Judge: Stephen I. Goorvitch, Case: 20STCV03232, Date: 2022-08-25 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20STCV03232    Hearing Date: August 25, 2022    Dept: 39

Custodio Cervantes v. I-MAXX Exchange, Inc.

Case No. 20STCV03232

Ex Parte Applications re: Contempt

            A default judgment for Custodio Cervantes was entered against I-MAXX Exchange, Inc. (“I-MAXX”) on July 29, 2020.  Cervantes assigned the judgment to Gregory Kelly (“Kelly”).  The assignment was filed with the Court on July 23, 2021. 

            On January 10, 2022, the Court ordered the custodian of records for I-MAXX to provide verified responses, without objections, to Requests for Production of Documents, Set One, and Special Interrogatories, Set One.  On May 12, 2022, the Court ordered the custodian of records for Prime Cabinets and Flooring, Inc. (“Prime”) to provide verified responses, without objections, to a deposition subpoena.

            Kelly alleges that neither I-MAXX nor Prime has complied with the Court’s orders and asks the Court to issue Orders to Show Cause why the respective custodians of record—Jae H. Pak and Young Taek Pak—should not be held in contempt of court.  In a contempt proceeding, “an affidavit must be presented to the court stating the facts constituting the contempt, an order to show cause must be issued, and hearing on the facts must be held by the judge.” (Arthur v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (1965) 62 Cal.2d 404, 407–408.)  Upon receipt, the Court issues an Order to Show Cause why the person should not be held in contempt.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 1212.)  The alleged contemnor may respond to the affidavit and OSC by counter-affidavits or declarations.  (Lyon v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (1968) 68 Cal.2d 446, 452.)

            Plaintiff was required to personally serve the ex parte applications and related documents.  (Cedars-Sinai Imaging Med. Group v. Superior Court (2000) 83 Cal.App.4th 1281, 1286-1287.)  Plaintiff failed to do so.  This is a jurisdictional requirement.  (Ibid.)  Therefore, the ex parte applications are denied without prejudice.  Kelly shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.