Judge: Lisa R. Jaskol, Case: 23STCV09664, Date: 2025-04-10 Tentative Ruling
All parties are urged to meet and confer with all parties concerning this tentative ruling to see if they can reach an agreed-upon resolution of their matter. If you are able to reach an agreement, please notify the courtroom staff in advance of the hearing if you wish to submit on the tentative ruling rather than argue the motion by notifying the court by e-mailing the court at: SSCDEPT28@lacourt.org. Include the word "SUBMITS" in all caps and the Case Number in the Subject line. In the body of the email, please provide the date and time of the hearing, your name, your contact information, the party you represent, and whether that party is a plaintiff, defendant, cross-complainant, cross-defendant, claimant, intervenor, or non-party, etc.
Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may still appear at the hearing and argue the matter, and the court could change its tentative based upon the argument. Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue. If you submit, but still intend to appear, include the words "SUBMITS, BUT WILL APPEAR" in the Subject line. If you elect to argue your matter, you are urged to do so remotely, via Court-Connect.
Note that once the Court has issued a tentative, the Court has the inherent authority not to allow the withdrawal of a motion and to adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the court. This does not excuse a moving party's need to do one of the following: appear; submit; or take a matter off calendar by canceling the motion in the case reservation system before issuance of the tentative ruling if the matter moving party does not intend to proceed.
If you submitted a courtesy copy of your papers containing media (such as a DVD or thumb drive), unless you request the return of the media in your papers, the court will destroy it following the hearing of your matter.
Case Number: 23STCV09664 Hearing Date: April 10, 2025 Dept: 28
Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows.
BACKGROUND
On May 1, 2023, Plaintiffs Selena Caballero (“Caballero”) and Ana Munoz (“Munoz”) filed this action against Defendants Raymond Bien (“Defendant”) and Does 1-5 for motor vehicle tort.
On October 28, 2024, the Court dismissed the action without prejudice under Code of Civil Procedure section 581, subdivision (b)(3), when no party appeared for trial.
On February 25, 2025, Plaintiffs filed a motion to vacate the dismissal. The motion was set for hearing on April 10, 2025.
PARTIES’ REQUESTS
Plaintiffs ask the Court to set aside the October 28, 2024 dismissal.
LEGAL STANDARD
Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (b), provides in part:
“Notwithstanding any other requirements of this section, the court shall, whenever an application for relief is made 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. The court shall, whenever relief is granted based on an attorney’s affidavit of fault, direct the attorney to pay reasonable compensatory legal fees and costs to opposing counsel or parties. . . . .”
(Code Civ. Proc., § 473, subdivision (b).)
Code of Civil Procedure section 581, subdivision (b)(3) provides:
“(b) An action may be dismissed in any of the following instances:
* * *
(Code Civ. Proc., § 581, subd. (b)(3).)
DISCUSSION
Plaintiffs ask the Court to vacate the dismissal under the mandatory relief provision of Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (b), because their attorney failed to calendar the final status conference and trial date. As a result of the failure to calendar these dates, counsel failed to appear for the final status conference on October 14, 2024 and the trial on October 28, 2024, leading the Court to dismiss the case under Code of Civil Procedure section 581, subdivision (b)(3). Plaintiffs contend that their counsel’s mistake and neglect caused the failure to calendar the trial and final status conference dates.
Plaintiffs’ counsel has submitted a declaration stating: “I admit that the failure to attend the Final Status Conference on October 14, 2024 and the Trial on October 28, 2024, were entirely due to my mistake and neglect and in no way was the fault of Plaintiffs. I take full responsibility for it.”
Based on counsel’s declaration, the Court vacates the October 28, 2024 order dismissing the case. Because no other parties have appeared in the case, the Court does not order Plaintiffs’ counsel to pay reasonable compensatory legal fees and costs to opposing counsel and parties.
CONCLUSION
The Court GRANTS the motion of Plaintiffs Selena Caballero and Ana Munoz to vacate the dismissal entered on October 28, 2024. The Court vacates the dismissal.
The Court sets an Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal for Failure to File Proof of Service of Summons and Complaint for May 9, 2025, at 8:30 a.m., in Department 28 of the Spring Street Courthouse.
Moving parties are ordered to give notice of this ruling.
Moving parties are ordered to file the proof of service of this ruling with the Court within five days.