Judge: Michael P. Linfield, Case: 21STCV34711, Date: 2023-08-25 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV34711    Hearing Date: March 19, 2024    Dept: 34

SUBJECT:        Motion to Strike Answer to Complaint and First Amended Cross-Complaint

Moving Party: Burrell Construction, Inc. and George Robles, Jr. 

Resp. Party:    None

The Motion to Strike and Enter Default is GRANTED.

The Answer to the Complaint filed by The Dream @Tamarind, LLC is STRICKEN.

The First Amended Cross-Complaint filed by The Dream @Tamarind, LLC is STRICKEN.

Default is ENTERED on The Dream @Tamarind, LLC.   

BACKGROUND:

On September 21, 2021, Burrell Construction, Inc. filed its Complaint against The Dream @Tamarind, LLC on causes of action arising from construction work and materials allegedly provided by Burrell Construction, Inc. for The Dream @Tamarind, LLC.

On September 27, 2021, Burrell Construction, Inc. filed its Notice of Pending Action.

On January 11, 2022, by request of Burrell Construction, Inc., the Clerk’s Office dismissed without prejudice the doe defendants from the Complaint.

On February 7, 2022, The Dream @Tamarind, LLC filed: (1) Answer to the Complaint; and (2) Cross-Complaint against Burrell Construction, Inc. and George R. Robles, Jr.

On February 25, 2022, the Court found related cases 21STCV34711 and 22STCV02612, and designated case 21STCV34711 as the lead case.

On June 20, 2023, The Dream @Tamarind, LLC filed its First Amended Cross-Complaint against Burrell Construction, Inc.; George R. Robles, Jr.; A+ Electric Services, Inc.; Air Kool, Inc.; Gavina Plumbing, Inc.; Indigo Construction Corp.; and Ramirez & Company LLC.

On August 25, 2023, the Court granted the Motion to be Relieved as Counsel of Pamela Mozer, who was counsel for The Dream @Tamarind, LLC.

On September 5, 2023, Burrell Construction, Inc. and George R. Robles, Jr. filed: (1) Answer to the First Amended Cross-Complaint; and (2) Cross-Complaint against A+ Electric Services, Inc.; Air Kool, Inc.; Gavina Plumbing, Inc.; Indigo Construction Corp.; and Ramirez & Company LLC.

On February 15, 2024, Burrell Construction, Inc. and George R. Robles, Jr. filed their Motion to Strike Answer to Complaint and First Amended Cross-Complaint of The Dream at Tamarind, LLC (“Motion to Strike and Enter Default”). They concurrently filed their Proposed Order.

No opposition or other response has been filed to the Motion to Strike and Enter Default.

ANALYSIS:

I.          Legal Standard

“Any party, within the time allowed to respond to a pleading may serve and file a notice of motion to strike the whole or any part thereof, but this time limitation shall not apply to motions specified in subdivision (e).” (Code Civ. Proc., § 435, subd. (b)(1).)

“The court may, upon a motion made pursuant to Section 435, or at any time in its discretion, and upon terms it deems proper:

“(a) Strike out any irrelevant, false, or improper matter inserted in any pleading.

“(b) Strike out all or any part of any pleading not drawn or filed in conformity with the laws of this state, a court rule, or an order of the court.”

(Code Civ. Proc., § 436.)

“The grounds for a motion to strike shall appear on the face of the challenged pleading or from any matter of which the court is required to take judicial notice.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 437, subd. (a).)

“A notice of motion to strike a portion of a pleading must quote in full the portions sought to be stricken except where the motion is to strike an entire paragraph, cause of action, count, or defense. Specifications in a notice must be numbered consecutively.” (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1322(a).)

II.       Discussion

Burrell Construction, Inc. and George R. Robles, Jr. move the Court to: (1) strike the Answer to the Complaint filed by The Dream @Tamarind, LLC; (2) strike the First Amended Cross-Complaint by The Dream @Tamarind, LLC; and (3) enter default on The Dream @Tamarind. (Motion to Strike and Enter Default, p. 6:3–5.)

Burrell Construction, Inc. and George R. Robles, Jr. argue: (1) that the Dream @Tamarind, LLC is a corporate party that has been unrepresented since September 8, 2023; (2) that the Court may strike the pleadings of an unrepresented corporate party; and (3) that the Court should strike such pleadings here and enter default on the corporate party. (Motion to Strike and Enter Default, pp. 4:1–7, 4:14, 5:10–11.)

The Dream @Tamarind, LLC does not oppose or otherwise respond to the Motion to Strike and Enter Default.

The Court agrees with the arguments made by Burrell Construction, Inc. and George R. Robles, Jr. Despite the Court warning The Dream @Tamarind, LLC six months ago that it faced a significant risk of proceeding without counsel, it appears that The Dream @Tamarind has not retained new counsel. (Minute Order dated August 25, 2023, pp. 4–5.) Given that Trial is less than one week away from the date of the hearing on this motion, it is now appropriate to strike the pleadings of The Dream @Tamarind, LLC and to enter default on it.

III.     Conclusion

The Motion to Strike and Enter Default is GRANTED.

The Answer to the Complaint filed by The Dream @Tamarind, LLC is STRICKEN.

The First Amended Cross-Complaint filed by The Dream @Tamarind, LLC is STRICKEN.

Default is ENTERED on The Dream @Tamarind, LLC.