Wrongful Death Suit filed Nov. 13, 2013 in California, #2

[justice be served]

BBM

Perhaps he and Dina got hit with the same 'illness'? And were in the third floor bedroom to recoup while all the phones were shut down, wearing eye masks (or whatever they're called with ear plugs in? And the boyfriends daughter was up there also with that horrible sickness? Also with earplugs? And not one of them could hear the cops pounding on the doors and windows. For all those hours. Yeah, makes sense, right? NOT.

Something bizarre about that story too. IMO

Yes, just add this one to the other fishy stories. Can't agree more.

 

[LuckyLucy2]

I agree, Morag. As I recall, Dina's then-boyfriend was staying at her home on the island. Remember? He is the one who finally answered the door to her house, after all those hours when police were looking for Dina and knocking on the doors, and no one was answering. I've always wondered why he didn't answer the door earlier, since Dina claims she was sleeping with ear plugs in and her phone off. Couldn't he hear the police at the door?

Perhaps Dina wanted to be with him before he left, and that's why she left the hospital for 12 hours the first day Max was in the ICU?

I wonder when the boyfriend left for home? His daughter is the one that posted on social media so early that Max wasn't expected to make it. I've always assumed she heard that from her dad. She sounded so shocked and broken up about it in her post.

Do you have a MSM link that shows the boyfriend answered the door? TIA.

IIRC, he flew in AFTER Max was injured, that Monday evening, according to the article in Phoenix Magazine.

 

[LuckyLucy2]

BBM

Yep, indeed, very bizarre choice of words. "naked and desirable". wow. Oh Dina, Dina, Dina. I do imagine her doing this.

Not bizarre at all. It is the Zahaus that claim Rebecca's nipples were pinched by Adam. Not mine. And then they go on to make him sound like a sex-crazed maniac, who is so overwhelmed with lust he JUST HAS TO pinch her nipples. That is what THEY infer in their narrative.

So, so ridiculous!

 

[MyBelle]

Do you have a MSM link that shows the boyfriend answered the door? TIA.

IIRC, he flew in AFTER Max was injured, that Monday evening, according to the article in Phoenix Magazine.

Oh, I didn't realize that. Good point. Thanks.

 

[MyBelle]

Not bizarre at all. It is the Zahaus that claim Rebecca's nipples were pinched by Adam. Not mine. And then they go on to make him sound like a sex-crazed maniac, who is so overwhelmed with lust he JUST HAS TO pinch her nipples. That is what THEY infer in their narrative.

So, so ridiculous!

The entirety of the lawsuit is ridiculous which is why the media is following it. The lawsuit claims either Dina or Nina sat on the bed while Adam tossed RZ's body off the balcony so the bed wouldn't move more than a foot. They don't know which one but apparently, because they are twins, it doesn't matter.

JMO

 

[LuckyLucy2]

The entirety of the lawsuit is ridiculous which is why the media is following it. The lawsuit claims either Dina or Nina sat on the bed while Adam tossed RZ's body off the balcony so the bed wouldn't move more than a foot. They don't know which one but apparently, because they are twins, it doesn't matter.

JMO

I suppose Dina and Nina knew that in the future, a TV station would do a in-no-way-scientific reinactment, and that they should sit on the bed to keep it from moving like it did in the future news segment, so they took turns sitting on the bed to weigh it down more? Surely that's it, MyBelle.

 

[fran]

I don't believe I need to explain why this thread is temporarily closed.

I'll give you all some time to think about what you've been posting here. You may not see your more recent posts, as they violated Websleuths' rules, or were in response to a post that was violating TOS.

Please visit this link and go over our rules.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?159-The-Rules

fran

 

[fran]

I trust you've all had time to review our rules.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?159-The-Rules

I hope I don't get any more alerts on this thread.

Please post responsibly.

TIA
fran
:seeya:

 

[K_Z]

Thank you, fran, for reopening the thread for discussion of the wrongful death suit that is proceeding.

There is a new entry posted yesterday on the San Diego Register of Actions, #106:

106 03/04/2015 Ex Parte scheduled for 03/19/2015 at 08:45:00 AM at Central in C-69 Katherine Bacal.

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/faces/CaseSearch.xhtml

I'd anticipate the memorandum of points and authorities for Dina Shacknai's motion to compel discovery will be coming soon.

I also wanted to share this interesting post from AZlawyer over to this thread, in case not all have seen it. We had been talking about the defendants potentially settling individually to get out of the case, or alternately, their attorneys working together, etc. This is AZlawyer's comment on those issues:

(snipped)

In either of the cases, the defendants are not going to be allowed to sever from one another--i.e., they will not be allowed to have the case against them proceed in a separate action from the case against the other defendants. This might be allowed in a criminal case and technically is possible in a civil case but will not happen here. But of course in either of the cases each defendant can settle with the plaintiff individually and get dismissed from the case if they can agree on terms with the plaintiff. That's not severing the case--that's just getting dismissed as a defendant.

I think the comment on the collaborative relationship was that separate motions filed by separate lawyers for separate defendants are suggestive of a lack of collaboration. If the defendants were all "on the same page," you would expect their lawyers to file motions jointly.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...-for-VERIFIED-LAWYERS&p=11530019#post11530019

I have to wonder if Nina's demurrer is a signal that she wants to settle and be dismissed from the case?

 

[LuckyLucy2]

^ Nina's demurrer proves she wants the case thrown out of court - NOT to settle.

What is a Demurrer:

A Demurrer is used to test the legal sufficiency of the Complaint or a cause of action alleged in the Complaint. A Demurrer can be used only to challenge defects that appear on the face of the Complaint; or from matters outside the Complaint that can be judicially noticed. [CCP § 430.30(a)] A Demurrer can be taken to the whole Complaint or to any of the causes of action in the Complaint. [CCP § 430.50]

https://thecalifornialitigator.com/pleadings/challenging-a-complaint-by-demurrer-2/

And since Nina also just submitted a Motion to Dismiss, and asked the Judge to have the Plantiff's pay her court costs AND damages, she sure ain't settling!

 

[MyBelle]

Thank you, fran, for reopening the thread for discussion of the wrongful death suit that is proceeding.

There is a new entry posted yesterday on the San Diego Register of Actions, #106:



https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/faces/CaseSearch.xhtml

I'd anticipate the memorandum of points and authorities for Dina Shacknai's motion to compel discovery will be coming soon.

I also wanted to share this interesting post from AZlawyer over to this thread, in case not all have seen it. We had been talking about the defendants potentially settling individually to get out of the case, or alternately, their attorneys working together, etc. This is AZlawyer's comment on those issues:

(snipped)



http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...-for-VERIFIED-LAWYERS&p=11530019#post11530019

I have to wonder if Nina's demurrer is a signal that she wants to settle and be dismissed from the case?

I can't open that because I don't have the case number but I think ex parte means only one side is being represented.

 

[*Lash*]

The ROA website has a participant name search, look at the top grey area.

ex parte -

An exparte judicial proceeding is conducted for the benefit of only one party.Exparte may also describe contact with a person represented by an attorney, outside the presence of the attorney.The term ex parte is used in a case name to signify that the suit was brought by the person whose namefollows the term.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/ex+parte

 

[bourne]

The ROA website has a participant name search, look at the top grey area.

ex parte -

An exparte judicial proceeding is conducted for the benefit of only one party.Exparte may also describe contact with a person represented by an attorney, outside the presence of the attorney.The term ex parte is used in a case name to signify that the suit was brought by the person whose namefollows the term.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/ex+parte

Definitely the three POIs -- Dina, Nina and Adam -- are NOT collaborating together. Even Nina is legally separated from her <mod snip> twin Dina, each with their own lawyers who are proceeding disjointly and separately, in this WDS suit. This says A LOT.

This means someone will be throwing someone else under the bus and into :jail: VERY VERY SOON.

 

[LuckyLucy2]

Here are the upcoming action dates for the CA Civil trial.

It appears Dina has had to file a "Motion to Compel Discovery" in order to force the Zahaus to answer "further Responses to Special Interrogatories Set One for an Order Deeming All Objections Waived and for an Order Requiring a Proper Verification from Responding Plaintiff Pari Z Zahau."

So it seems that the Zahaus accused Dina of all these heinous acts, yet can't give her enough concrete information about the charges to defend herself properly? I guess they just don't have any factual information to give her, since the charges are all made up and imagined. Dina having to file this motion says a lot about their "evidence".

Case Number: 37-2013-00075418 Date Filed: 11/13/2013

2/25/15- Motion to Compel Discovery (Further Responses to Special Interrogatories Set One for an Order Deeming All Objections Waived and for an Order Requiring a Proper Verification from Responding Plaintiff Pari Z Zahau) filed by Shacknai, Dina.

As you can see in the list of court dates below, the main focus at this point seems to be dismissing the case,with hearings 5/1/15 and 8/21/15, and then a Summery Judgement scheduled for 10/09/15.


03/19/2015 08:45 AM C-69 Ex Parte
05/01/2015 01:30 PM C-69 Civil Case Management Conference - Complaint
05/01/2015 01:30 PM C-69 Demurrer / Motion to Strike
05/01/2015 01:30 PM C-69 Demurrer / Motion to Strike

05/08/2015 01:30 PM C-69 Discovery Hearing
07/17/2015 01:30 PM C-69 Discovery Hearing
07/17/2015 01:30 PM C-69 Discovery Hearing

08/21/2015 01:30 PM C-69 Demurrer / Motion to Strike

09/04/2015 01:30 PM C-69 Motion Hearing (Civil)
10/09/2015 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/faces/CaseSearch.xhtml

 

[bourne]

snipped.

03/19/2015 08:45 AM C-69 Ex Parte
05/01/2015 01:30 PM C-69 Civil Case Management Conference - Complaint
05/01/2015 01:30 PM C-69 Demurrer / Motion to Strike
05/01/2015 01:30 PM C-69 Demurrer / Motion to Strike

05/08/2015 01:30 PM C-69 Discovery Hearing
07/17/2015 01:30 PM C-69 Discovery Hearing
07/17/2015 01:30 PM C-69 Discovery Hearing

08/21/2015 01:30 PM C-69 Demurrer / Motion to Strike

09/04/2015 01:30 PM C-69 Motion Hearing (Civil)
10/09/2015 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/faces/CaseSearch.xhtml

I see lots of DISCOVERY HEARINGS coming up soon. No signs of dismissal.

Look forward to TRIAL soon Way to go, Zahau lawyers! You're doing an excellent job. JUSTICE for Rebecca SOON Sayonara <mod snip> Dina etc.

 

[Morag]

I've noticed the phrase 'the big twin' or occasionally, 'the big twins' being used. I think that we are discouraged from criticizing peoples body types on this forum. Their names are Dina and Nina, or, perhaps the brunette twin and the blonde twin for those of us who get confused as to who's who in this case. Thanks. Or is there another set of twins involved in the case, like the Bobbsey Twins?

 

[Gilgamesh]

I've noticed the phrase 'the big twin' or occasionally, 'the big twins' being used. I think that we are discouraged from criticizing peoples body types on this forum. Their names are Dina and Nina, or, perhaps the brunette twin and the blonde twin for those of us who get confused as to who's who in this case. Thanks. Or is there another set of twins involved in the case, like the Bobbsey Twins?

There is a lot of unnecessary ugliness on these boards. It's ugly and it's a shame.

 

[bourne]

I've noticed the phrase 'the big twin' or occasionally, 'the big twins' being used. I think that we are discouraged from criticizing peoples body types on this forum. Their names are Dina and Nina, or, perhaps the brunette twin and the blonde twin for those of us who get confused as to who's who in this case. Thanks. Or is there another set of twins involved in the case, like the Bobbsey Twins?

You are misattributing. Big twin simply means Dina's the older twin. Has nothing to do with her size.

 

[MzOpinion8d]

Of course they are all three repeatedly asking for dismissal of the case, doesn't every defendant?

 

[K_Z]

Of course they are all three repeatedly asking for dismissal of the case, doesn't every defendant?

Of course they do-- that's pretty standard, lol! To do otherwise is to essentially say "please continue to sue me."

Defendants can also be involved with private settlement discussions, and simultaneously file motions to dismiss. I'd sort of be shocked if the defendants didn't ask for the case to be dismissed-- would make me wonder how good their legal representation was if they didn't ask for dismissal. JMO.

California even has a "form" for this.

http://www.courts.ca.gov/documents/civ110.pdf