Judge: Deirdre Hill, Case: 21STCV20121, Date: 2023-05-02 Tentative Ruling
ALERT
Due to Coronavirus, please consider appearing by phone for Department M cases.
Department M strongly encourages the use of LA CourtConnect* for ALL hearings, without need for prior approval, unless live testimony by a witness is required.
The contact information for LA CourtConnect* is:
https://lacourt.portalscloud.com/VCourt/
*Parties with a fee waiver on file may be eligible to appear at no/reduced cost
Dept. M issues tentative rulings in many, but not all motion hearings. There is no set time at which tentatives are posted. Please do not call the staff to inquire if a tentative will be posted.
If parties are satisfied with the ruling, parties may submit on the tentative. However, if an opposing party does not submit, they will be permitted to argue. Please check with the other side before calling the courtroom to submit. The staff does not keep track of which parties submitted and which did not, so please do not ask.
If a matter is also a scheduling hearing (CMC, TSC, OSC etc) an appearance is still required even if a party submits on the tentative ruling.
Case Number: 21STCV20121 Hearing Date: May 2, 2023 Dept: M
|
Superior Court
of Southwest
District Torrance Dept. M |
|||
|
LEE
CYNTHIA WYNDER, et al., |
Plaintiffs, |
Case No.: |
21STCV20121 |
|
vs. |
|
[Tentative]
RULING |
|
|
GRACE
MEMORIAL CHAPEL AND FUNERAL HOME, INC., et al., |
Defendants. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hearing
Date: May 2, 2023
Moving Parties: Defendant Grace Memorial
Chapel and Funeral Home, Inc.
Responding Party: Plaintiffs Lee Cynthia Wynder,
et al.,
Motion
to Set Aside and Vacate the Default and Default Judgment
The court considered the moving,
opposition, and reply papers.
RULING
The motion is GRANTED. The default entered on November 14, 2022 is
set aside and vacated. Defendant Grace
Memorial is ordered to file and serve a responsive pleading forthwith.
BACKGROUND
On May
27, 2021, plaintiffs Lee Cynthia Wynder, Vincent Wynder, and Latonya Renay
Wynder filed a complaint
against Grace Memorial Chapel and Funeral Home, Inc., New Gardens Memorial
Chapel & Funeral Home, Inc., and Vincent B. Wilson for (1) negligence, (2)
IIED, and (3) breach of contract.
On November 14, 2022, a default was
entered against Grace Memorial Chapel and Funeral Home.
LEGAL AUTHORITY
“The court may, upon terms as may
be just, relieve a party or his or her legal representative from a judgment,
dismissal, order, or other proceeding taken against him or her through his or
her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. Application for this relief shall be
accompanied by a copy of the answer or other pleading proposed to be filed
therein, otherwise the application shall not be granted, and shall be made
within a reasonable time, in no case exceeding six months, after the judgment,
dismissal, order, or proceeding was taken. . . . Notwithstanding any other
requirements of this section, the court shall, whenever an application for
relief is made no more than six months after entry of judgment, is in proper
form, and is accompanied by an attorney’s sworn affidavit attesting to his or
her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect, vacate any (1) resulting
default entered by the clerk against his or her client, and which will result
in entry of a default judgment, or (2) resulting default judgment or dismissal
entered against his or her client, unless the court finds that the default or
dismissal was not in fact caused by the attorney's mistake, inadvertence,
surprise, or neglect. The court shall,
whenever relief is granted based on an attorney's affidavit of fault, direct
the attorney to pay reasonable compensatory legal fees and costs to opposing
counsel or parties.” CCP § 473(b).
DISCUSSION
Under
CCP §473(b), defendant Grace Memorial Chapel and Funeral Home, Inc. requests that
the court vacate the default entered against it on November 14, 2022 based on
attorney mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect.
Attorney
Atyria S. Clark, Esq. states in her declaration that she has in the last few
years served as counsel for Grace Memorial.
Shortly after April 15, 2022, Clark retrieved from her private mail box
located in Santa Monica a copy of the complaint. She states that at that time, Clark was
counsel to Grace Memorial in an unrelated matter but was not the registered
agent and she considered the service invalid and not requiring a response. “When I received the Complaint, it was my
impression that service was not proper.”
Clark further states that as of June 16, 2022, Grace Memorial had
appointed Clark as the registered agent for service and has remained the
registered agent for service, although as of September 19, 2022 at a different
address in Culver City. Attorney Clark
states, “I forget [sic] that in addition to my services as counsel on a
matter-by-matter basis that my role had changed. That my error was forgetting this expanded
role, which lead to the failure to have a timely answer on file when a second
service, accomplished on September 9, 2022.
Therefore, I still acted as if service was invalid.” Counsel further states, “[T]he error was mine
. . . .” Atyria S. Clark, Esq. decl.
In
opposition, plaintiffs contend that defendant was properly served with the
summons and complaint and the request for entry of default and that plaintiffs’
counsel was not obligated to contact defendant’s registered agent before
requesting default. Plaintiffs also
assert that attorney Clark was not acting as attorney for defendant when she
made the “error” and thus mandatory relief is not warranted. As for discretionary relief, plaintiffs argue
that Clark’s mistake was inexcusable.
In
reply, defendant argues that at all relevant times, Clark was a licensed
attorney who was also the registered agent for service.
The
court finds that the default was the result of an attorney and/or party’s
registered agent’s mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect. Relief is warranted.
Thus, the
motion is GRANTED.
Moving defendant
is ordered to give notice of the ruling.