Judge: Melvin D. Sandvig, Case: 24CHCV00555, Date: 2025-01-14 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 24CHCV00555 Hearing Date: January 14, 2025 Dept: F47
Dept. F47
Date: 1/14/25
Case #24CHCV00555
WRIT OF
POSSESSION
Application filed on 5/30/34. Notice of Application filed on 11/12/24.
MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Mitsubishi HC Capital America,
Inc.
RESPONDING PARTY: Defendants Cypress Manufacturing, LLC
and Robert Loranger
RULING: The application is placed off
calendar.
In this action, Plaintiff Mitsubishi HC Capital America,
Inc. (Plaintiff) seeks recovery based on Defendant Cypress Manufacturing, LLC’s
(Cypress) alleged breach of its financing agreements for equipment and the
alleged breach of personal guaranties by Defendant Robert Loranger (Loranger).
On 5/8/24, the operative First Amended Complaint for
Breach of Equipment Lease, Breach of Contract, Breach of Guaranty and Claim and
Delivery of Property was personally served on Loranger and on Cypress via
service on Loranger, Cypress’s CEO. (See
Proofs of Personal Service filed 5/10/24).
On 5/30/24, Plaintiff filed an Application for Writ of
Possession, a Memorandum of Points & Authorities in support thereof, a supporting
Declaration of Brian Kerrins and a Proof of Service by Mail which indicates
that the documents were mailed to Cypress and Loranger on 5/29/24. By way of this application, Plaintiff seeks a
writ of possession regarding: (1) 2021 ALLROUNDER 42Q C 1000-290 Injection
Molding Machine with Rigging Charges, Serial Number 260771; (2) 2021 ALLROUNDER
470 C 1500-400 Injection Molding Machine with Rigging Charges, Serial Number
260772; (3) ARBURG ALLROUNDER 520 S 1600 Injection Molding Machine with all
Accessories, Attachments, and Components; Serial Number 249634; with a collectively
estimated value of $177,000.00.
On 6/12/24, pursuant to Plaintiff’s request, default was
entered against Cypress and Loranger. On 11/12/24, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Application
for Writ of Possession which gave notice of the original 1/6/25 hearing date
for the application and a Proof of Service by Mail for that notice which
indicates that it was mailed to Defendant on 11/12/24.
On 12/18/24, the Court ordered the 1/6/24 hearing on the
application continued to 1/14/25 and ordered Plaintiff to provide notice of
same. (See 12/18/24 Notice of
Continuance).
Plaintiff has failed to provide proper notice of the
hearing on the application for writ of possession. Defendants have not appeared in this action;
therefore, there are no addresses of record for Defendants by which the Court
can confirm the service by mail of the documents in relation to this
application. Additionally, there are no
responses to the application to cure the defect in notice. As such, unless/until Defendants appear in
the action so that the Court can confirm their addresses of record, Plaintiff must
personally serve the application for writ of possession and supporting
documents on Defendants.
The Court further notes that there is no evidence that Plaintiff
provided any notice (by mail or personally) to Defendants of the continuance of
the hearing on this application in violation of the Court’s 12/18/24 Notice and
Order Re Continuance.