Judge: Latrice A. G. Byrdsong, Case: 22STLC04077, Date: 2024-04-22 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STLC04077    Hearing Date: April 22, 2024    Dept: 25

Hearing Date:                          Monday, April 22, 2024 

Case Name:                             PAUL PARK v. SCOTT HOUSEFIELD  

Case No.:                                22STLC04077 

Motion:                                   Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Dismissal Entered on 12/15/2023

Moving Party:                         Plaintiff Paul Park  

Responding Party:                   None  

Notice:                                     Ok 

Tentative  Ruling:                   Grant

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE:  Plaintiff’s Request for Entry of Default Judgment set for 06/12/2024 at 9:30 a.m. in Department 25 of the  Spring Street Courthouse.

 ====================================================================

BACKGROUND 

On June 17, 2022, Paul Park filed his Complaint against Scott Housefield and Does 1 to 10 asserting causes of action for (1) Breach of Contract and (2) Fraud.

Default was entered on April 12, 2023.

On December 15, 2023, the Court issued a minute order stating:

The Court finds that the defendant has been defaulted and no request for Entry of Default Judgment has been submitted by plaintiff.

There are no appearances by or for either side on this date.

The Judicial Officer is made aware that there are no communication or appearances by or for either side on this date.

There being no appearance by 9:00 a.m., the Court rules as follows: The Court orders the Complaint filed by Paul Park on 06/17/2022 dismissed without prejudice.

(Minute Order 12/15/2023.)

On March 27, 2024, Plaintiff filed the instant motion to set aside the order dismissing Plaintiff’s Complaint.  No opposition has been filed as of April 17, 2024.

ANALYSIS 

I.          Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Dismissal

Per Code of Civil Procedure, section 473, subdivision (b), a court may relieve a party or his counsel from a dismissal against him because of his “mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect.” When a party seeks relief “no more than six months after entry of judgment, is in proper form, and is accompanied by an attorney's sworn affidavit attesting to his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect, vacate any (1) resulting default entered by the clerk against his or her client, and which will result in entry of a default judgment, or (2) resulting default judgment or dismissal entered against his or her client, unless the court finds that the default or dismissal was not in fact caused by the attorney's mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 473) And when such relief is available, “there is a strong public policy in favor of granting relief and allowing the requesting party his or her day in court.” (Rappleyea v. Campbell (1994) 8 Cal.4th 975, 981-982, internal quotations omitted.) 

II.        Discussion   

The Court dismissed Plaintiff’s action on December 15, 2023. Plaintiff filed the instant motion on March 27, 2024, within the six-month deadline of the Code of Civil Procedure section 473(b).

On December 15, 2023, a non-jury trial for this matter was scheduled and both parties failed to appear. The Court dismissed the action without prejudice. Plaintiff and his counsel failed to appear at the trial date due to a mistaken date of calendar entry. In support of this, Plaintiff provides the declaration of his counsel, Alex Park. Counsel declares the following:

Our office effectuated service on Defendant Scott Housefield on July 5, 2022 via personal service. After receiving no responsive pleading from Defendant following service, our office moved to entry of default against Defendant Housefield. A request for entry of default was entered on April 12, 2023. Due to a calendaring mistake, our office neglected to properly calendar the trial date for this case. As a result, I failed to appear at the Non-Jury Trial Date set on December 15, 2023. I sincerely apologize to the court and to Judge Windham for time and resources that I have wasted the due to my non-appearance. On or about December 15, 2020, the court dismissed this case without prejudice for lack of prosecution. If this motion is granted by the court, our office will prepare and file a default judgment package within 30 days.

(Declaration of Alex Park, ¶¶ 1-5.) Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s absence on December 15, 2023 was a result of Plaintiff’s counsel’s neglect. The Court is inclined to grant the motion. 

III.       Conclusion 

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion is granted.

As the Court notes that Default as to Defendant Scott Housefield is entered herein on 04/12/2023, Counsel for Plaintiff is ordered to electronically submit the Default Judgment Packet within 30-dys.

An Order to Show Cause Re:  Plaintiff’s Request for Entry of Default Judgment is set for 06/12/2024 at 9:30 a.m. in Department 25 of the Spring Street Courthouse.

Moving Party to give notice.