This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 08/16/2019 at 12:42:56 (UTC).

ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY VS SEALY'S PLUMBING AND HEATING

Case Summary

On 01/17/2018 a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury case was filed by ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY against SEALY'S PLUMBING AND HEATING in the jurisdiction of Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******1246

  • Filing Date:

    01/17/2018

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

ELAINE LU

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY AKA JAMES ROBERTSON

Defendant

SEALY'S PLUMBING AND HEATING

 

Court Documents

Notice Of Rejection - Request For Dismissal

9/11/2018: Notice Of Rejection - Request For Dismissal

Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel - Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel

10/18/2018: Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel - Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel

Declaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil - Declaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil

10/18/2018: Declaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil - Declaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel)

12/11/2018: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel)

Notice (name extension) - Notice of Continuance of Motion to be Relieved as Counsel

12/14/2018: Notice (name extension) - Notice of Continuance of Motion to be Relieved as Counsel

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel)

1/24/2019: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to be Relieved as Counsel)

Order Granting Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil - Order Granting Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil

1/24/2019: Order Granting Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil - Order Granting Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel-Civil

Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

2/21/2019: Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

Minute Order - Minute Order (Non-Appearance Case Review Re: failure to file proof of servi...)

2/26/2019: Minute Order - Minute Order (Non-Appearance Case Review Re: failure to file proof of servi...)

Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint) - Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

2/26/2019: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint) - Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

Motion for Order (name extension) - Motion for Order NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR ORDER COMPELLING VERIFIED RESPONSES TO FORM INTERROGATORIES; REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS IN THE AMOUNT OF $660.0

5/23/2019: Motion for Order (name extension) - Motion for Order NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR ORDER COMPELLING VERIFIED RESPONSES TO FORM INTERROGATORIES; REQUEST FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS IN THE AMOUNT OF $660.0

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery"))

7/2/2019: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery"))

Notice (name extension) - Notice NOTICE OF TRIAL

7/12/2019: Notice (name extension) - Notice NOTICE OF TRIAL

Notice (name extension) - Notice NOTICE OF CONTINUED HEARING FOR MOTION TO COMPEL VERIFIED RESPONSES TO FORM INTERROGATORIES

7/12/2019: Notice (name extension) - Notice NOTICE OF CONTINUED HEARING FOR MOTION TO COMPEL VERIFIED RESPONSES TO FORM INTERROGATORIES

Answer

4/2/2018: Answer

Civil Case Cover Sheet

1/17/2018: Civil Case Cover Sheet

Complaint

1/17/2018: Complaint

Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

1/17/2018: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

8 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 01/20/2021
  • Hearingat 08:30 AM in Department 94 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Order to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/01/2019
  • Hearingat 08:30 AM in Department 94 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Non-Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/27/2019
  • Hearingat 08:30 AM in Department 94 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Hearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery")

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/12/2019
  • DocketNotice NOTICE OF CONTINUED HEARING FOR MOTION TO COMPEL VERIFIED RESPONSES TO FORM INTERROGATORIES; Filed by: Allstate Insurance Company (Plaintiff); As to: Sealy's Plumbing and Heating (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/12/2019
  • DocketNotice NOTICE OF TRIAL; Filed by: Allstate Insurance Company (Plaintiff); As to: Sealy's Plumbing and Heating (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/02/2019
  • DocketHearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery") scheduled for 08/27/2019 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/02/2019
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 10/01/2019 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/02/2019
  • DocketMinute Order (Hearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery"))

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/02/2019
  • DocketOn the Court's own motion, Hearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery") scheduled for 07/02/2019 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94 Held - Continued was rescheduled to 08/27/2019 08:30 AM

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/02/2019
  • DocketOn the Court's own motion, Non-Jury Trial scheduled for 07/17/2019 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94 Not Held - Advanced and Continued - by Court was rescheduled to 10/01/2019 08:30 AM

    Read MoreRead Less
20 More Docket Entries
  • 04/02/2018
  • DocketAnswer; Filed by: Sealy's Plumbing and Heating (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/20/2018
  • DocketCase reassigned to Stanley Mosk Courthouse in Department 77

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/25/2018
  • DocketUpdated -- Summons on Complaint: Name Extension changed from on Complaint to on Complaint

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/22/2018
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. Elaine Lu in Department 77 Stanley Mosk Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/22/2018
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 07/17/2019 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 77

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/22/2018
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause - Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 01/20/2021 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 77

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/17/2018
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: Allstate Insurance Company (Plaintiff); As to: Sealy's Plumbing and Heating (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/17/2018
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Allstate Insurance Company (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/17/2018
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/17/2018
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 18STLC01246    Hearing Date: February 13, 2020    Dept: 26

Allstate Ins. Co. v. Sealy’s Plumbing and Heating, et al.

MOTION TO STRIKE

(CCP §§ 92, 435, 436)

TENATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Allstate Insurance Company’s Motion to Strike the Answer is DENIED.

ANALYSIS:

Plaintiff Allstate Insurance Company a/s/o James Robertson (“Plaintiff”) filed the instant action for automobile subrogation against Defendant Sealy’s Plumbing and Heating (“Defendant”) on January 17, 2018. Defendant filed an Answer on April 2, 2018. On January 3, 2019, Plaintiff filed an Amendment to Complaint seeking to add Morrington Randy Sealy to the action as Doe Defendant 1. However, the Amendment was never approved by the Court.

On January 24, 2019, the Court granted the motion of Defendant’s counsel to withdraw from representation.

Following the Court’s order granting Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Defendant’s responses to written discovery, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Strike the Answer on September 30, 2019.

When the matter came for trial on October 1, 2019, Plaintiff requested that the trial date be continued to be concurrent with the February 13, 2020 hearing on the instant Motion to Strike.

To date, Defendant has not filed an opposition to the Motion to Strike.

Legal Standard

The Motion to Strike is brought pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 435 and 436, which authorize a party’s motion to strike matter from an opposing party’s pleading if it is irrelevant, false, or improper. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 435; 436, subd. (a).) Motions to strike may also target pleadings or parts of pleadings that are not filed or drawn in conformity with applicable laws, rules or orders. (Code Civ. Proc., § 436, subd. (b).) A motion to strike is used to address defects that appear on the face of a pleading or from judicially noticed matter but that are not grounds for a demurrer. (Pierson v. Sharp Memorial Hospital (1989) 216 Cal.App.3d 340, 342; see also City & County of San Francisco v. Strahlendorf (1992) 7 Cal.App.4th 1911, 1913 (motion may not be based on a party's declaration or factual representations made by counsel in the motion papers).)

However, motions to strike in limited jurisdiction courts may only challenge pleadings on the basis that “the damages or relief sought are not supported by the allegations of the [pleading].” (Code Civ. Proc., § 92, subd. (d).) This may fall under matters that are “improper” or “not filed or drawn in conformity with applicable laws, rules or orders.” (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 436, subd. (a)-(b).)

Finally, Code of Civil Procedure section 435.5 requires that “[b]efore filing a motion to strike pursuant to this chapter, the moving party shall meet and confer in person or by telephone with the party who filed the pleading that is subject to the motion to strike for the purpose of determining whether an agreement can be reached that resolves the objections to be raised in the motion to strike.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 435.5, subd. (a).)

Discussion

As an initial matter, the Motion to Strike is procedurally defective. It is not brought within the time to respond to an Answer, which is 10 days. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 430.40, subd. (b); 435, subd., (b)(1).) It is also not accompanied by a meet and confer declaration as required by Code of Civil Procedure section 435.5. (See Motion, Ford Decl.)

On the substantive merits, the Motion is brought on the basis that the Court has discretion to strike the Answer due to Defendant’s failure to appear at the hearings on Plaintiff’s discovery motions (held on July 2, 2019 and August 27, 2019) and failure to file papers explaining the non-appearance.

There is no basis under the aforementioned statutes to strike a pleading for a party’s failure to appear for hearings regarding discovery motions, or any other motion. Plaintiff offers no explanation as to how Defendant’s failure to appear demonstrates that the Answer is false, irrelevant, improper, or not filed or drawn in conformity with applicable laws, rules or orders. These are the only proper basis to strike a pleading under Code of Civil Procedure section 436. Nor does Plaintiff explain how Defendant’s failure to appear demonstrates that “the damages or relief sought are not supported by the allegations of the [Answer].” The Court has no discretion to strike a pleading beyond those grounds set forth in law and Plaintiff has shown no such authority for the relief requested. (Code Civ. Proc., § 436.)

Plaintiff Allstate Insurance Company a/s/o James Robertson’s Motion to Strike the Answer is DENIED.

Court clerk to give notice.