Judge: Maurice A. Leiter, Case: 24STCV25922, Date: 2025-01-13 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV25922    Hearing Date: January 13, 2025    Dept: 54

Hearing Date: January 13, 2025

Department 54, Judge Maurice Leiter

Motion: Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike the Answer of Defendants Web Apps Agency LLC and Broadway Innovation House Inc.

Moving Party: Plaintiff RJ Broadway LLC     

Responding Party: N/A - Unopposed

T/R: The Court considers the moving papers and GRANTS Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike the Answer of Defendant Web Apps Agency LLC and Defendant Broadway Innovation House Inc.

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.

BACKGROUND

On October 3, 2024, Plaintiff RJ Broadway LLC filed an unlawful detainer Complaint against Web Apps Agency, LLC (WAA). On October 18, 2024 Plaintiff substituted DOE 1 for Broadway Innovation House, Inc. (BIH). The Complaint alleges Plaintiff and Defendants entered into a lease agreement on October 19, 2020 where Defendants would agree to pay the rent of $8,381.00 monthly. Plaintiff alleges Defendants breached the lease and filed this action for recovery of the premises and unpaid rent by Defendants.

Defendants filed an Answer on November 13, 2024. The Answer was filed by Marcus Brown as pro per. Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike the Answer of Defendant Web Apps Agency LLC and Defendant Broadway Innovation House Inc (the Motion). No opposition was filed.   

ANALYSIS

The court may, upon motion, or at any time in its discretion, and upon terms it deems proper, strike any irrelevant, false, or improper matter inserted in any pleading. (Code Civ. Proc. §436, subd. (a).) The court may also strike all or any part of any pleading not drawn or filed in conformity with the laws of this state, a court rule, or an order of the court. (Code Civ. Proc. §436, subd. (b).) The grounds for a motion to strike are that the pleading has irrelevant, false, or improper matter, or has not been drawn or filed in conformity with laws. (Code Civ. Proc. §436.) The grounds for moving to strike must appear on the face of the pleading or by way of judicial notice. (Code Civ. Proc. §437.)

            Plaintiff argues that: (a) the Answer was untimely filed in violation of Code Civ. Proc. §1167.3; (b) Defendants failed to serve Plaintiff’s counsel; and (c) entities cannot represent themselves. The Court agrees with each argument and grants the Motion.

            Code Civ. Proc. §1167.3 requires that an answer be filed no more than five days after service. Defendants were personally served with the Summons and Complaint on October 31, 2024.Defendants’ Answer was not filed until November 13, 2024. The Answer is untimely.

            On November 13, 2024, Defendants’ pro per representative Marcus Brown filed a proof of service with the Court that purports to show service on RJ Broadway LLC at 660 Lombardy Pl., San Marino, CA 91108. This is not the address of Plaintiff’s counsel;  service was improper.

            The answer filed by Defendants is defective as a matter of law because entities cannot represent themselves in Court. (CLD Construction, Inc. v. City of San Ramon (2004) 120 Cal.App.4^th 1141, 1145.)