Judge: Michael E. Whitaker, Case: BC640588, Date: 2023-01-24 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: BC640588    Hearing Date: January 24, 2023    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

              Defendant Craig Carley (Defendant) moves to set aside the Clerk of the Court’s August 11, 2022, entry of default judgment.  Plaintiff Sonia Diaz (Plaintiff) has not filed an opposition.

            Foremost, the Court notes that there is an issue with proper notice to Plaintiff.  The proof of service attached to the notice of motion indicates that the moving papers were served on David S. Lamonica of the Law Offices of David S. Lamonica (Lamonica) via messenger delivery on December 29, 2022.  Lamonica is Plaintiff’s counsel of record. 

            However, on January 12, 2021, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Association of Counsel in which Lamonica associated as counsel for Plaintiff, Southern California Attorneys, APC.  Further, Lamonica requested that all future correspondence, notices and pleadings be forwarded to Southern California Attorneys.  In addition, the Court notes that the counsel for Plaintiff identified on the subject default judgment is Southern California Attorneys.  Yet, Defendant did not serve Southern California Attorneys with the moving papers. 

            Consequently, to ensure that proper notice has been given to Plaintiff, the Court will continue the hearing on the motion to March 21, 2023 at 1:30 PM.  Opposition and reply papers shall be filed and served per Code of Civil Procedure section 1005 in accordance with the continued hearing date of March 21, 2023.  Defendant shall provide notice of continued hearing, serve his moving papers, by personal delivery/service on Lamonica and Southern California Attorneys forthwith, and file the proofs of service regarding the same.