Judge: Kerry Bensinger, Case: 21STCV32000, Date: 2023-11-27 Tentative Ruling

Counsel may submit on the tentative ruling by emailing Dept. 31 before 8:30 the morning of the hearing. The email address is smcdept31@lacourt.org. Please do not call the court to submit on the tentative. Please do not submit to the tentative ruling on behalf of the opposing party. Please do not e-mail the Court if you plan to appear and argue.

In deciding whether to submit on the tentative ruling or attend the hearing and present oral argument, please keep the following in mind:

The tentative rulings authored by this court reflect that the court has read and considered all pleadings and evidence timely submitted to the court in connection with the motion, opposition, and reply (if any). Because the pleadings were filed, they are part of the public record.

Oral argument is not an opportunity to simply regurgitate that which a party set forth in its pleadings. Nor, is oral argument an opportunity to "make a record" when there is no court reporter present and the statements and arguments of counsel are already part of the record because they were set forth in the pleadings. Finally, simply because a party or attorney disagrees with the court's analysis and ruling or is not satisfied with it does not necessarily warrant oral argument when no new arguments will be articulated.

If you submit on the tentative, you must immediately notify all other parties email that you will not appear at the hearing. If you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the motions. If all parties to the motion submit, this tentative ruling will become the final ruling after the hearing date and it will be memorialized in a minute order. This tentative ruling is not an invitation, nor an opportunity, to file further documents relative to the hearing in question. No such document will be considered by the Court.

**Tentative rulings on Motions for Summary Judgment will only be available for review in the courtroom on the day of the hearing.

Case Number: 21STCV32000    Hearing Date: November 27, 2023    Dept: 31

This is a declaratory relief action arising from an alleged fraudulent insurance claim.  On September 30, 2021, Plaintiffs, U-Haul Co. of California, U-Haul Co. of Arizona, and ARCOA Risk Retention Group, Inc., filed a complaint against, Defendants, Gregory Nalbandian (“Nalbandian”), Jonathan Hanasab (“Hanasab”), XYZ Corporations, and Does 1-100.  Plaintiffs allege Nalbandian rented a U-Haul truck and intentionally struck Hanasab’s vehicle to make an unlawful and fraudulent insurance claim.  Nalbandian purchased an additional supplemental liability insurance of $1,000,000 for the U-Haul rental.  

                Plaintiffs served Nalbandian with the summons and complaint on October 28, 2021 by substituted service.  Default was entered against Nalbandian on December 17, 2021.  Hanasab was dismissed on April 5, 2022.  XYZ Corporations and Doe defendants were dismissed on February 21, 2023.

Plaintiffs now seek a declaratory judgment by default against Nalbandian stating that the supplemental liability insurance of $1,000,000 is void.  Upon review, the Court finds the application is sufficiently supported by documentation and evidence.  Plaintiffs justify a declaratory judgment by default in their favor.

Accordingly, Plaintiffs’ application for default judgment is GRANTED.

Moving party to give notice.