Judge: William A. Crowfoot, Case: 21STCV01404, Date: 2022-10-03 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV01404    Hearing Date: October 3, 2022    Dept: 27

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

On January 12, 2021, plaintiff Lino Pineda (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against defendant Emilio Vasquez.  On July 13, 2022, the Court issued an order of dismissal without prejudice after Plaintiff failed to appear at the final status conference and non-jury trial on June 28, 2022 and July 12, 2022, respectively.  On August 30, 2022, Plaintiff filed this instant motion to set aside or vacate the dismissal.  Plaintiff’s counsel, Octavio Lopez and Mark J. Bloom, submit declarations explaining that no appearances were made on behalf of Plaintiff because of a clerical oversight.  Mr. Lopez engaged Mr. Bloom to seek resolution in this matter after Mr. Lopez’s attempts to settle were unsuccessful. (Lopez Decl., ¶¶ 4-6.)  However, Mr. Bloom’s office never filed a notice of association and did not receive any notifications regarding the pending court dates, and therefore the matter was never added to the case management system.  (Bloom Decl., ¶¶ 3-4.) 

“The court may, upon any terms as may be just, relieve a party or his or her legal representative from a judgment, dismissal, order, or other proceeding taken against him or her through his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 473, subd. (b).)  Application for this relief shall be made within a reasonable time, in no case exceeding six months, after judgment, dismissal, order, or proceeding was taken.  (Ibid.)  “[T]he court shall, whenever an application for relief is made no more than six months after entry of judgment, is in proper form, and is accompanied by an attorney’s sworn affidavit attesting to his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect, vacate any (1) resulting default entered by the clerk against his or her client, and which will result in entry of a default judgment, or (2) resulting default judgment or dismissal entered against his or her client, unless the court finds that the default or dismissal was not in fact caused by the attorney’s mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect.”  (Ibid.)

This Motion to set aside dismissal was timely filed within six months of dismissal and the Court finds dismissal was due to counsel’s excusable neglect.  The Motion to set aside the July 13, 2022 dismissal is GRANTED and the action is reinstated.  Trial is set for December 5, 2023 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 27 and the final status conference is set for November 21, 2023 at 10:00 a.m. in Department 27.  The Court also sets an OSC re: Failure to File Proof of Service of Summons and Complaint on December 20, 2022 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 27. 

Moving party to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the matter.  Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue.  If the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.