborah Sass, Plaintiff and Respondent Robert S. Gerstein, Associated counsel |
| 06/10/2019 | Certification of interested entities or persons filed |
Theodore Cohen, Defendant and Appellant Todd E. Lundell, Retained counsel |
| 06/24/2019 | Received: |
Untimely request for an extension of time to file the opening brief on the merits.Deborah Sass, Plaintiff and Respondent Robert S. Gerstein, Associated counsel |
| 06/25/2019 | Application for relief from default filed | By Robert S. Gerstein, counsel for respondent, requesting permission to file an untimely extension of time to file the opening brief on the merits. |
| 06/28/2019 | Order filed | The application by the respondent for relief from default to file an untimely request for extension of time is hereby granted. |
| 06/28/2019 | Application for extension of time filed | by Robert S. Gerstein, counsel for respondent, request an extension of time to file the opening brief on the merits until and including July 22, 2019. |
| 06/28/2019 | Extension of time granted | On application of respondent and good cause appearing, it is ordered that the time to serve and file the opening brief on the merits is extended to and including July 22, 2019. |
| 07/23/2019 | Opening brief on the merits filed |
Plaintiff and Respondent: Deborah Sass Opening brief on the merits filed. Due on 07/22/2019 By 31 Day(s) Filed pursuant to rules of court, CRC 8.25(b). |
| 08/15/2019 | Application for extension of time filed | by Theodore L. Cohen, counsel for appellant, requesting an extension of time to file the answer brief on merits until and including September 20, 2019. |
| 08/20/2019 | Extension of time granted | On application of appellant and good cause appearing, it is ordered that the time to serve and file the answer brief on the merits is extended to and including September 20, 2019. |
| 09/23/2019 | Answer brief on the merits filed |
Defendant and Appellant: Theodore Cohen Answer brief on the merits filed. Due on 09/20/2019 By 29 Day(s) Filed pursuant to rules of court, CRC 8.25(b) |
| 10/01/2019 | Application for extension of time filed |
respondent requesting extension until November 13, 2019 to file reply brief on the merits. by Robert S. Gerstein, counsel |
| 10/02/2019 | Extension of time granted | On application of respondent and good cause appearing, it is ordered that the time to serve and file the reply brief on the merits is extended to and including November 13, 2019. |
| 11/06/2019 | Application for extension of time filed | By Robert S. Gerstein, counsel for respondent requesting an extension to November 25, 2019 to file the reply brief on the merits. |
| 11/13/2019 | Extension of time granted | On application of respondent and good cause appearing, it is ordered that the time to serve and file the reply brief on the merits is extended to and including November 25, 2019. |
| 11/26/2019 | Reply brief filed (case fully briefed) |
Plaintiff and Respondent: Deborah Sass Reply brief filed (case fully briefed). Due on 11/13/2019 By 0 Day Reply brief filed (case fully briefed). Due on 11/25/2019 By 12 Day(s) (CRC 8.25(b)) |
| 02/18/2020 | Oral argument letter sent |
Dear counsel: Please be advised that the court could set this case for argument within the next few months. Schedules showing the court's oral argument dates and locations for the next twelve months can be found at http://www.courts.ca.gov/supremecourt.htm by clicking on "calendars," and then accessing the "Oral Argument Calendar Dates" documents. Any counsel who believes good cause exists to avoid scheduling oral argument for a particular date (including counsel who, before receiving this letter, have previously asked to avoid certain dates) should inform the court within 7 calendar days from the date of this letter with a detailed explanation for such cause. Thereafter, counsel must immediately update the court on an ongoing basis as additional conflicts constituting good cause may arise. Examples of conflicts previously found to constitute good cause to avoid scheduling argument on any particular date include significant health-related issues; prepaid and nonrefundable travel arrangements booked in advance of the court's notification regarding oral argument; and significant family events such as weddings. Examples of conflicts previously found not to constitute good cause include scheduled trial and hearing dates in lower courts; conflicting professional seminars, meetings, or conventions; and planned significant family events that do not conflict with the actual dates on which argument might be held. Once the court files an order setting this case for oral argument, that date will not be changed absent exceptional cause, such as a medical emergency. Immediately upon filing of the calendar setting this case for argument, the court will send counsel an email communication with (1) a copy of that document; (2) an appearance sheet, upon which counsel must provide the names of the attorney or attorneys who will present argument, along with further instructions governing any request to divide argument time; and (3) a general notice regarding appearance for oral argument before the court. If a party wishes to bring to the court's attention new authorities, new legislation, or other matters that were not available in time to be included in the party's brief on the merits, the party must comply with California Rules of Court, rules 8.630(d) and 8.520(d). Sincerely, JORGE E. NAVARRETE Clerk and Executive Officer of the Supreme Court |
| 09/16/2020 | Case ordered on calendar | To be argued on Wednesday, October 7, 2020, at 9:00 a.m., in San Francisco. Counsel to appear via video or teleconference per Administrative Orders 2020-03-13 (March 16, 2020) and 2020-03-27 (March 27, 2020). |
| 09/22/2020 | Case ordered on calendar |
To be argued on Wednesday, October 7, 2020, at 9:00 a.m., in San Francisco. Counsel to appear via video or teleconference per Administrative Orders 2020-03-13 (March 16, 2020) and 2020-03-27 (March 27, 2020). *First amended calendar issued this date reflecting justice pro tempore assignment. |
| 09/23/2020 | Justice pro tempore assigned |
Hon. Patricia Guerrero Fourth Appellate District, Division One |
| 10/07/2020 | Cause argued and submitted | |
| 12/23/2020 | Notice of forthcoming opinion posted | To be filed on Thursday, December 24, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. |
| 12/24/2020 | Opinion filed: Judgment affirmed in full |
Because the Court of Appeal's opinion accords with our own holding here, we affirm its judgment. Majority Opinion by Cantil-Sakauye, C. J. -- Corrigan, Liu, Cuéllar, Kruger, Groban, and Guerrero*, JJ. * Associate Justice of the Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division One, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution. |
| 01/26/2021 | Remittitur issued | |
| 02/16/2021 | Received: | Received receipt for remittitur from Court of Appeal, 2nd Appellate District. |
Click here to request automatic e-mail notifications about this case.