Judge: Michael E. Whitaker, Case: 20STCV37975, Date: 2022-08-08 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV37975    Hearing Date: August 8, 2022    Dept: 32

PLEASE NOTE:   Parties are encouraged to meet and confer concerning this tentative ruling to determine if a resolution may be reached.  If the parties are unable to reach a resolution and a party intends to submit on this tentative ruling, the party must send an email to the Court at sscdept32@lacourt.org indicating that party’s intention to submit.  The email shall include the case number, date and time of the hearing, counsel’s contact information (if applicable), and the identity of the party submitting on this tentative ruling.  If the Court does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may place the motion off calendar or adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court.  If all parties do not submit on this tentative ruling, they should arrange to appear in-person or remotely (which is highly encouraged).  Further, after the Court has posted/issued a tentative ruling, the Court has the inherent authority to prohibit the withdrawal of the subject motion and adopt the tentative ruling as the order of the Court. 

 

TENTATIVE RULING

 

DEPARTMENT

32

HEARING DATE

August 8, 2022

CASE NUMBER

20STCV37975

MOTION

Motion for Reconsideration

MOVING PARTY

Plaintiff Hadasah Enterprises

OPPOSING PARTIES

None

 

MOTIONS

 

              Plaintiff Hadasah Enterprises moves for reconsideration of the Court’s order of July 7, 2022, in which the Court took Plaintiff’s motion to set aside/vacate dismissal off calendar.

The motion is unopposed.

 

ANALYSIS

 

Under Code of Civil Procedure section 1008, subdivision (a), “[w]hen an application for an order has been made to a judge, or to a court, and refused in whole or in part, or granted, or granted conditionally, or on terms, any party affected by the order may, within 10 days after service upon the party of written notice of entry of the order and based upon new or different facts, circumstances, or law, make an application to the same judge or court that made the order, to reconsider the matter and modify, amend, or revoke the prior order.  The party making the application shall state by affidavit what application was made before, when and to what judge, what order or decisions were made, and what new or different facts, circumstances, or law are claimed to be shown.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 1008, subd. (a).)  Where the statutory requirements are met, reconsideration should be granted; upon reconsideration, however, the court may simply reaffirm its original order.  (Corns v. Miller (1986) 181 Cal.App.3d 195, 202.) 

 

The moving party on a motion for reconsideration “must provide not only new evidence but also a satisfactory explanation for the failure to produce that evidence at an earlier time[.]” (Mink v. Superior Court (1992) 2 Cal.App.4th 1338, 1342, internal quotations & citations omitted; see New York Times Co. v. Superior Court (2005) 135 Cal.App.4th 206, 21 [on a motion for reconsideration, a party must present new or different facts, circumstances, or law, which the moving party “could not, with reasonable diligence, have discovered or produced” in connection with the original hearing].)

 

Here, Plaintiff timely filed the motion within 10 days after entry of the Court’s July 7, 2022 Minute Order.  Plaintiff advances the declaration of counsel for Plaintiff, A. Mina Tran (“Counsel”).  Counsel states that her office sent an email to the Court at 8:25 a.m. on July 7, 2022, submitting on the Court’s tentative ruling to grant the motion.  (Declaration of A. Mina Tran, ¶ 4, Exhibit B.)  Counsel avers that she received notice of the Court’s July 7, 2022 Minute Order on July 12, 2022, by mail, indicating that the motion had been taken off calendar for Plaintiff’s failure to appear.  (Declaration of A. Mina Tran, ¶ 5.) 

 

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

 

            Therefore, the Court grants Plaintiff’s motion for consideration and will order that the ruling on the motion to set aside the dismissal be issued as of July 7, 2022. 

 

Plaintiff shall give notice of the Court’s ruling and file a proof of service of such.