Judge: Michael D. Washington, Case: 37-2023-00002963-CU-PA-NC, Date: 2024-04-26 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

SOUTH BUILDING TENTATIVE RULINGS - April 25, 2024

04/26/2024  01:30:00 PM  N-31 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Michael D Washington

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Unlimited  PI/PD/WD - Auto Motion Hearing (Civil) 37-2023-00002963-CU-PA-NC BREMERMANN VS HILTON [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion - Other, 01/19/2024

The Motion for Terminating Sanctions brought by defendant Janean Hilton (Defendant) is continued to Friday, June 14, 2024 at 1:30 p.m. in Department N-31 to provide Defendant time to address the deficiencies set forth below.

The 'Notice of Motion' accompanying the moving papers does not include a date or a time of the hearing. (ROA 44.) Without those basic items, the motion cannot be granted as it has not been properly noticed. (See Weil and Brown, California Practice Guide: Civil Procedure Before Trial (The Rutter Group, 2024) ¶ 9:30, citing California Rules of Court, rule 3.1110(b) (internal citations omitted).) Additionally, the moving papers have been served on plaintiff Claudia Bremermann electronically. (ROA 44, PDF pp. 9-10.) While attorneys must accept electronic service, the law does not require the same of pro per litigants unless they consent. (San Diego Local Rule 2.1.2 (I) and 2.1.4; see, generally, Weil and Brown, California Practice Guide: Civil Procedure Before Trial (The Rutter Group, 2024) ¶ 9:86.25, et seq.) There is a question here as to whether the appropriate method of service of the instant motion would be electronic service on Plaintiff's counsel or mail service on Plaintiff herself.

Plaintiff's counsel previously moved (and was granted) relief from representing Plaintiff. However, that relief was made contingent upon the filing of a proof of service demonstrating that Plaintiff's counsel served a copy of the Order Granting Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel on Plaintiff. (ROA 39, Item 5a.) The Register of Actions in this case does not reflect that a proof of service has ever been filed, and, as such, Plaintiff's counsel is still technically counsel of record.

On the other hand, whatever administrative issues may exist with that service, it is entirely possible that Plaintiff's counsel could file such a proof of service at any day – thereby rendering service questionable if Defendant's notice of the instant motion were to 'cross in the mail' so-to-speak. As such, the Court continues the instant motion, will set a concrete hearing date that Defendant can use to update and include on an Amended Notice of Motion for Terminating Sanctions, and directs Defendant to serve an amended notice and all supporting moving papers on both Plaintiff's counsel (which can be served electronically) and on Plaintiff herself (which may be served personally or by mail to Claudia Bremermann, 1575 W Valley Pkwy SPC 103, Escondido, CA 92029). Defendant is directed to: (1) complete such service within the time for noticing a motion in the first instance per code (see Code of Civil Procedure § 1005), and (2) file a proof of service at least five court days prior to the continued hearing date reflecting that such service has been made. Failure to complete either of these requirements may result in the motion being summarily denied.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3091508 CASE NUMBER: CASE TITLE:  BREMERMANN VS HILTON [IMAGED]  37-2023-00002963-CU-PA-NC Unless the ruling(s) above indicate that an appearance is necessary, parties who wish to submit, who are satisfied with the above tentative ruling(s), and/or who do not otherwise wish to argue the motion(s) are encouraged to give notice to the Court and each other of their intention not to appear.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3091508