Judge: Melvin D. Sandvig, Case: 24CHCV00002, Date: 2025-03-24 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24CHCV00002    Hearing Date: March 24, 2025    Dept: F47

Dept. F47

Date: 3/24/25

Case #24CHCV00002

 

 

(1)

 

MOTION TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT, VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT

&

STAY EXECUTION OF JUDGMENT

 

Motion filed on 1/8/25.

 

MOVING PARTY: Defendant Teresa Ledezma

RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff Martin Ledezma

NOTICE: ok

 

RELIEF REQUESTED: An order setting aside and vacating the default and default judgment entered against Defendant Teresa Ledezma in this action and staying execution of the judgment.

 

 

(2)

 

MOTION TO HAVE THE CLERK OF THE COURT SIGN ESCROW DOCUMENTS

ON BEHALF OF TERESA LEDEZMA

 

Amended Motion filed 2/28/25.

 

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Martin Ledezma

RESPONDING PARTY: Defendant Teresa Ledezma

 

RELIEF REQUESTED: An order authorizing the Clerk of the Court to sign all necessary escrow documents on behalf of Defendant Teresa Ledezma to complete the sale of the property located at 10521 Oneida Avenue, Pacoima, CA 91331.

 

***

 

RULINGS: The hearing on the motions will be continued.

 

On 1/2/24, Plaintiff Martin Ledezma (Plaintiff) filed this action against various defendants, including Defendant Teresa Ledezma (Defendant), for partition of real property located at 10521 Oneida Avenue, Pacoima, CA 91331.

 

On 7/30/24, Plaintiff filed a proof of service indicating Defendant was personally served with the summons and complaint on 6/25/24.  On that same date, Plaintiff’s request for entry of default against Defendant was entered.  On 8/30/24, a Stipulation and Order Re Judgment was entered.

 

On 1/8/25, Defendant filed a motion seeking an order setting aside and vacating the default and default judgment entered against Defendant Teresa Ledezma in this action and staying execution of the judgment.  No proof of service for the motion has been filed; however, on 2/14/25, Plaintiff filed an opposition to Defendant’s motion.  The proof of service attached to the opposition indicates that it is for a “Notice of Order to Show Cause Re: Entry/Receipt of Judgment.”  (See Opposition, pdf 12).  Even if the proof of service was for the opposition to Defendant’s motion, it contains an incorrect address for Defendant.  The opposition indicates that it was mailed to Defendant at: 14168 Foothill Blvd., #116, Sylmar, CA 91342.  Id.  However, Defendant’s address of record is 14164 Foothill Blvd., #116, Sylmar CA 91342.  (See Motion to Set Aside Default and eCourt).  Defendant has not filed a reply to the opposition to cure the defect in notice.

 

The proof of service attached to Plaintiff’s motion for an order authorizing the Clerk of the Court to sign all necessary escrow documents on behalf of Defendant Teresa Ledezma to complete the sale of the property located at 10521 Oneida Avenue, Pacoima, CA 91331 also contains the same incorrect address for Defendant.  (See Plaintiff’s Amended Motion, pdf 39).  Defendant has not opposed or otherwise responded to Plaintiff’s motion to cure the defect in notice.

 

Based on the foregoing, the hearing on the motions will be continued.  Plaintiff’s counsel is ordered to re-serve the opposition to Defendant’s motion and Plaintiff’s motion at Defendant’s address of record.

 

Any reply to Plaintiff’s opposition to Defendant’s motion to set aside default must be filed and served at least 5 court days before the continued hearing date.

 

Any opposition to Plaintiff’s motion for an order authorizing the Clerk of the Court to sign all necessary escrow documents on behalf of Defendant must be filed and served at least 9 court days before the continued hearing date and any reply to such opposition must be filed and served at least 5 court days before the continued hearing date. 

 

The Court further notes that in violation of CRC 3.1110(f)(4), Plaintiff’s attorney has failed to electronically bookmark the exhibits attached to Plaintiff’s papers.  Counsel is warned that failure to comply with this requirement in the future may result in matters being continued so that papers can be resubmitted in compliance, papers not being considered and/or the imposition of sanctions.