Judge: Michael P. Linfield, Case: 22STCV34569, Date: 2023-09-11 Tentative Ruling

The Court often posts its tentative several days in advance of the hearing. Please re-check the tentative rulings the day before the hearing to be sure that the Court has not revised the ruling since the time it was posted.

Please call the clerk at (213) 633-0154 by 4:00 pm. the court day before the hearing if you wish to submit on the tentative.

Case Number: 22STCV34569    Hearing Date: October 31, 2023    Dept: 34

PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT

I.          BACKGROUND

On October 28, 2022, Plaintiffs Phillys Johnson and Raul Salas filed their Complaint against Defendants Home Matters USA, Southwest Consulting Enterprises, Inc., and Roger S. Dyer on causes of action for breach of contract, fraud, and unjust enrichment.

On June 30, 2023, by request of Plaintiffs, the Clerk’s Office entered default on Defendants Home Matters USA and Roger S. Dyer.

On July 20, 2023, by request of Plaintiffs, the Clerk’s Office entered default on Defendant Southwest Consulting Enterprises, Inc.

On August 2, 2023, Plaintiffs filed Judicial Council Form JUD-100, Proposed Judgment.

On September 11, 2023, the Court denied Plaintiff’s Request for Entry of Default Judgement because she had not filed the required documents.

II.       ANALYSIS

Plaintiffs’ counsel has been derelict in litigating this action.  On October 28, 2022, The Sands Law Group filed this case on behalf of Plaintiff.

        At the first Case Management Conference on March 1, 2023, counsel stated that they had just served defendants and requested that the CMC be continued 60 days. The Court continued the CMC, ordered that all parties to file a new, timely CMS prior to continued CMC.

        No Proof of Service or Case Management Statement was filed prior to the continued CMC on April 17, 2023.  In fact, contradicting their previous statement on March 1, 2023, Plaintiff’s counsel stated on April 17th that they had been unable to serve the defendants and that they might be dismissing the case.  The Court continued the CMC, and again ordered that all parties to file a new, timely CMS prior to next CMC.  The Court further stated that if there was no service prior to the next CMC, the Court would dismiss the case.  The CMC was continued to June 16, 2023.

At the June 16^th CMC, Plaintiff’s counsel informed the Court – contrary to its previous two representations to the Court – that Defendants had actually been served on December 22, 2022.  The Court imposed sanctions of $250 against Plaintiff’s counsel for failure to timely file the Case Management Statements and Proofs of Service.  The CMC and/or OSC re Entry of Default was continued to July 7, 2023.

On July 7, 2023, the CMC and/or OSC re Entry of Default was again continued to August 10, 2023.

Default against the final defendant was finally entered on July 20, 2023.  The Court set an OSC re Entry of Default Judgement for today’s date.

On September 11, 2023, the Court denied Entry of Default Judgement because plaintiff failed to file the required documents. The Court continued the OSC re Entry of Default Judgement until today’s hearing.  The Court further stated that “[i]f default is not entered by that date, the Court will dismiss the action.”  (See 9/11/23 Minute Order.)

No further documents have been filed since the last hearing.

III.     CONCUSION

The case is dismissed.