Judge: Bruce G. Iwasaki, Case: 23STCV00910, Date: 2023-09-19 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 23STCV00910 Hearing Date: September 19, 2023 Dept: 58
Judge Bruce G. Iwasaki
Hearing
Date: September 19, 2023
Case
Name: Resolution
Economics, LLC v. Centinela Car Wash, Inc.
Case
No.: 23STCV00910
Motion: Motion to Vacate Entry of
Default
Moving
Party: Defendant Centinela Car
Wash, Inc.
Responding
Party: None
Tentative
Ruling: The motion to set aside entry
of default is granted.
Background
On January 17, 2023, Plaintiff Resolution
Economics, LLC (Plaintiff) filed a complaint against Defendant Centinela Car
Wash, Inc. (Defendant Car Wash) and Defendant Hooman Nissani (Defendant
Nissani) alleging Defendants had become indebted to Plaintiff in the amount of
$146,621.50.
On May 8, 2023, the Court entered
default against Defendant Car Wash.
On July 27, 2023, Defendant Car Wash
moved to set aside the entry of default based on attorney fault. No opposition
was filed.
The motion to set aside the entry of
default is granted.
Legal Standard
Code of Civil Procedure section 473,
subdivision (b) provides for either discretionary or mandatory relief from
certain prior actions or proceedings in the trial court. (Luri¿v. Greenwald¿(2003)
107 Cal.App.4th 1119, 1124.)¿¿
“ ‘Under the discretionary relief
provision, on a showing of “mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable
neglect,”¿the court has discretion to allow relief from a “judgment, dismissal,
order, or other proceeding taken against”¿a party or his or her
attorney.¿¿Under the mandatory relief provision, on the other hand, upon a
showing by attorney declaration of “mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or
neglect,”¿the court shall vacate any “resulting default judgment or dismissal
entered.” ’ [Citation.] Applications seeking relief under the mandatory
provision of section 473 must be ‘accompanied by an attorney’s sworn affidavit
attesting to his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect.’ The
mandatory provision¿further adds that ‘whenever relief¿is granted based on an
attorney’s affidavit of fault [the court shall] direct the attorney to pay
reasonable compensatory legal fees and costs¿to opposing counsel or parties.’¿” (Ibid.; Code Civ. Proc., § 473, subd.
(b).)¿¿
The party seeking such relief must
do so “within a reasonable time, in no case exceeding six months, after the
judgment, dismissal, order, or proceeding was taken.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 473,
subd. (b); see Rappleyea v. Campbell (1994) 8 Cal.4th 975, 980 [“because
more than six months had elapsed from the entry of default, and hence relief
under section 473 was unavailable”].) This time limit is jurisdictional. (Austin
v. Los Angeles Unified School Dist. (2016) 244 Cal.App.4th 918, 928; Rappleyea,
supra, 8 Cal.4th at pp. 981–982 [“ ‘Beyond this period there is a strong public
policy in favor of the finality of
judgments and only in exceptional circumstances should relief be granted.’ ”].)
Discussion
Defendant Car Wash moves to set aside the
entry of default based on attorney fault.
The purpose of this mandatory relief provision is to
alleviate the hardship on parties who lose their day in court due to an
inexcusable failure to act by their attorneys. (Zamora v. Clayborn Contracting Group, Inc. (2002) 28 Cal.4th 249, 257.) More recently, the Court of Appeal has stated the purpose
was to relieve the innocent client of the burden of the attorney's fault, to
impose the burden on the erring attorney, and to avoid precipitating more
litigation in the form of malpractice suits. (SJP Limited Partnership
v. City of Los Angeles (2006) 136 Cal.App.4th 511, 516.)
Here, as
required by the statute, Defendant’s attorney submits his declaration, stating Defendant’s
counsel thought he had filed the Answer but inadvertently did not do so. (Cohan
Decl., ¶ 2.) No analysis of the reasonableness of the mistake or neglect is
required under the mandatory provision. (See Martin Potts & Associates, Inc. v. Corsair, LLC (2016) 244 Cal.App.4th 432, 438
[“[T]he mandatory relief provision is broader in scope insofar as it is
available for inexcusable neglect . . ..”].)
Thus, the
motion to set aside the entry of default is granted based on the attorney affidavit
of neglect.
Conclusion
Accordingly, the Motion to Vacate the
Entry of Default is granted.