Judge Olivia Rosales, Case 21NWCV00512 2022-08-04 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Olivia Rosales, Case: 21NWCV00512, Date: 2022-08-04 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21NWCV00512 Hearing Date: August 4, 2022 Dept: SEC

CITIBANK N.A. v. AVETISIAN

CASE NO.: 21NWCV00512

HEARING: 08/04/22

JUDGE: MARGARET M. BERNAL

TENTATIVE ORDER

Defendant ROBERT AVETISIAN (pro per) Motion to Set Aside Default and Default Judgment is GRANTED.

Court Clerk to give Notice.

No Opposition filed as of August 2, 2022.

Defendant’s Proposed Answer attached as Exhibit 1 to the Moving Papers is deemed FILED as of the hearing date but is NOT deemed served as of the hearing date. Moving Party is ORDERED to SERVE the Proposed Answer within 5 court days of this hearing date.

All parties are ORDERED to appear for a Case Management Conference on Friday, September 11, 2022 at 1:30 p.m. in Dept. SE-F.

“The court may, upon any terms as may be just, relieve a party or his or her legal representative from a judgment, dismissal, order, or other proceeding taken against him or her through his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.” (CCP §473(b).) Under CCP §473.5, the Court may set aside a default or default judgment if “(1) [defendant] received through no inexcusable fault of his own, no actual notice of the action in time to appear and defend, and had not made a general appearance; (2) a default or default judgment has been entered against him by the court; (3) he acted with reasonable diligence in serving and filing the notice of motion to set aside the default or default judgment; and (4) he has a meritorious defense.” (CCP §473.5.)

CCP § 473(b), states that “[t]he court may…relieve a party or his or her legal representative from a judgment, dismissal, order, or other proceeding taken against him or her through his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.”

The Proof of Service of Summons filed on September 21, 2021 states that Robert Avetisian was personally served at 5020 Cord Avenue, Pico Rivera, California, and that the process server confirmed Robert Avetisian prior to service.

However, Defendant argues that the Summons and Complaint in this action were inadvertently served onto his mother at 5020 Cord Avenue, Pico Rivera, California. Defendant contends that he actually resides at 5030 Cord Avenue, Pico Rivera, California. (Opp. 3:15.) Defendant declares that “[p]rior to April 23, 2022, [Defendant] was unaware of any court actions against [him].” (Avetisian Decl., ¶4.)

The policy of hearing cases on their merits is well-established. (See, e.g., Berman v. Klassman (1971) 17 Cal.App.3d 900.) Given the liberality associated with Motions to Set Aside Defaults, the Court finds Defendant’s Declaration and arguments raised in the Motion sufficient to warrant to relief. The law favors trials on the merits. (Rappleyea v. Campbell (1994) 8 Cal.4th 975, 980.) The Court finds adequate grounds to allow Defendant the opportunity to defend himself on the merits of this action.

The Motion is GRANTED.