Wrongful Death Suit filed Nov. 13, 2013 in California, #4

[K_Z]

The San Diego ROA has the hearing listed for Friday, Nov 6, at 1:30-- not today.

1/06/2015 01:30 PM C-69 Discovery Hearing - Motion to Compel Discovery
11/06/2015 01:30 PM C-69 Discovery Hearing - Motion to Compel Discovery
11/06/2015 01:30 PM C-69 Discovery Hearing

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

37-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL

 

[*Lash*]

The San Diego ROA has the hearing listed for Friday, Nov 6, at 1:30-- not today.



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

37-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL

Thanks KZ! Misinformation from another post. Thank you for the correction.

Best wishes to the Zahau family at tomorrow's court proceedings .

 

[LuckyLucy2]

Ha! For some reason, I thought yesterday was Thursday all day long. :blushing:

I think I am just so eager to hear the Judge fine the Zahaus and FORCE them to answer all of those questions they REFUSED to answer in their depositions! So looking forward to that.

DANG, now I have to wait more than 24 more hours! Ugh! :tears: I wonder how long it will take for them to post the decision? :headache:

And I guess this means another sleepless night for Mary. :countsheep:


:scale: Justice for the innocent - Adam Shacknai, Dina Shacknai, and Nina Romano!

 

[Betty P]

Still wondering why Dina hasn't offered up her alibi proving she was at Rady the night of RZ's murder. All of these court battles would be unnecessary if she would just do that.

I'm also wondering when we will get to see the deposition questions that Dina refuses to answer. There are likely to be many and, if she had already been deposed, we would have heard about them by now.

 

[LuckyLucy2]

Dina has already given her alibi - to the detectives working the case which would be in the investigative files. It has also been reported in MSM five times, and I have posted that in this thread.

BettyP, do you have a link that proves Dina has already been deposed and has refused to answer questions?

Also, can you tell me how we would know when she was deposed, since those schedules are not published in advance? In fact, the only way we know is if they are mentioned in Motions submitted to the Court, so I'm curious where you believe we could get that information another way.

AZLawyer has told us that she has seen no evidence that Dina has tried to evade being deposed. Do you have evidence that contradicts that?

In fact, it appears is the Zahaus who avoided answering almost 100 questions in their depositions taken last January, which is why there is a hearing at 1:30 today. And it appears that Judge Bacal has already made a tenetive ruling:

239 11/05/2015 Tentative Ruling for Discovery Hearing published.

 

[LuckyLucy2]

Betty P, I'm posting these again, I'm case you haven't seen them before...

1. "The sheriff has determined that cell phone evidence and video cameras at the hospital confirmed that Jonah Shacknai was at the hospital standing vigil forMax the entire time when Rebecca Zahau’s suicide occurred. Video cameras at the hospital also showed Dina was there during that time period."

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...bysitter*rebecca*zahau*s*death*no*murder.html

2. In the audio interview of Nina Romano, she states that Dina had nurses as witnesses and was also on surveillance footage.

http://www.cbs8.com/story/15145788/sister?clienttype=printable

3. In Ann Rules "Two Strange Deaths in Coronado" (written with the input of Anne Bremner and Mary Zahau), she states on page 214:

"The bicyclist must have been mistaken. Numerous witnesses place Dina in the hospital at Max's bedside throughout Tuesday night.

"She (Ann Rule) did not travel to Coronado or to Arizona, where Shacknai lives, to conduct her research, Rule said, but talked extensively with Zahau's loved ones, who believe she was killed. She also has a long*time friendship with Seattle attorney Anne Bremner, who is representing."

http://patch.com/california/coronado/celebrated*author*ann*rule*turns*her*attention*to*spraecafa7a51

4. From A Boy Interrupted, Phoenix Magazine, Aug. 2012

"Dina says she got the news at the hospital. Jonah was sobbing. he said, Rebecca's killed herself," Dina recalls. As Dina was leaving the hospital, a Coronado police detective paid her a visit. "Are you aware of what happened?" he asked.

The detective would have confirmed at that time with the nurses that Dina had been there all night, IMO.

http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/loc...u*Spreckels*Mansion*2011*Death*303178091.html

5. However, regardless of our lack of complete information thus far, I could not comment on Mr. Greer's statement as I was with my son Maxie at Rady’s Hospital in Pediatric Intensive Care, praying for his recovery, and watching him fight for his life, trying to breathe on his own while on a ventilator.”

She adds:

“It would be impossible for me to hear any disturbances at Jonah's home as I was with our son alone at a hospital miles away. As well, my sister, Nina was with her son, and our close friend, none of whom heard a disturbance as they were five blocks from Jonah's house on Ocean Blvd. My sister and I would again publicly like to extend, for the fourth time since 2012, our offer to share all of the information we have with the Zahau’s and ask that they reciprocate. Perhaps an exchange of accurate data could help both families find answers, healing, and resolution.”

Source:
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/loc...nsion*2011*Death*303178091.html#ixzz3fL53Fpju

 

[*Lash*]

http://www.sandiego.courts.ca.gov/v...CU-PO-CTL&SelDates=11/06/2015&EventId=1505698

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - November 05, 2015

EVENT DATE: 11/06/2015 EVENT TIME: 01:30:00 PM
DEPT.: C-69 JUDICIAL OFFICER: Katherine Bacal
CASE NO.: 37-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL
CASE TITLE: ESTATE OF REBECCA ZAHAU VS. SHACKNAI [IMAGED]

CASE CATEGORY: Civil - Unlimited
EVENT TYPE: Discovery Hearing
CASE TYPE: PI/PD/WD - Other


CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED:
Defendant's motions to compel further deposition testimony are continued to November 13 at 1:30 p.m​

 

[Betty P]

Betty P, I'm posting these again, I'm case you haven't seen them before...

1. "The sheriff has determined that cell phone evidence and video cameras at the hospital confirmed that Jonah Shacknai was at the hospital standing vigil forMax the entire time when Rebecca Zahau’s suicide occurred. Video cameras at the hospital also showed Dina was there during that time period."

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...bysitter*rebecca*zahau*s*death*no*murder.html

2. In the audio interview of Nina Romano, she states that Dina had nurses as witnesses and was also on surveillance footage.

http://www.cbs8.com/story/15145788/sister?clienttype=printable

3. In Ann Rules "Two Strange Deaths in Coronado" (written with the input of Anne Bremner and Mary Zahau), she states on page 214:

"The bicyclist must have been mistaken. Numerous witnesses place Dina in the hospital at Max's bedside throughout Tuesday night.

"She (Ann Rule) did not travel to Coronado or to Arizona, where Shacknai lives, to conduct her research, Rule said, but talked extensively with Zahau's loved ones, who believe she was killed. She also has a long*time friendship with Seattle attorney Anne Bremner, who is representing."

http://patch.com/california/coronado/celebrated*author*ann*rule*turns*her*attention*to*spraecafa7a51

4. From A Boy Interrupted, Phoenix Magazine, Aug. 2012

"Dina says she got the news at the hospital. Jonah was sobbing. he said, Rebecca's killed herself," Dina recalls. As Dina was leaving the hospital, a Coronado police detective paid her a visit. "Are you aware of what happened?" he asked.

The detective would have confirmed at that time with the nurses that Dina had been there all night, IMO.

http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/loc...u*Spreckels*Mansion*2011*Death*303178091.html

5. However, regardless of our lack of complete information thus far, I could not comment on Mr. Greer's statement as I was with my son Maxie at Rady’s Hospital in Pediatric Intensive Care, praying for his recovery, and watching him fight for his life, trying to breathe on his own while on a ventilator.”

She adds:

“It would be impossible for me to hear any disturbances at Jonah's home as I was with our son alone at a hospital miles away. As well, my sister, Nina was with her son, and our close friend, none of whom heard a disturbance as they were five blocks from Jonah's house on Ocean Blvd. My sister and I would again publicly like to extend, for the fourth time since 2012, our offer to share all of the information we have with the Zahau’s and ask that they reciprocate. Perhaps an exchange of accurate data could help both families find answers, healing, and resolution.”

Source:
http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/loc...nsion*2011*Death*303178091.html#ixzz3fL53Fpju

Per the San Diego County Sheriff:

"We don't have her (Dina Shacknai) on surveillance tape," Gore confirmed. "Her position was determined thorough GPS triangulation on her cell phone, which put her in the vicinity of Rady Children's Hospital."

From the news story "Mixed DNA 'all over' Zahau Death Scene; Some Evidence Not Tested"

http://www.760kfmb.com/story/16068012/mixed-dna-all-over-zahau-death-scene-some-evidence-not-tested?clienttype=mobile

 

[*Lash*]

Interesting the Tentative Ruling is dated 11/5/2015, yet the proceeding is on the court calendar for today the 6th? Was the proceeding postponed?

 

[Carioca]

Filed 11/6/2015
Order of Dismissal with Prejudice

Looks like the bottom of the ninth for Dina vs Jonah, and Dina strikes out.

https://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov
Case number: CV2013-009289

 

[Betty P]

Filed 11/6/2015
Order of Dismissal with Prejudice

Looks like the bottom of the ninth for Dina vs Jonah, and Dina strikes out.

https://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov
Case number: CV2013-009289

IANAL, but I believe "with prejudice" means Dina cannot bring the suit against Jonah again. It must mean the judge really felt there was no merit to her case.

 

[AZlawyer]

IANAL, but I believe "with prejudice" means Dina cannot bring the suit against Jonah again. It must mean the judge really felt there was no merit to her case.

The parties filed a stipulation for dismissal with prejudice, and the judge granted it. The judge would not have considered the merits of the case in any way.

 

[Betty P]

The parties filed a stipulation for dismissal with prejudice, and the judge granted it. The judge would not have considered the merits of the case in any way.

Thanks for the clarification. I think I understand!

 

[LuckyLucy2]

http://www.sandiego.courts.ca.gov/v...CU-PO-CTL&SelDates=11/06/2015&EventId=1505698

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - November 05, 2015

EVENT DATE: 11/06/2015 EVENT TIME: 01:30:00 PM
DEPT.: C-69 JUDICIAL OFFICER: Katherine Bacal
CASE NO.: 37-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL
CASE TITLE: ESTATE OF REBECCA ZAHAU VS. SHACKNAI [IMAGED]

CASE CATEGORY: Civil - Unlimited
EVENT TYPE: Discovery Hearing
CASE TYPE: PI/PD/WD - Other


CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED:
Defendant's motions to compel further deposition testimony are continued to November 13 at 1:30 p.m​

I wonder if today's hearing was continued because the Zahaus and their lawyer, Greer, refused to show up in an attempt to further avoid answering their deposition questions?

There is a new entry for an Ex Parte scheduled for Tuesday:


240 11/06/2015 Ex Parte scheduled for 11/10/2015 at 08:45:00 AM at Central in C-69 Katherine Bacal.


ex parte
(ex par-tay, but popularly, ex party) adj. Latin meaning "for one party," referring to motions, hearings or orders granted on the request of and for the benefit of one party only. This is an exception to the basic rule of court procedure that both parties must be present at any argument before a judge, and to the otherwise strict rule that an attorney may not notify a judge without previously notifying the opposition. Ex parte matters are usually temporary orders (like a restraining order or temporary custody) pending a formal hearing or an emergency request for a continuance. Most jurisdictions require at least a diligent attempt to contact the other party's lawyer of the time and place of any ex parte hearing.


Read more: http://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=696#ixzz3qlK9LuqL

 

[bourne]

The parties filed a stipulation for dismissal with prejudice, and the judge granted it. The judge would not have considered the merits of the case in any way.

IANAL, but according to NOLO at http://www.nolo.com/dictionary/dismissal-with-prejudice-term.html

"When a lawsuit is dismissed with prejudice, the court is saying that it has made a final determination on the merits of the case, and that the plaintiff is therefore forbidden from filing another lawsuit based on the same grounds. See also: dismiss, dismissal without prejudice."

So the Dismissal with Prejudice DOES mean the Court considered the *merits* of Dina's WDS against Jonah to be invalid so much so that she cannot bring the WDS against Jonah again.

 

[bourne]

Interesting the Tentative Ruling is dated 11/5/2015, yet the proceeding is on the court calendar for today the 6th? Was the proceeding postponed?

Looking forward to hearing update on this proceeding. A defendant namely Dina, appears to be sh***ing in her pants. Hope the murderer gets her just deserts behind bars/suffers capital punishment/tormented for life and beyond.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Per the San Diego County Sheriff:



From the news story "Mixed DNA 'all over' Zahau Death Scene; Some Evidence Not Tested"

http://www.760kfmb.com/story/16068012/mixed-dna-all-over-zahau-death-scene-some-evidence-not-tested?clienttype=mobile

Surely the Zahau attorneys have had all of this tested by now, right? Have they asked the Judge for an order to be able to test evidence found at the scene that wasn't tested before?

It seems to me they would have requested that immediately to see if any of Dina's DNA was found in the bedroom and outside on the balcony.

TIA

 

[oceanblueeyes]

IANAL, but according to NOLO at http://www.nolo.com/dictionary/dismissal-with-prejudice-term.html

"When a lawsuit is dismissed with prejudice, the court is saying that it has made a final determination on the merits of the case, and that the plaintiff is therefore forbidden from filing another lawsuit based on the same grounds. See also: dismiss, dismissal without prejudice."

So the Dismissal with Prejudice DOES mean the Court considered the *merits* of Dina's WDS against Jonah to be invalid so much so that she cannot bring the WDS against Jonah again.

If it was stipulated by both sides the Judge would honor that stipulation. There would be no point for the Judge going forward if both had stipulated to drop the case with prejudice. From what I understand that is pretty standard when both sides agree. He wouldn't have to dismiss the case on its merit but would do so because both parties agreed to drop it. If neither side wanted to go forward there would be no point for the Judge to continue it.

Now of course in other cases a Judge can dismiss the case on his/her own but it seems like from what AZlawyer has stated this particular case was dismissed because both parties agreed and that is different than a Judge solely dismissing it on his or her own.

IMO

 

[AZlawyer]

IANAL, but according to NOLO at http://www.nolo.com/dictionary/dismissal-with-prejudice-term.html

"When a lawsuit is dismissed with prejudice, the court is saying that it has made a final determination on the merits of the case, and that the plaintiff is therefore forbidden from filing another lawsuit based on the same grounds. See also: dismiss, dismissal without prejudice."

So the Dismissal with Prejudice DOES mean the Court considered the *merits* of Dina's WDS against Jonah to be invalid so much so that she cannot bring the WDS against Jonah again.

If it was stipulated by both sides the Judge would honor that stipulation. There would be no point for the Judge going forward if both had stipulated to drop the case with prejudice. From what I understand that is pretty standard when both sides agree. He wouldn't have to dismiss the case on its merit but would do so because both parties agreed to drop it. If neither side wanted to go forward there would be no point for the Judge to continue it.

Now of course in other cases a Judge can dismiss the case on his/her own but it seems like from what AZlawyer has stated this particular case was dismissed because both parties agreed and that is different than a Judge solely dismissing it on his or her own.

IMO

Yes, a dismissal with prejudice is a final determination on the merits. This can happen after the court has actually considered the merits--or when the parties agree to dismiss with prejudice. If the parties agree, there would be no reason for a judge to deny the request. In this case, we happen to know that the parties agreed, because a stipulation to dismiss with prejudice appears on the docket.

 

[LuckyLucy2]

Surely the Zahau attorneys have had all of this tested by now, right? Have they asked the Judge for an order to be able to test evidence found at the scene that wasn't tested before?

It seems to me they would have requested that immediately to see if any of Dina's DNA was found in the bedroom and outside on the balcony.

TIA

Dina's DNA or fingerprints were not found because she was not there. Only Rebecca was in the mansion that night and early morning preparing for her suicide.

"There were 13 samples taken from fingernails of both hands. Each of the samples was analyzed separately. In twelve of the samples, the DNA results were consistent with the presence of DNA from only one person. The DNA types found in these samples matched the DNA of Rebecca Zahau. In one of the samples, the results indicated the presence of DNA from at least two people. The majority of the DNA present was consistent with Rebecca's DNA.The amount of information obtained from the other contributor(s) was so minute; it was not possible to identify the source."

http://sdsheriff.net/coronado/1115.pdf

"The small knife had Rebecca’s DNA, and only Rebecca’s DNA. No fingerprints were developed from this item. The large knife had Rebecca’s fingerprints, and only Rebecca’s fingerprints. A low level of DNA material was found on this knife as well but it was not enough for any comparison."

"Rebecca’s DNA was found on the rope, particularly in areas that would have to be manipulated to tie the knots. Only Rebecca’s DNA was found on these items other than one “artifact,” which is a fragment of material that could be DNA, but does not contain enough information to determine who, or what, it came from (animals and plants also have DNA that can be left behind). The rope could not be fingerprinted."

"Rebecca’s prints were found in all areas of the incident scene, and on items directly related to the event (knife, paint tube). There was one fingerprint from a child found on the bed frame (possibly from Max), along with one other unidentified fingerprint. These two prints were from an area of the bedframe that was not near the location the rope was secured. Immediately around the area the rope was secured to the bed we found several of Rebecca’s prints, and only Rebecca’s prints. We fully expected to find many fingerprints in this house because, simply stated, it is a house. Anyone living in or visiting a residence can leave behind finger prints because, simply stated, it is a house. Anyone living in or visiting a residence can leave behind fingerprints, which is why we had to focus on items directly related to the event."

http://sdsheriff.net/coronado