Judge Peter A. Hernandez, Case Number: 22PSCV02991, Date: 2023-07-11 Tentative Ruling

Defendant A Real Logic Corp.’s Motion for Reconsideration of the Order Granting Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment is summarily DENIED for lack of jurisdiction.

This is an unlawful detainer action involving the premises located at 224 E. Arrow Highway, San Dimas, California 91773 (“Premises”).

On December 21, 2022, Plaintiff MSD Investments, Ltd. (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint, asserting a cause of action for Unlawful Detainer against Defendant A Real Logic Corp. (“Defendant”) and Does 1-10.

On February 14, 2023, All Unknown Occupants in Possession’s default was entered.

On July 11, 2023, an “Order Granting Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment” was entered. On July 12, 2023, judgment was entered.

On August 2, 2023, Plaintiff filed a “Notice of Bankruptcy Stay,” advising therein of Defendant’s Chapter 7 bankruptcy filing; that day, the court ordered the case stayed.

On September 13, 2023, Plaintiff filed a “Notice of Order Granting Motion for Relief from the Automatic Bankruptcy Stay.”

Defendant[2] moves the court for reconsideration of its July 11, 2023 order granting Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment.

The motion is summarily denied for lack of jurisdiction. “[A] trial court may only rule on a motion for reconsideration before entry of judgment.” (Ramon v. Aerospace Corp. (1996) 50 Cal.App.4th 1233, 1237.) Judgment was entered in this case on July 12, 2023.

[1] The motion was filed (and mail-served) on July 19, 2023 and originally set for hearing on August 14, 2023. On August 2, 2023, the court rescheduled the hearing to January 29, 2024. The court clerk gave notice of the new hearing date to Plaintiff’s counsel and Defendant’s counsel Alberto Munoz. Munoz had a motion to be relieved as counsel set for hearing on August 1, 2023, but this was vacated by the court on July 11, 2023. The motion was never heard.

[2] Defendant, a corporation, has purported to file the instant motion in pro se. “[A] corporation, unlike a natural person, cannot represent itself before courts of record in propria persona, nor can it represent itself through a corporate officer, director or other employee who is not an attorney. It must be represented by licensed counsel in proceedings before courts of record.” (CLD Construction, Inc. v. City of San Ramon (2004) 120 Cal.App.4th 1141, 1145.) The court would decline to consider the motion on this basis, even if it had jurisdiction.