Judge: Mark H. Epstein, Case: 22SMCV00685, Date: 2022-12-16 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22SMCV00685    Hearing Date: December 16, 2022    Dept: R

The motion to set aside the default is GRANTED.  The court believes that enough has been shown to establish that the error was that of counsel.  Even were it not counsel’s fault, the court would grant the motion given California’s strong preference for resolving matters on the merits.  Because the court believes that the fault was counsel’s, and because the court frankly believes that the amount of sanctions sought is unreasonably high, sanctions are limited to the amount of $1000 and are imposed on defendant and counsel.  They are payable within 30 days.  The answer is deemed filed as of today.

The request to file a cross complaint is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.  Defendant may seek leave to so file, but it is not granted as part of this motion.  In deciding whether or not to oppose the motion should one be made, plaintiff should consider: (1) the state’s strong preference for allowing the filing of cross-complaints where no prejudice will result (and having to defend against the cross-complaint is not prejudice) and (2) that plaintiff reserves all rights to demur to the cross-complaint once filed assuming there are grounds to do so.