Fictional matter — created for portfolio demonstration. No real parties, courts, or facts.
report plaintiff

San Bernardino County Superior Court

Reyes v. Pacific Western Logistics, Inc., et al. · No. CIVDS2401847 (FICTIONAL)

Case Status & Audit Report

2026-04-15

[ATTORNEY NAME — STATE BAR NO. ######]
[FIRM NAME]
[ADDRESS LINE 1]
[CITY, STATE ZIP]
[PHONE | EMAIL]
Attorneys for Plaintiff MARIA REYES


PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL — ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION / WORK PRODUCT

CASE STATUS AND AUDIT REPORT

Case: Reyes v. Pacific Western Logistics, Inc., et al.
Court: San Bernardino County Superior Court
Case No.: CIVDS2401847 (FICTIONAL)
Report Date: April 15, 2026
Prepared By: [PARALEGAL NAME]
Supervising Attorney: [ATTORNEY NAME — STATE BAR NO. ######]


I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report provides a current status audit of all pleadings, discovery, pending motions, and upcoming deadlines in Reyes v. Pacific Western Logistics, Inc., et al. The matter arises from a November 4, 2023 semi-truck collision on Milliken Avenue, Ontario, California, resulting in C5-C6 and L4-L5 disc herniations to Plaintiff Maria Reyes. As of the report date, the case is in active written discovery with a motion to compel pending and a trial-setting conference scheduled for May 2026.

Overall case health: YELLOW — Two discovery deficiencies unresolved; motion to compel pending hearing.


II. PARTIES AND COUNSEL

PartyCounselContact
Plaintiff Maria Reyes[FIRM NAME] / [ATTORNEY NAME — BAR NO. ######][CONTACT — REDACTED]
Pacific Western Logistics, Inc.[DEFENSE FIRM — REDACTED] / [DEFENSE ATTORNEY — BAR NO. ######][CONTACT — REDACTED]
John Doe (Driver)Same defense counsel (jointly represented)[CONTACT — REDACTED]

III. PLEADINGS STATUS

DocumentFiledStatus
Complaint (Negligence, Neg. Entrustment, Vicarious Liability)2024-07-15Filed; summons issued
Summons — Pacific Western Logistics, Inc.2024-07-16Issued
Proof of Service — Pacific Western Logistics, Inc.2024-09-03Filed — served 2024-08-28
Proof of Service — John Doe2024-09-03Filed — served 2024-08-30
Answer — Pacific Western Logistics, Inc.2024-09-03Filed; general denial + affirmative defenses (comparative fault)
Answer — John Doe2024-09-03Filed; same counsel; same defenses
Statement of Damages (CCP § 425.11)2024-08-01Served on defendants prior to complaint; copy in file

Pleadings status: COMPLETE — no pending pleadings motions


IV. DISCOVERY STATUS

A. Plaintiff’s Written Discovery to Defendants

DiscoveryServedResponses DueResponses ReceivedStatus
Form Interrogatories, Set One (DISC-001)2025-01-102025-02-112025-02-11Complete
Special Interrogatories, Set One (30 Qs)2025-01-102025-02-112025-02-11Deficient — Qs 14, 22
Requests for Production, Set One (22 demands)2025-01-102025-02-112025-02-11Pending — MTC filed

B. Meet-and-Confer Log

DateMethodTopicResult
2025-03-04LetterSROG Qs 14, 22 — driver hours-of-service logsDefendants agreed to supplement by 2025-03-21
2025-03-25LetterSROG supplemental responses received — still deficientDefendants disputed deficiency
2025-04-02Phone callRFP Set One — ELD data, maintenance recordsNo resolution; motion to compel authorized
2026-01-15LetterFinal meet-and-confer — SROG Qs 14, 22No resolution; motion to compel pending

C. Depositions

DeponentDeposition DateStatusNotes
John Doe (Driver)2025-06-18CompletedHOS log produced showing 14-hr prior day; transcript ordered
[DEFENSE EXPERT — ACCIDENT RECON]TBDNot yet noticedDefense indicated expert designation pending
[PLAINTIFF’S MEDICAL EXPERT]TBDNot yet noticedAwaiting expert designation cutoff
Maria Reyes (Plaintiff)TBDNot yet takenDefense has not yet noticed

D. Defendants’ Written Discovery to Plaintiff

DiscoveryServedResponses DueStatus
Form Interrogatories to Plaintiff2025-02-202025-03-22Complete
Special Interrogatories to Plaintiff (18 Qs)2025-02-202025-03-22Complete
Requests for Production to Plaintiff2025-02-202025-03-22Complete — 400+ pages produced

V. PENDING MOTIONS

Motion to Compel Further Responses — SROG Set One (Qs 14, 22)


VI. UPCOMING DEADLINES (60-DAY WINDOW)

DeadlineDateItemPriority
Opposition to MTC2026-04-25Defendants’ opposition dueHIGH — calendar monitored
Reply ISO MTC2026-05-02Plaintiff’s reply ISO motionHIGH
MTC Hearing2026-05-15Hearing — Dept. [##]HIGH
Trial-Setting ConferenceMay 2026 (TBD)Court to assign trial dateHIGH
Expert Designation (est.)TBD — per trial orderPlaintiff’s expert disclosuresMEDIUM
Plaintiff’s DepositionTBDDefense has not noticedMEDIUM

VII. OPEN ITEMS AND ACTION LIST

ItemAssigned ToPriorityTarget Date
File reply ISO motion to compel SROG[ATTORNEY NAME]HIGH2026-05-02
Attend MTC hearing; request sanctions[ATTORNEY NAME]HIGH2026-05-15
Prepare for trial-setting conference; draft proposed dates[PARALEGAL NAME]HIGHPrior to TSC
Send supplemental RFP meet-and-confer letter re: ELD data[PARALEGAL NAME]HIGH2026-04-20
Notice plaintiff’s deposition of defense expert (post-designation)[PARALEGAL NAME]MEDIUMPost-designation
Draft plaintiff’s expert designation letter[ATTORNEY NAME]MEDIUMPer court order
Obtain updated medical records and billing summary[PARALEGAL NAME]MEDIUM2026-04-30
Update litigation budget and damages estimate[PARALEGAL NAME]MEDIUM2026-04-30

VIII. DAMAGES SUMMARY (CURRENT)

CategoryAmount (Estimated)
Medical expenses incurred to date~$185,000
Future medical (conservative — no surgery)~$45,000
Future medical (surgery scenario)~$120,000
Lost wages to date (~24 months)~$126,000
Future lost earning capacityTBD — expert opinion pending
General damages (pain and suffering)TBD — trial value analysis pending
Total (conservative, no surgery)~$356,000+

Report prepared by: [PARALEGAL NAME]
Date: April 15, 2026
Next audit scheduled: Post-TSC

How this was made

Method

Used Claude to extract and consolidate status data from the docketing system export, discovery tracking spreadsheet, and court's eCourt portal; AI generated a first-draft status narrative and compliance checklist that paralegal then verified against the actual file and corrected for two deadline discrepancies.

Human judgment points

  • Identified that defendants' supplemental SROG responses remained deficient on interrogatories 14 and 22 even after the meet-and-confer — a judgment call requiring review of the actual responses versus what the AI flagged as resolved based on the date-only docket log
  • Determined that the upcoming trial-setting conference required preparation of a proposed discovery cutoff date that accommodated plaintiff's pending expert designations — required legal strategy input, not just date arithmetic
  • Assessed the risk level of the outstanding ELD data dispute as 'high' rather than 'medium' because the court had previously sanctioned Pacific Western Logistics in an unrelated matter — context the AI could not access from the docket data alone

Time

~3 hours AI-augmented vs ~8 hours traditional file-by-file review and memo drafting