Judge: Kevin C. Brazile, Case: 22STCV01722, Date: 2022-11-08 Tentative Ruling

Hearing Date: November 8, 2022

Case Name: Creditors Adjustment Bureau, Inc. v. Royalty Trucking, Inc., et al.

Case No.: 19STCV34978

Matter: Motion to Set Aside Default

Moving Party: Defendant Royalty Trucking, Inc.

Responding Party: Plaintiff Creditors Adjustment Bureau, Inc. 

Notice: OK

Ruling: The Motion is granted.

Moving party to give notice.

If counsel do not submit on the tentative, they are strongly 

encouraged to appear by LACourtConnect rather than in person due to the COVID-19 pandemic. 

On July 14, 2022, the Court entered a default for Defendant Royalty Trucking, Inc.

Defendant Royalty Trucking, Inc. now seeks to set aside its default on the grounds of excusable mistake, neglect, inadvertence, or surprise.  Defendant contends that it “has only recently become aware of its obligations in responding to the Complaint. Specifically, Mr. Jose Coreas, the owner of Defendant Royalty Trucking, Inc., does not speak English well, and did not understand the documents that were served on him. Moreover, as he was served with a Notice of Case Management Conference scheduled to take place on August 24th, 2022, around the time that he was served with the Complaint, he was under the impression that he would show up to court on that date to present his defense. Upon the hiring of counsel, Mr. Coreas became aware of his errors, which led to the filing of this motion.” 

The discretionary provision of Code Civ. Proc. § 473(b) provides, “The court may, upon any 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 made within a reasonable time, in no case exceeding six months, after the judgment, dismissal, order, or proceeding was taken.”  The statute is liberally construed in order to give effect to the policy favoring resolution of disputes on their merits.  (Hopkins & Carley v. Gens (2011) 200 Cal.App.4th 1401, 1410.)  To be entitled to relief under the statute, the moving party must demonstrate a satisfactory excuse for his or her default, as well as diligence in seeking relief after discovery of the default.  Whether the moving party has carried this burden is a question to be resolved in the discretion of the trial court.  (Ibid.)

For relief to be warranted, any mistake must be something other than professional incompetence or ignorance of the law.  (Hearn v. Howard (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 1193, 1206.)  The term “surprise” refers to “some condition or situation in which a party is unexpectedly placed to his injury, without any default or negligence of his own, which ordinary prudence could not have guarded against.”  (Ibid., internal quotations omitted.)  Similarly, to be excusable, a litigant’s inadvertence or neglect must have been “such as might have been the act of a reasonably prudent person under the same circumstances.”  (Ibid.)

Given Coreas’ language issues, the Court, in the exercise of its discretion, finds excusable neglect, mistake, surprise, or inadvertence warranting that the default be set aside.  (Code Civ. Proc. § 473(b).)  

The Motion is granted.

Moving party to give notice.

If counsel do not submit on the tentative, they are strongly encouraged to appear by LACourtConnect rather than in person due to the COVID-19 pandemic.