Judge Randolph M. Hammock, Case Number: 24STCV14403, Date: 2024-12-16 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Randolph M. Hammock, Case: 24STCV14403, Date: 2024-12-16 Tentative Ruling

Plaintiff Si Jung Oh is an assistant manager of a Senior Apartment in Los Angeles. Plaintiff alleges that defamatory statements were made about her on Defendant MissyUSA’s website. Plaintiff asserts causes of action against Defendant for (1) defamation, (2) negligence, and (3) IIED.

On October 8, 2024, the court dismissed the action without prejudice after Plaintiff failed to appear at the Case Management Conference or file a Case Management Conference Statement.

Plaintiff’s Motion to Set Aside Dismissal is GRANTED. The court orders the dismissal entered on October 8, 2024 as to the entire action set aside and vacated.

A Case Management Conference was held on October 8, 2024. Plaintiff did not appear or notify the court of her whereabouts. (See 10/08/2024 Minute Order). Plaintiff also failed to file a CMC Statement. (Id.) Therefore, this court ordered the case dismissed without prejudice pursuant to CCP sections 583.150 and/or 583.410, Government Code section 68608 (b) and/or LASC Local Rules 3.24 et seq. (Id.)

Plaintiff now moves to set aside the order of dismissal under CCP section 473(b). Under the discretionary provisions of section 473(b), 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).) To obtain relief under this provision, the application for relief must be made “within a reasonable time, in no case exceeding six months, after the judgment, dismissal, order, or proceeding.” (Ibid.) [FN 2]

In support of relief, Plaintiff states that she wanted to appear in person for the Case Management Conference, however, she suffers from panic-disorder. (Si J. Oh Decl. ¶¶ 4-7.) On the morning of the CMC, she experienced a panic-disorder that prevented her from appearing in person. (Id.) Plaintiff then attempted to use LACourt Connect to appear remotely but “could not be connected to the courtroom.” (Id. ¶¶ 8, 9.) Plaintiff further states she “did not know to file [a] CMC statement before CMC date.” (Id. ¶ 6.)

Here, mindful of the policy favoring relief from dismissals where there is no prejudice to the opposing party, the court will provide Plaintiff relief. (See Even Zohar Constr. & Remodeling, Inc. v. Bellaire Townhouses, LLC, (2015) 61 Cal. 4th 830, 839 [“The general underlying purpose of section 473(b) is to promote the determination of actions on their merits”]; see also Austin v. Los Angeles Unified Sch. Dist. (2016) 244 Cal. App. 4th 918, 929 [“[b]ecause the law favors disposing of cases on their merits, ‘any doubts in applying section 473 must be resolved in favor of the party seeking relief from default [citations].’”].) Importantly, there is no evidence Defendant will suffer prejudice if the dismissal is set aside as this early stage.

However, Plaintiff is admonished that the failure to timely appear at any single hearing going forward may result in a dismissal of the action. Plaintiff must make any necessary arrangements so that she can timely appear at all future hearings and comply with all future orders of this court.

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Motion to Set Aside Dismissal is GRANTED. The court orders the dismissal entered on October 8, 2024 as to the entire action set aside and vacated.

Judge of the Superior Court

FN 1 - Plaintiff filed a Proof of Service of Summons on October 10, 2024, indicating Defendant was served by substituted service on June 18, 2024. Defendant has not appeared in this action.

FN 2 - Section 473, subdivision (b) also provides for mandatory relief upon a showing by attorney declaration of “mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect.” As Plaintiff is in pro per, the mandatory provision does not apply.