Judge: Michael E. Whitaker, Case: BC706983, Date: 2022-08-15 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: BC706983    Hearing Date: August 15, 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

MOTION

Plaintiff Harlan Powers sued defendant Ashford TRS Pool A, LLC based on a slip and fall on property owned and controlled by Defendant.   Defendant moves to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint per the Fugitive Disentitlement Doctrine.  Plaintiff has not filed an opposition to the motion.

The Court finds Defendant’s service of the motion on Plaintiff on July 21, 2022, by electronic transmission to be procedurally deficient. Plaintiff is a self-represented litigant. Self-represented parties must affirmatively consent to electronic service by serving and filing a notice so stating. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 2.251, subd. (c)(3)(B).) Absent such affirmative consent, self-represented parties must be served with documents by nonelectronic means. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 1010.6, subd. (d)(4), 1011, subd. (b); Cal. Rules of Court, rule 2.253, subds. (b)(2), (3).)

Plaintiff has not filed and served a notice affirmatively consenting to electronic service.  Notwithstanding, Defendant’s service of the motion on Plaintiff on July 21, 2022, by electronic transmission is inadequate notice per Code of Civil Procedure section 1005.  (See Code Civ. Proc., §§ 1005, subd. (b) [moving and supporting papers to be served 16 court days before the hearing]; 1010.6, subd. (a)(4)(B) [period of notice extended by 2 court days for service by electronic means].) 

The Court therefore denies the motion as procedurally defective.  Defendant shall provide notice of this Court’s ruling and file a proof of service of such.