Judge: Elaine W. Mandel, Case: 23SMCV05149, Date: 2024-10-01 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 23SMCV05149 Hearing Date: October 1, 2024 Dept: P
Tentative Ruling
Farmers Insurance v. McCarthy, Case
No. 23SMCV05149
Hearing date October 1, 2024
Defendant
Farmers’ Motion to Set Aside Default
Plaintiff
Farmers Insurance sued to recover damages resulting from a motor vehicle between
one of its insureds and defendant McCarthy. Defendant was served 11/10/2024. As
no answer was filed, default was granted on 2/28/2024, and notice of default
was served 3/1/2024. Defendant moves to set aside the default on 8/27/2024,
including a proposed answer. Plaintiff opposes.
Under
Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §473(b), the court may set aside a dismissal taken
against a party through “mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable
neglect.” Relief under §473 should be liberally granted because public policy
favors resolution of disputes on the merits, rather than through technical
default. E.g., Fasuvi v. Permatex, Inc. (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th
681, 685. 
Defendant
acknowledges he was personally served on 11/10/2023. Despite this, defendant
argues he “did not receive actual notice as he was unable to understand the
nature of the documents in time to defend the action.” Mtn. to Set Aside at 3:19-20.
Defendant’s counsel states defendant did not understand his obligation to file
a responsive pleading within 30 days. Decl. Castro para. 2. It is on this basis
that defendant seeks to set aside.
Plaintiff
provides the declaration of Megan Sarrail, which states plaintiff previously
retained Erika Prager as counsel on 2/20/2024, and Prager reached out to
plaintiff, stating defendant had not been served. Decl. Sarrail para. 7. Plaintiff
provided Prager with a photo of defendant being served on 11/10/2024. Id.
Plaintiff received no further communications from Prager. Id.
Ignorance
of the law is not in of itself a defense, and simply because defendant
allegedly did not understand his obligations at the time of service does not
change that he was properly served and a default properly entered. 
However,
California maintains a strong preference to settle disputes via litigation and trial,
and defendant has demonstrated his willingness to move forward with the
litigation process by retaining new counsel and providing a proposed answer to
the complaint. The motion is GRANTED.
The
court will also exercise its discretion under Cal. Civ. Proc. §473(c)(1)(A) to impose
a penalty of $800 on defendant as requested by plaintiff. Defendant was given
ample time to avoid the initial default, and plaintiff provides evidence that
defendant was under sufficient notice to retain counsel prior to the default
being entered. The request for a penalty of $800 is reasonable.
GRANTED
with a penalty of $800 against defendant. Payable within 30 days.