Judge: Michelle Williams Court, Case: 23STCV10681, Date: 2023-12-28 Tentative Ruling

If you wish to submit on the tentative ruling, please email
the clerk at SMCdept1@lacourt.org (and “cc” all other parties in the same
email) no later than 7:30 am on the day of the hearing, and please notify all
other parties in advance that you will not be appearing at the hearing.  Include the word "SUBMISSION" in
all caps in the subject line and include your name, contact information, the
case number, and the party you represent in the body of the email. If you
submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing
party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the motion, and the
Court may decide not to adopt the tentative ruling.

Case Number: 23STCV10681    Hearing Date: December 28, 2023    Dept: 1

23STCV10681           JOYCE CRAIG vs MAXINE MARIE HAMLIN

Plaintiff’s Motion for Change of Venue

TENTATIVE RULING:       Plaintiff’s Motion for Change of Venue is DENIED without prejudice.  Clerk to give notice to all parties.

Standard

The Local Rules of the Los Angeles Superior Court govern the assignment of cases between its districts and departments. (Code Civ. Proc. § 402.) LASC Local Rule 2.3(b)(2) authorizes Department 1 to transfer civil cases from one judicial district to another via a noticed motion on three enumerated grounds: (1) when the case was filed in an improper district; (2) for the convenience of witnesses; or (3) to promote the ends of justice. (LASC Local Rule 2.3(b)(2).) A transfer under the Local Rules is discretionary.

Plaintiff’s Motion is Procedurally Defective

On November 9, 2023, Plaintiff, in propria persona, filed a notice of motion, a declaration, and a proof of service.

Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.1113(a), “[a] party filing a motion, . . . must serve and file a supporting memorandum. The court may construe the absence of a memorandum as an admission that the motion . . . is not meritorious and cause for its denial . . .” A “memorandum must contain a statement of facts, a concise statement of the law, evidence and arguments relied on, and a discussion of the statutes, cases, and textbooks cited in support of the position advanced.” (Cal. R. Ct., rule 3.1113(b).) “[P]ro per litigants are not entitled to special exemptions from the California Rules of Court.” (Gamet v. Blanchard (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 1276, 1284.)

Plaintiff did not file a memorandum of points and authorities, rendering her motion incomplete and not in compliance with Rule 3.1113.

Additionally, it is unclear whether Plaintiff’s motion was properly noticed and served. The proof of service attached to the motion indicates electronic service to Defendant’s counsel to the email address “mark@martinezlawcenter.com.” This address has not been used on any filing by Defendant’s counsel in this case. Defendant’s counsel’s proper address for electronic service, as used on every filing made by Defendant, appears to be “efile@martinezlawcenter.com.”

Furthermore, Plaintiff’s original notice of motion indicated the motion would be heard in Department 69 on December 11, 2023. On November 29, 2023, Judge William F. Fahey issued an order resetting the hearing to December 28, 2023 in Department 1. The order also provided “Plaintiff is ordered to give notice to all parties.” Plaintiff has not filed a new notice of motion and it is unclear whether Defendant is aware of the new hearing date and location. (Code Civ. Proc. § 1010 (“the notice of a motion . . . must state when . . . it will be made.”).) Proper notice is required to satisfy due process. (See generally, McMillin v. Eare (2021) 70 Cal.App.5th 893, 913 (describing the “right to notice, which is an element of due process.”).) The motion is unopposed. Accordingly, there is no evidence before the Court that Defendant was given proper notice of the hearing on Plaintiff’s motion.

For the reasons stated herein, Plaintiff’s motion is DENIED without prejudice.

Additionally, the Court notes Plaintiff has subsequently become represented by counsel, which may alter the stated basis for the transfer.