Connecticut General Life Insurance v. New Images of Beverly Hills

MEMORANDUM **

A. Procedural Irregularities

The “procedural irregularities” of which Ezeckiel Zilka complains did not deprive him of due process. Although the plaintiffs’ notice of motion for summary judgment and the first order granting summary judgment appear to have inadvertently omitted three RICO claims, the plaintiffs’ moving papers provided clear notice of the claims that were the subject of the motion and specifically referenced the first, second and fourth RICO claims involving the Beverly Hills Outpatient Surgery Center (“BHOSC”), Moreno Valley and Westwood clinics. In addition, Zilka has not demonstrated how he was prejudiced by any shortcomings in the notice or order. Likewise, in the court’s order dismissing claims and certifying judgment against Zilka, it was not prejudicial error for the district court to *88 have failed to strike a reference to a hearing that did not occur because Zilka elected not to oppose the motion.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by concluding that the letter sent by plaintiffs’ attorneys to defense counsel prior to seeking summary judgment on liability satisfied the local “meet and confer” rule. Nor did the district court…