Judge: Douglas W. Stern, Case: 22STCV06315, Date: 2023-04-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV06315    Hearing Date: April 11, 2023    Dept: 68

Background

            Plaintiff has tried a few times to file a default judgment against Defendant, but these attempts have been rejected by the clerk for improper format and failure to comply with court rules, with the most recent rejection being on March 13, 2023. Plaintiff also filed a document titled “Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings” on January 5, 2023, but this seemed to be yet another attempt at filing a default judgment, and the Court denied Plaintiff’s motion on January 18, 2023. Plaintiff’s newest attempt, filed on March 23, 2023, is a motion titled “motion for summary judgment,” but the document asks the Court to enter default judgment against Defendant.

Analysis

            The motion filed by Plaintiff is not a motion for summary judgment, and it is therefore an improper motion. In particular, a motion for summary judgment requires that there has been a responsive pleading filed, but no responsive pleading has been filed in this case. (See CCP § 437c(1).) There are numerous other issues with the motion, including the fact that a summary judgment motion must be served on the other parties to the action at least 75 days before the hearing, and the motion was just filed on March 23, and there is no indication that the motion was served on any other party. (See CCP § 437c(2).)

            Additionally, if Plaintiff is attempting to file a default judgment, Plaintiff must file the default judgment in the proper format and ensure that the defendant was properly served.

Order

1.      Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is DENIED.