Judge: Maurice A. Leiter, Case: 22STCV06085, Date: 2023-05-04 Tentative Ruling



Case Number: 22STCV06085    Hearing Date: May 4, 2023    Dept: 54

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

 

Cartwright Termite & Pest Control, Inc.,

 

 

 

Plaintiff,

 

Case No.:

 

 

22STCV06085

 

vs.

 

 

Tentative Ruling

 

 

Nisan Tepper, et al.,

 

 

 

Defendants.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hearing Date: May 4, 2023

Department 54, Judge Maurice Leiter

Motion to Set Aside Default

Moving Party: Defendant Shmuel Erde

Responding Party: Plaintiff Cartwright Termite & Pest Control, Inc.

 

T/R:     DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT IS DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

 

DEFENDANT TO NOTICE.

 

If the parties wish to submit on the tentative, please email the courtroom at¿SMCdept54@lacourt.org¿with notice to opposing counsel (or self-represented party) before 8:00 am on the day of the hearing.

 

The Court considers the moving papers, opposition, and reply.

 

            CCP § 473(b) provides, in pertinent part, “[t]he 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.”

 

            Defendant Erde, who substituted in for defaulted Defendant 4276 Crenshaw Investment LLC (“Crenshaw”) on March 29, 2023, moves to set aside default against Crenshaw. Default was entered against Crenshaw on April 14, 2022. Erde represents he did not know of the default until February 10, 2023.

 

            Erde asserts that entry of default should be vacated because Crenshaw was not properly served with the complaint. The registered agent for Crenshaw was served with the complaint by substitute service on February 24, 2022. Erde cites to the proof of service, which shows substitute service on “John Doe, Employee PMB (Male/30/African American/6'0"/200/browneyes/black hair.)” Erde concludes that this service was improper but provides no explanation or analysis showing why service was improper. The Court cannot set aside default on these grounds.

 

            Defendant’s motion to set aside default is DENIED without prejudice.