Judge: Salvatore Sirna, Case: 22PSCV00561, Date: 2024-10-16 Tentative Ruling

The Court may change tentative rulings at any time. Therefore, counsel are advised to check this website periodically to determine whether any changes or updates have been made to the tentative ruling. Counsel may submit on a tentative ruling by calling the clerk in Department G at (909) 802-1104 prior to 8:30 a.m. the morning of the hearing.

Case Number: 22PSCV00561    Hearing Date: October 16, 2024    Dept: G

Plaintiff Baxter, Bailey, & Associates, Inc.’s Motion for Relief and Vacate the Dismissal

Respondent: Defendant Aldi Foods Inc.

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff Baxter, Bailey, & Associates, Inc.’s Motion for Relief and Vacate the Dismissal is DENIED.

BACKGROUND

This is a collections action. In January 2022, a group of entities that assigned their claims to Plaintiff Baxter, Bailey, & Associates, Inc. (Baxter Bailey) provided transportation services to Defendants SB CFS, Inc. (SB CFS); Drum Workshop, Inc. (Drum); Kelway Transportation L.L.C. (Kelway); Aldi Foods Inc. (Aldi); Quik Pick Express LLC (Quik Pick); Woods Distribution Solutions LLC (Woods); and Priority Express. Subsequently, Baxter Bailey alleges Defendants failed to make the required payments for the services rendered.

On June 10, 2022, Baxter Bailey filed a complaint against Defendants and Does 1-100, alleging the following causes of action: (1) breach of contract, (2) open book, (3) account stated, (4) quantum meruit, and (5) unjust enrichment.

On January 6, 2023, Baxter Bailey dismissed Aldi and Woods from the present action. On January 26, 2023, Baxter Bailey unsuccessfully attempted to amend the previously entered dismissal.

On April 13, 2023, Baxter Bailey dismissed Quik Pick and Priority Express from the present action.

On September 17, 2024, Baxter Bailey filed the present motion as an ex parte application. On September 19, 2024, the court denied the ex parte application and set the present motion for a noticed hearing on October 16, 2024. A case management conference/status conference re: ADR is also set for the same day.

ANALYSIS

Baxter Bailey seeks to amend Baxter Bailey’s previous dismissal of Aldi and Woods. For the following reasons, the court DENIES their motion.

Legal Standard

Whenever an application for relief from dismissal is made no more than six months after entry of the judgment of dismissal, is in proper form, and is accompanied by the moving party’s sworn affidavit attesting to his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect, the court may vacate any dismissal entered against the moving party unless the court finds that the dismissal was not in fact caused by the moving party’s mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. (Code Civ. Proc., §473, subd. (b).) The court shall grant relief if the moving party’s counsel provides a “sworn affidavit attesting to his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 473, subd. (b).) “The court shall, whenever relief is granted based on an attorney's affidavit of fault, direct the attorney to pay reasonable compensatory legal fees and costs to opposing counsel or parties.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 473, subd. (b).) “The six-month time limit for granting statutory relief is jurisdictional and the court may not consider a motion for relief made after that period has elapsed.” (Manson, Iver & York v. Black (2009) 176 Cal.App.4th 36, 42.)

Discussion

In this case, Baxter Bailey seeks to amend a dismissal entered on January 6, 2024. But the court is without jurisdiction to consider their request as it was not filed within six months of January 6, 2024. Accordingly, the court DENIES Baxter Bailey’s motion.

CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, Baxter Bailey’s motion to vacate the dismissal entered January 6, 2024, is DENIED.