Judge: Teresa A. Beaudet, Case: 19STCV43571, Date: 2023-04-28 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV43571    Hearing Date: April 28, 2023    Dept: 50

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 50

On October 5, 2020, the Court issued its Case Management Conference Order which set forth the requirements for the Final Status Conference (‘FSC”) and the Trial.  At that time, Defendants Oren Loni and Burgerim Group USA, Inc. (“Burgerim”) (the “Answering Defendants”) had filed answers and were represented by counsel. Prior thereto, on September 25, 2020, default had been entered against Defendants Burgerim Group, Inc and Food Chain Investments, USA, LLC. Shortly after the Case Management Conference on October 9, 2020, the default of Defendant Saffron Mediterranean Kitchen was entered.

On June 8, 2021, the motion of counsel for the Answering Defendants to be relieved was granted. Proof of service thereof was filed on July 6, 2021.  Since that date, no attorney has represented the Answering Defendants. On September 14, 2021, the Court held a conference to determine if the case should be sent to a mandatory settlement conference.  The Answering Defendants did not appear.  The Court set a status conference regarding representation of the Answering Defendants on November 16, 2021. Plaintiff served the Answering Defendants with notice of the status conference. Neither side appeared at the November 16^th hearing, and the Court set an order to show cause (“OSC”) on January 11, 2022, as to why the Court should not impose $250 in sanctions against Plaintiff’s counsel and the Answering Defendants. Concurrently, the Court vacated the existing FSC Date on December 3, 2021 and the Trial on December 15, 2021, and set a Trial Setting Conference (“TSC”) on January 11, 2022.  The Court’s Judicial Assistant gave notice to Plaintiff and to the Answering Defendants. The notices to the Answering Defendants were returned as undeliverable.

At the January 11, 2022, hearing, the OSC was discharged as to Plaintiff’s Counsel based upon the Declaration of Matias Castro filed in response to the OSC. The Court imposed the sanctions against the Answering Defendants and set another OSC on February 8, 2022, as to why the Court should not strike the Answer of Defendant Burgerim. The Court set the FSC on November 15, 2022, and the Trial on November 30, 2022.  Plaintiff filed a proof of service regarding the notice of sanctions and the new dates for the FSC and Trial.  At the February 8, 2022 hearing, the Court stayed the ability of Burgerim to defend itself at trial until it substituted in counsel to represent it. Plaintiff filed proof of service of the notice of this ruling on February 16, 2022.

At the request of Plaintiff on November 15, 2022, the FSC and the Trial dates were vacated and a TSC was set on January 24, 2023.  Proof of service of notice of this new schedule was filed by Plaintiff on November 18, 2022.

On January 4, 2023, Plaintiff’s Motions to Deem Admitted Plaintiff’s First Set of Requests for Admission propounded to the Answering Defendants was granted based upon their failure to respond to the Requests.  After several conferences regarding whether Plaintiff would waive jury, Plaintiff elected not to waive trial by jury and the Court issued its Trial Setting Order on March 27, 2023, setting the FSC on April 28, 2023, and the Trial on May 10, 2023 as a jury trial.  The Court also ordered that the joint trial readiness and exhibit binders were to be lodged in Department 50 on April 21, 2023.

Pursuant to the October 5 Case Management Order and the courtroom information for Dept. 50, the parties had been ordered to file joint trial readiness documents, including, inter alia, a joint statement of the case, a joint witness list, a joint trial readiness list, a joint list of jury instructions and a joint proposed verdict form. Defendants did not provide any input to Plaintiff for the joint trial readiness documents. On April 21, 2023, Plaintiff filed, inter alia, a statement of the case, a witness list, an exhibit list, proposed jury instructions and a proposed special verdict.

Because the Court finds that the Answering Defendants have failed to obey the Court’s orders, including the Case Management Order, and they have failed to appear at any hearings since their counsel was relieved, the Court issues an OSC as to why their Answers should not be stricken and default entered against them. This OSC is set on May 9, 2023 at 10 a.m. in Department 50. The Answering Defendants are ordered to file and serve a Declaration in response to this Order by noon on May 8, 2023, with a courtesy copy delivered concurrently to Department 50. Plaintiff is ordered to serve notice of this OSC to the Answering Defendants today, and to file the proof of service thereof on May 1, 2023. If the Answering Defendants fail to respond to the OSC, the Court will strike their Answers for failing to obey the Court’s orders, enter default and set a date by which Plaintiff will file and serve the default judgment package as to the Answering Defendants as well as the other defendants that were defaulted previously.

DATED:  April 28, 2023                                ________________________________

Hon. Teresa A. Beaudet

Judge, Los Angeles Superior Court