Judge: Thomas Falls, Case: 21PSCV00470, Date: 2022-08-10 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21PSCV00470    Hearing Date: August 10, 2022    Dept: R

Brackett Hangar LLC v. Zahid Saddiqi (21PSCV00470)

______________________________________________________________________________

Plaintiff Brackett Hangar LLC’s MOTION TO CORRECT

CLERICAL ERROR IN DEFAULT JUDGMENT

                                                Responding Party: Unopposed

Tentative Ruling

Plaintiff Brackett Hangar LLC’s MOTION TO CORRECT CLERICAL ERROR IN

DEFAULT JUDGMENT is GRANTED.

Background

This is an unlawful detainer case involving the premises located at 1615 McKinley Avenue, Hangar F3/Office F3 in La Verne, California, 91750 (“Premises”).

On June 7, 2021, Plaintiff Brackett Hangar LLC (“Plaintiff”) filed an unlawful detainer action (“UDA”) against Defendant Zahid Saddiqi (“Defendant”). Plaintiff alleges that Defendant agreed to rent the premises for 12 months at a monthly rent of $6,290.00 based upon a written agreement. On May 20, 2021, Plaintiff served notice of the ‘3-day notice to pay rent or quit’ by posting a coy of said notice on the premises and by giving a copy to a person found residing at the premises and mailing a copy to defendant at the premises. At the time the 3-day notice to pay rent or quit was served, the amount of rent due was $95,075.21; the premises has a fair rental value of $226.00 per day. 

On July 20, 2021, Default was entered against Defendant.

On March 22, 2022, the court entered default judgment against Defendant.

On July 12, 2022, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion.

Legal Standard

Under § 473(d), the court may, upon motion of the injured party, or its own motion, correct clerical mistakes in its judgment or orders as entered, so as to conform to the judgment or order directed, and may, on motion of either party after notice to the other party, set aside any void judgment or order. CCP § 473(d). The distinction between clerical error and judicial error, which cannot be corrected by amendment, is whether the error is made in rendering the judgment, or in recording the judgment rendered. (In re Candelario (1970) 3 Cal 3d 702, 705.) That is, the test between clerical and judicial mistake is simply whether challenged judgment was made or entered inadvertently (clerical error) or advertently (judicial error). (Nathanson v Murphy (1957, 1st Dist) 147 Cal App 2d 462, 469.) Any attempt by a court, under the guise of correcting clerical error, to revise its deliberately exercised judicial discretion is not permitted. (Candelario, supra, 3 Cal.3d at 705.)

Discussion

Plaintiff moves the court to amend the default judgment entered in this action in the following manner and upon the grounds stated herein: That portion of the default judgment at page 2, numbered paragraph 4, to correct the address of the premises to which Plaintiff is entitled to possession to state: 2015 McKinley Avenue, Hangar F3/Office F3, La Verne, County of Los Angeles, California 91750.

Here, as the error is a clerical error, the court may exercise its discretion in granting the motion.

Conclusion

Based on the foregoing, the motion is granted.