Judge: Holly J. Fujie, Case: 23STC25545, Date: 2024-06-27 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STC25545    Hearing Date: June 27, 2024    Dept: 56

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

BACKGROUND

            On October 19, 2023, Plaintiff Pooria Navid (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendants First Quality Builds LLC (“FQB”), Farshid Seyyed Hosseni (“Hosseni”)[1], Elham Riahi Moghaddam (“Moghaddam”) and Eli Tour LLC (“Eli Tour”) (collectively, “Defendants”).  The complaint asserts claims for breach of contract, among others, arising from an allegedly failed construction agreement.

            On April 4 and 5, 2024, Plaintiff filed the instant Motions to Compel Discovery against FQB, Eli Tour, and Moghaddam (“Present Defendants”).

            On May 22, 2024, default was entered against Present Defendants. 

DISCUSSION

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 473, “[t]he court may, upon motion of the injured party, or its own motion, correct clerical mistakes in its judgment or orders as entered, so as to conform to the judgment or order directed, and may, on motion of either party after notice to the other party, set aside any void judgment or order.”  (CCP § 473(d).)  Ministerial acts that were performed inadvertently by a court clerk are clerical errors in nature and within the Court’s power to correct at any time.  (People v. Mitchell (2001) 26 Cal.4th 181, 185.)  The court has the inherent power to reconsider its own interim orders at any time on its own motion.  (Le Francois v. Goel (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1094, 1107; Nieto v. Blue Shield of Calif. Life & Health Ins. Co. (2010) 181 Cal.App.4th 60, 73.)  

Here, the Court finds that on May 22, 2024, default appears to have been entered against Present Defendants, through inadvertence and/or clerical error.  The Court notes that Present Defendants had previously appeared in this case by filing a Demurrer on March 21, 2024, and a Motion to Strike on March 22, 2024.  In a Minute Order dated May 7, 2024, the Court denied the Demurrer and overruled the Motion to Strike.  In the order, the Court inadvertently did not set a date for the filing of an answer.  Thus, default should not have been entered against Present Defendants.

Therefore, the Court, on its own motion, strikes the default entered against Present Defendants.  Present Defendants shall have 30 days from the date of this Order to answer the complaint.

The hearing on the Motions to Compel Discovery filed by Plaintiff, currently set for June 27, 2024, is hereby vacated and continued to August 26, 2024.  Present Defendants may file oppositions to the Motions to Compel Discovery after they have filed their Answers to the Complaint and according to Code.  A reply may be filed by Plaintiff according to Code.

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of this ruling.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMC_DEPT56@lacourt.org as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If the department does not receive an email and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion will be placed off calendar.

Dated this 27th day of June 2024