Judge Audra Mori, Case 19STCV31565 2022-10-19 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Audra Mori, Case: 19STCV31565, Date: 2022-10-19 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV31565 Hearing Date: October 19, 2022 Dept: 31

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

GLISELDA VELASQUEZ,

Plaintiff(s),

vs.

CASSIUS JEROME STANLEY, ET AL.,

Defendant(s).

)

CASE NO: 19STCV31565

[TENTATIVE] ORDER CONTINUING MOTION TO SET ASIDE DISMISSAL

Dept. 31

1:30 p.m.

October 19, 2022

On September 5, 2019, Plaintiff Gliselda Velasquez (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Cassius Jerome Stanley, Walter Jerome Stanley, and Tonya L. Sedwick (collectively, “Defendants”) for damages arising from a motor vehicle accident. This matter was set for a Final Status Conference and non-jury trial for November 22, 2021. However, after there was no appearance or contact by either party, the Court ordered Plaintiff’s complaint dismissed without prejudice.

On May 20, 2022, Plaintiff filed the instant motion to set aside dismissal. Plaintiff asserts the dismissal was the result of Plaintiff’s counsel’s mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect. The motion is unopposed.

Defendants filed their answer to the complaint on October 11, 2019. However, there is no proof of service attached to the instant motion or other evidence showing that Defendants were given proper notice of this hearing. (McDonald v. Severy (1936) 6 Cal.2d 629 [no authority to set aside dismissal where no notice given to dismissed party]; see also Maxwell v. Cooltech, Inc. (1997) 57 Cal.App.4th 629, 631-32.) Setting aside the dismissal means bringing Defendants back into the action, and thus, directly affects their rights.[1] Defendants must be given notice of this motion prior to the hearing. Thus, the motion will be continued to ensure Defendants receive notice of the motion.

The motion is continued to ________________ at 1:30 pm. Plaintiff must file proof of service of the motion, and proof of service of notice of the continued hearing date, prior to the hearing. Failure to do so may result in this matter being taken off calendar.

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice.

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE:

Parties are encouraged to meet and confer after reading this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreement.
If a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the court at sscdept31@lacourt.org with the Subject line “SUBMIT” followed by the case number. The body of the email must include the hearing date and time, counsel’s contact information, and the identity of the party submitting.
Unless all parties submit by email to this tentative ruling, the parties should arrange to appear remotely (encouraged) or in person for oral argument. You should assume that others may appear at the hearing to argue.
If the parties neither submit nor appear at hearing, the Court may take the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court. After the Court has issued a tentative ruling, the Court may prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion without leave.

Dated this 19^th day of October 2022

Hon. Audra Mori

Judge of the Superior Court

[1] It is the general rule that “ ‘... notice of motion must be given whenever the order sought may affect the rights of an adverse party. [Citations.] (McDonald v. Severy (1936) 6 Cal.2d 629, 631.)’ Restated, ‘...in an adversary proceeding where an order may affect the rights of an adverse party's right to be heard on the issue as a matter of due process of law.’ [Citations.]” (St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Superior Court (1984) 156 Cal.App.3d 82, 85; see also Miller v. Foremost Motors, Inc. (1993) 16 Cal.App.4th 1275-76 [“Fundamental due process demands that [the defendant] have notice of a motion to vacate a dismissal…”].)