Judge: Michael Shultz, Case: 19CMCV00296, Date: 2024-01-25 Tentative Ruling
INSTRUCTIONS: If the parties wish to submit on the tentative ruling and avoid a court appearance on the matter, the moving party must:
1. Contact the opposing party and all other parties who have appeared in the action and confirm that each will submit on the tentative ruling.
2. No later than 4:00 p.m. on the court day before the hearing, call the Courtroom (310-761-4302) advising that all parties will submit on the tentative ruling and waive hearing; and
3. Serve notice of the Court's ruling on all parties entitled to receive service.
If this procedure is followed, when the case is called the Court will enter its ruling on the motion in accordance with its tentative ruling. If any party declines to submit on the tentative ruling, then no telephone call is necessary, and all parties should appear at the hearing. If there is neither a telephone call nor an appearance, then the matter may either be taken off calendar or ruled on.
TENTATIVE RULINGS -- http://www.lacourt.org/tentativeRulingNet/u
Case Number: 19CMCV00296 Hearing Date: January 25, 2024 Dept: A
19CMCV00296
Lawrence Chibueze, et al v. Telops International, Inc., et al.
Thursday, January 25, 2024, at 8:30 a.m.
[TENTATIVE]
ORDER CONTINUING PLAINTIFFS’
The complaint, filed on October 19, 2019,
alleges that Telops International, Inc., (“Telops”) through their agent,
Defendant, Julio Benavente (“Benavente”), installed solar panels on Plaintiffs’
home, although Plaintiffs never signed an agreement to purchase, finance, or
install the panels. Benavente allegedly forged Plaintiffs’ signatures on the
installation agreement and financing contract. Plaintiffs’ home began to leak
because the roof was not installed prior to the installation, resulting in mold
growth throughout their home. Defendants allegedly placed a lien of $84,000 on
Plaintiffs’ home, which increased Plaintiffs’ mortgage and property taxes.
The Court recently heard Plaintiffs’
request for Court judgment on December 1, 2023, and continued the hearing to
give Plaintiffs an opportunity to file a proof of service of Statement of
Damages on the defaulting defendant. The proof of service filed on March 24, 2021,
indicates that a summons, complaint, civil case cover sheet, and notice of case
assignment were served by notice of acknowledgment and receipt. (Proof
of Svc. 3/24/21.) Plaintiffs filed a Statement of
Damages with the Court, but no proof of service thereof. (Stmt.
of Damages 8/26/21.) As the Court’s minute order
reflects, there was no indication that Plaintiffs served the Statement of Damages
and Punitive Damages on Telops in the same manner as a summons as required by
statute before a default may be taken. (Min.
Ord. 12/1/23; Code
Civ. Proc., § 425.11, Code
Civ. Proc., § 425.115.) Plaintiffs personally served the summons
and complaint only. (Proof
of service filed 4/4/23.) Absent proof of service of the
Statement of Damages, judgment cannot be entered.
Plaintiff’s supplemental declaration and
Statement of the Case filed on January 24, 2024, do not cure these defects.
Plaintiffs did comply with the Court’s order to file a dismissal of all DOE
defendants which dismissal was filed on January 24, 2024.
The Court will permit one more
continuance for Plaintiffs to perfect their request for default judgment.
Accordingly, the Court sets an Order to Show Cause re Dismissal for failure to
obtain Court judgment by default for