Judge Salvatore Sirna, Case Number: 23PSCV01059, Date: 2023-08-31 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Salvatore Sirna, Case: 23PSCV01059, Date: 2023-08-31 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23PSCV01059 Hearing Date: January 17, 2024 Dept: G

Defendant Guruaan LA Real Estate Inc.’s Motion to Vacate Default

Respondent: NO OPPOSITION

TENTATIVE RULING

Defendant Guruaan LA Real Estate Inc.’s Motion to Vacate Default is GRANTED

BACKGROUND

This is a disability rights action. Plaintiff Luis Marquez is a paraplegic who uses a wheelchair for mobility. Defendant Guruaan LA, Inc. (Guruaan LA) owns an Arco gas station in Irwindale that is located on property owed by Defendant Guruaan LA Real Estate Inc. (Guruaan LA Real Estate). On July 27, 2022, Marquez visited the Arco gas station to avail himself of its goods, services, privileges, or advantages. During the visit, Marquez alleges the following barriers to access existed: (1) an inaccessible bathroom soap dispenser and (2) unwrapped sink plumbing.

On April 11, 2023, Marquez filed a complaint against Guruaan LA, Guruaan LA Real Estate, and Does 1-50, alleging (1) violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act (UCRA) and (2) violation of the California Disabled Persons Act (DPA). On May 2, Marquez’s process server served Guruaan LA Real Estate in Irwindale with substitute service.

On July 5, 2023, default was entered against Guruaan LA and Guruaan LA Real Estate. On August 24, Marquez submitted an application for default judgment that the court denied on August 31. The court also vacated the entry of default against Guruaan LA.

On October 4, 2023, Guruaan LA and Guruaan LA Real Estate filed an answer. On November 1, Guruaan LA and Guruaan LA Real Estate filed a verified first amended answer.

On December 15, 2023, Guruaan LA Real Estate filed the present motion. A hearing on the motion is set for January 17, 2024, with a case management conference on March 11.

ANALYSIS

Guruaan LA Real Estate seeks to set aside the entry of default on the grounds of mistake, inadvertence, or surprise. For the following reasons, the court GRANTS their motion.

Legal Standard

Whenever an application for relief from default judgment is made no more than six months after entry of judgment, 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 (1) resulting default entered by the clerk against the moving party or (2) resulting default judgment or dismissal entered against the moving party, unless the court finds that the default or dismissal was not in fact caused by the moving party’s mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. (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 (Manson).) That “six-month period runs from entry of default, not entry of judgment.” (Id.)

Courts liberally grant motions to vacate default judgments when relief is promptly sought and the opposing party is not prejudiced as the law strongly favors resolution on the merits. (Kramer v. Traditional Escrow, Inc. (2020) 56 Cal.App.5th 13, 28.) Courts only require “slight evidence” to support vacating a default and resolve all doubts in favor of the party seeking relief. (Ibid.) However, “[t]he only occasion for the application of section 473 is where a party is unexpectedly placed in a situation to his injury without fault or negligence of his own and against which ordinary prudence could not have guarded.” (Hearn v. Howard (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 1193, 1206, quoting Elms v. Elms (1946) 72 Cal.App.2d 508, 513.)

Discussion

In this case, default was entered against Guruaan LA Real Estate on July 5, 2023. Because their present motion was filed on December 15, the court finds their motion is timely.

On May 2, 2023, Marquez’s process server served Guruaan LA Real Estate by serving an individual named Destiny Lewis at Guruaan LA Real Estate’s property in Irwindale. In a declaration, Guruaan LA Real Estate’s owner, Gurvinder Aujla, states Lewis is an employee at the AM/PM minimart on the property and has never served as a manger or agent of Aujla’s companies. (Aujla Decl., ¶ 4.) Aujla states that the papers served on Lewis were never provided to Aujla and that Aujla also did not receive the copies that were allegedly mailed. (Aujla Decl., ¶ 4.) Last, Aujla states Aujla first became aware of the present action in September 2023 when Aujla received a notice of entry of default in the mail. (Aujla Decl., ¶ 6.)

Upon review of Aujla’s declaration and in light of the well-established judicial policy of resolving cases on their merits, the court will exercise its discretion to grant Guruaan LA Real Estate relief from the entry of the default. The court also notes Marquez has failed to file a timely opposition. Accordingly, Guruaan LA Real Estate’s motion is GRANTED.

CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, Guruaan LA Real Estate’s motion to vacate default is GRANTED. The proposed answer submitted with their motion is deemed filed as of this date.