Judge: Mark E. Windham, Case: 19STCV31718, Date: 2022-08-30 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 19STCV31718 Hearing Date: August 30, 2022 Dept: 26
TENTATIVE RULING:
Plaintiff Chicuace Chicuace’s
Motion to Quash Any Quashing of Other Party is DENIED.
SERVICE OF MOTION:
[X] Proof
of Service Timely Filed (CRC 3.1300) N/A
[X]
Correct Address (CCP 1013, 1013a) N/A
[X] 16/21
Day Lapse (CCP 12c and 1005 (b)) N/A
SUMMARY OF COMPLAINT: Action for slander.
REQUEST FOR RELIEF: Unclear.
OPPOSITION: None filed as
of August 26, 2022.
REPLY: None filed as of August 26, 2022.
ANALYSIS:
On September 6, 2019, Plaintiff Chicuace Chicuace (“Plaintiff”) filed the Complaint in this action for slander against Defendants Jimmy A. Gomez and Leonard Mata (“Defendants”).”
Initially, the case was incorrectly classified
as a class action; upon correction the case was reclassified to the limited
jurisdiction court on September 17, 2019. On July 8, 2020, the Court granted
Defendants’ Motion to Quash Service of the Summons. (Mintue Order 07/08/20.) Plainitff
filed proofs of personal service of the Summons and Complaint on November 15,
2021. An Order to Show Cause Re Failure to File Proof of Service and Failure to
File Default Judgment is set for September 7, 2022.
On April 18, 2022, Plaintiff filed the instant
Motion to Quash Any Quashing of Other Party.
The
Motion is not supported by any legal authority or evidence. “The
memorandum must contain a statement of facts, a concise statement of the law,
evidence and arguments relied on, and a discussion of the statutes, cases, and
textbooks cited in support of the position advanced.” (Cal. Rules of Court,
rule 3.1113(b).) Indeed, Plaintiff’s failure to provide a memorandum as
required by the Rule is an “admission that the [request] is without merit and
cause for its denial.” (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1113, subds. (a), (b); In
re Marriage of Falcone & Fyke (2012) 203 Cal.App.4th 964, 976.)
Therefore, the Motion to
Quash Any Quashing of Other Party is DENIED.
Court clerk to give notice.