This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 09/19/2021 at 03:30:00 (UTC).

FELIX RODRIGUEZ VS HOOMAN NISSANI, ET AL.

Case Summary

On 09/01/2020 FELIX RODRIGUEZ filed a Civil Right - Other Civil Right lawsuit against HOOMAN NISSANI. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is JAMES E. BLANCARTE. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******7436

  • Filing Date:

    09/01/2020

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Civil Right - Other Civil Right

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

JAMES E. BLANCARTE

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

RODRIGUEZ FELIX

Defendants

NBA AUTOMOTIVE INC.

NISSANI HOOMAN

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

MEHRBAN MORSE

Defendant Attorney

MCCREARY DUNCAN

 

Court Documents

Motion to Compel (name extension) - Motion to Compel Defendant's Compliance with Inspection Demands

9/8/2021: Motion to Compel (name extension) - Motion to Compel Defendant's Compliance with Inspection Demands

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

8/23/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery...)

Notice (name extension) - Notice of Entry of Judgment or Order

8/25/2021: Notice (name extension) - Notice of Entry of Judgment or Order

Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Hearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery")) of 08/09/2021

8/9/2021: Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Hearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery")) of 08/09/2021

Opposition (name extension) - Opposition to Motion to Compel

8/10/2021: Opposition (name extension) - Opposition to Motion to Compel

Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion - Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion

7/6/2021: Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion - Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion

Answer - Answer

4/29/2021: Answer - Answer

Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion - Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion

5/17/2021: Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion - Motion to Compel Discovery (not Further Discovery) - 1 moving party, 1 motion

Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Hearing on Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Default and Default Jud...) of 03/23/2021

3/23/2021: Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Hearing on Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Default and Default Jud...) of 03/23/2021

Opposition (name extension) - Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Vacate Default & Default Judgment

12/11/2020: Opposition (name extension) - Opposition to Defendants' Motion to Vacate Default & Default Judgment

Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Default and / or Default Judgment - Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Default and / or Default Judgment

12/2/2020: Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Default and / or Default Judgment - Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Default and / or Default Judgment

Abstract of Judgment - Civil and Small Claims - Abstract of Judgment - Civil and Small Claims

11/5/2020: Abstract of Judgment - Civil and Small Claims - Abstract of Judgment - Civil and Small Claims

Request for Dismissal - Request for Dismissal

10/23/2020: Request for Dismissal - Request for Dismissal

Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court) - Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)

9/1/2020: Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court) - Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)

Complaint - Complaint

9/1/2020: Complaint - Complaint

Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

9/1/2020: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

Summons - Summons on Complaint

9/1/2020: Summons - Summons on Complaint

Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

9/1/2020: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

19 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 04/04/2022
  • Hearing04/04/2022 at 08:30 AM in Department 25 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Non-Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/14/2021
  • Hearing10/14/2021 at 10:30 AM in Department 25 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Hearing on Motion to Compel (name extension)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/09/2021
  • DocketHearing on Motion to Compel Defendant's Compliance with Inspection Demands scheduled for 10/14/2021 at 10:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/08/2021
  • DocketMotion to Compel Defendant's Compliance with Inspection Demands; Filed by: Felix Rodriguez (Plaintiff); As to: NBA Automotive, Inc. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/25/2021
  • DocketNotice of Entry of Judgment or Order; Filed by: Felix Rodriguez (Plaintiff); As to: Hooman Nissani (Defendant); NBA Automotive, Inc. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/23/2021
  • DocketMinute Order (Hearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery...)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/23/2021
  • DocketHearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery") scheduled for 08/23/2021 at 10:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 updated: Result Date to 08/23/2021; Result Type to Held - Motion Denied

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/23/2021
  • DocketHearing on Motion to Compel Discovery (not "Further Discovery") scheduled for 08/23/2021 at 10:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 updated: Result Date to 08/23/2021; Result Type to Held - Motion Denied

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/11/2021
  • DocketNotice to Attend Trial; Filed by: Felix Rodriguez (Plaintiff); As to: Hooman Nissani (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/10/2021
  • DocketOpposition to Motion to Compel; Filed by: NBA Automotive, Inc. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
42 More Docket Entries
  • 09/01/2020
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: Felix Rodriguez (Plaintiff); As to: Hooman Nissani (Defendant); NBA Automotive, Inc. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/01/2020
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. James E. Blancarte in Department 25 Spring Street Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/01/2020
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Felix Rodriguez (Plaintiff); As to: Hooman Nissani (Defendant); NBA Automotive, Inc. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/01/2020
  • DocketRequest to Waive Court Fees; Filed by: Felix Rodriguez (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/01/2020
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Felix Rodriguez (Plaintiff); As to: Hooman Nissani (Defendant); NBA Automotive, Inc. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/01/2020
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/01/2020
  • DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/01/2020
  • DocketOrder on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court); Signed and Filed by: Clerk; As to: Felix Rodriguez (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/01/2020
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 03/01/2022 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/01/2020
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 09/05/2023 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

b'

Case Number: 20STLC07436 Hearing Date: August 23, 2021 Dept: 25

PROCEEDINGS: (1)\r\nMOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT’S ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES

\r\n\r\n

(2)\r\nMOTION TO COMPEL DEFENDANT’S ANSWER INSPECTION DEMANDS

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff\r\nFelix Rodriguez

\r\n\r\n

RESP. PARTY: Defendant NBA Automotive, Inc.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION\r\nOF DOCUMENTS; REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

\r\n\r\n

(CCP §§ 2030.290; 2031.300)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

TENTATIVE RULING:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Plaintiff\r\nFelix Rodriguez’s (1) Motion to Compel Defendant’s Answers to Interrogatories\r\nand (2) Motion to Compel Defendant’s Answer Inspection Demands are DENIED.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

SERVICE: \r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

[X]\r\nProof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) OK

\r\n\r\n

[X]\r\nCorrect Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) OK

\r\n\r\n

[X]\r\n16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) OK

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

OPPOSITION: Filed on August 10, 2021 [ ] Late [ ] None

\r\n\r\n

REPLY: None filed as\r\nof August 19, 2021 [ ] Late [X] None

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

ANALYSIS:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

I. \r\nBackground

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

On September 1, 2020, Plaintiff Felix Rodriguez\r\n(“Plaintiff”) filed an action against Defendant Hooman Nissani (“Nissani”) and\r\nNBA Automotive, Inc. (“NBA Automotive”) (collectively, “Defendants”).\r\nDefendants filed an Answer on April 29, 2021.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Plaintiff filed the instant (1) Motion to Compel\r\nDefendant’s Answers to Interrogatories and (2) Motion to Compel Defendant’s\r\nAnswer to Inspection Demand (collectively, the “Motions”) on July 6, 2021.\r\nDefendant NBA Automotive filed oppositions on August 10. No reply briefs were\r\nfiled.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

II. \r\nLegal\r\nStandard & Discussion

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

A. Request for Production & Interrogatories

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

A party must respond to interrogatories and requests for\r\nproduction of documents within 30 days after service. (Code Civ. Proc., §\r\n2030.260, subd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.260, subd. (a).) If a party to\r\nwhom interrogatories or requests for production of documents are directed does\r\nnot provide timely responses, the requesting party may move for an order\r\ncompelling responses to the discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (b);\r\nCode Civ. Proc., § 2031.300, subd. (c).) The party also waives the right to\r\nmake any objections, including one based on privilege or work-product\r\nprotection. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., §\r\n2031.300, subd. (a).) There is no time limit for a motion to compel responses\r\nto interrogatories or production of documents other than the cut-off on hearing\r\ndiscovery motions 15 days before trial. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 2024.020, subd.\r\n(a), 2030.290; Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300.) No meet and confer efforts are\r\nrequired before filing a motion to compel responses to the discovery. (Code\r\nCiv. Proc., § 2030.290; Code Civ. Proc., § 2031.300; Sinaiko Healthcare Consulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants\r\n(2007) 148 Cal.App.4th 390, 411.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Here, Plaintiff’s counsel served Defendant NBA\r\nAutomotive’s counsel with Special Interrogatories, Set One, and Inspection\r\nDemands, Set One, on May 3, 2021. (Motions, Mehrban Decls., ¶¶ 3.) Plaintiff’s\r\ncounsel sent Defendant’s counsel an email regarding the responses on June 23,\r\n2021. (Id. at ¶¶ 5, Exh. B.) In his supporting declaration, Plaintiff’s\r\ncounsel states that his office received no verified responses. (Id. at ¶¶\r\n4.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

In opposition, however, Defendant NBA provides evidence\r\nthat it served verified responses to the Special Interrogatories and to the\r\nInspection Demands on June 7, 2021 via regular mail. (Oppos., McCreary Decls.,\r\n¶ 3, Exhs. A.) Plaintiff did not file a reply brief explaining why these\r\nMotions were filed approximately one month after Defendant NBA Automotive\r\nserved verified responses.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Because Defendant NBA Automotive provided evidence it\r\nserved responses before these Motions were filed, Plaintiff’s requests to\r\ncompel responses and for sanctions are DENIED.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

III. \r\nConclusion\r\n& Order

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff\r\nFelix Rodriguez’s (1) Motion to Compel Defendant’s Answers to Interrogatories\r\nand (2) Motion to Compel Defendant’s Answer Inspection Demands are DENIED.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Moving party is ordered to give\r\nnotice.

'b'

Case Number: 20STLC07436 Hearing Date: August 9, 2021 Dept: 25

PROCEEDINGS: MOTION\r\nTO COMPEL DEFENDANT’S ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff\r\nFelix Rodriguez

\r\n\r\n

RESP. PARTY: None

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES TO INTERROGATORIES; REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

\r\n\r\n

(CCP § 2030.290)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

TENTATIVE RULING:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Plaintiff Felix Rodriguez’s Motion to\r\nCompel Defendant’s Answers to Interrogatories is GRANTED. Defendant NBA\r\nAutomotive, Inc. is ordered to serve verified responses without objections to\r\nForm Interrogatories, Set One, within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.\r\nPlaintiff’s request for sanctions against Defendant NBA Automotive and its\r\ncounsel is also GRANTED in the amount of $475.00 and is to be paid to\r\nPlaintiff’s counsel within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

SERVICE: \r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

[X]\r\nProof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) OK

\r\n\r\n

[X]\r\nCorrect Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) OK

\r\n\r\n

[X]\r\n16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) OK

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

OPPOSITION: None filed as of August 5,\r\n2021 [ ] Late [X]\r\nNone

\r\n\r\n

REPLY: None filed as\r\nof August 5, 2021 [ ] Late [X] None

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

ANALYSIS:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

I. \r\nBackground\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

On September 1, 2020, Plaintiff Felix Rodriguez\r\n(“Plaintiff”) filed an action against Defendant Hooman Nissani (“Nissani”) and\r\nNBA Automotive, Inc. (“NBA Automotive”) (collectively, “Defendants”).\r\nDefendants filed an Answer on April 29, 2021.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

On March 17, 2021, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to\r\nCompel Defendant’s Answers to Interrogatories (the “Motion”). No opposition was\r\nfiled.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

II. \r\nLegal\r\nStandard & Discussion

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

A. Form Interrogatories

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

A party must respond to interrogatories within 30 days\r\nafter service. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.260, subd. (a).) If a party to whom\r\ninterrogatories are directed does not provide timely responses, the requesting\r\nparty may move for an order compelling responses to the discovery. (Code Civ.\r\nProc., § 2030.290, subd. (b).) The party also waives the\r\nright to make any objections, including one based on privilege or work-product\r\nprotection. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290, subd. (a).) There is no time limit\r\nfor a motion to compel responses to interrogatories other than the cut-off on\r\nhearing discovery motions 15 days before trial. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2024.020,\r\nsubd. (a); Code Civ. Proc., 2030.290.) No meet and confer efforts are required\r\nbefore filing a motion to compel responses to the discovery. (Code Civ. Proc.,\r\n§ 2030.290; Sinaiko Healthcare\r\nConsulting, Inc. v. Pacific Healthcare Consultants (2007) 148 Cal.App.4th\r\n390, 411.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Here, Plaintiff’s counsel served Defendant\r\nNBA Automotive’s counsel with Form Interrogatories, Set One, on March 24, 2021 via\r\nregular mail. (Mot., Mehrban Decl., ¶ 3, Exh. A.) Although not statutorily\r\nrequired, Plaintiff’s counsel sent Defendant’s counsel an email regarding the\r\noverdue responses on May 5, 2021. (Id. at ¶ 5, Exh. B.) Plaintiff’s\r\ncounsel received no verified responses. (Id. at ¶ 4.) Thus, Plaintiff is\r\nentitled to an order compelling Defendant NBA Automotive to provide verified\r\nresponses without objections. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2030.290.)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

B. Sanctions

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Code of Civil Procedure section 2023.030, subdivision (a)\r\nprovides, in pertinent part, that the court may impose a monetary sanction on a\r\nparty engaging in the misuse of the discovery process to pay the reasonable\r\nexpenses, including attorney’s fees, incurred by anyone as a result of that\r\nconduct. A misuse of the discovery process includes failing to respond or\r\nsubmit to an authorized method of discovery. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2023.010,\r\nsubd. (d).)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

The Court finds Defendant NBA\r\nAutomotive’s failure to respond to Plaintiff’s discovery request a misuse of\r\nthe discovery process.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Plaintiff seeks sanctions of $475.00\r\nbased on one hour of attorney time. (Mot., Mehrban Decl., ¶ 6.) Plaintiff’s\r\nrequest is reasonable and is thus GRANTED.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

III. \r\nConclusion\r\n& Order

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff\r\nFelix Rodriguez’s Motion to Compel Defendant’s Answers to Interrogatories is\r\nGRANTED. Defendant NBA Automotive, Inc. is ordered to serve verified responses\r\nwithout objections to Form Interrogatories, Set One, within thirty (30) days of\r\nnotice of this order. Plaintiff’s request for sanctions against Defendant NBA\r\nAutomotive and its counsel is also GRANTED in the amount of $475.00 and is to\r\nbe paid to Plaintiff’s counsel within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Moving party is ordered to give\r\nnotice.

'

Case Number: 20STLC07436    Hearing Date: March 23, 2021    Dept: 25

HEARING DATE: Tue., March 23, 2021 JUDGE /DEPT: Blancarte/25

CASE NAME: Rodriguez v. Nissani, et al. COMP. FILED: 09-01-20

CASE NUMBER: 20STLC07436 DEFAULT: 10-23-20

NOTICE: OK DEF. JDGMT: 11-02-20

PROCEEDINGS: MOTION TO SET ASIDE ENTRY OF DEFAULT AND DEFAULT JUDGMENT

MOVING PARTY: Defendants Hooman Nissani and NBA Automotive, Inc.

RESP. PARTY: Plaintiff Felix Rodriguez

MOTION TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT AND DEFAULT JUDGMENT

(CCP § 473(b))

TENTATIVE RULING:

Defendants Hooman Nissani and NBA Automotive, Inc.’s Motion to Set Aside Entry of Default and Default Judgment is GRANTED. The default entered on October 23, 2020 and default judgment entered on November 2, 2020 against Defendants are HEREBY VACATED.

In addition, Defendants’ counsel is ordered to pay Plaintiff’s counsel attorney’s fees of $1,377.50 within thirty (30) days of service of this order.

SERVICE:

[X] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) OK

[X] Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) OK

[X] 16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) OK

OPPOSITION: Filed on December 11, 2020 [ ] Late [ ] None

REPLY: None filed as of March 19, 2021 [ ] Late [X] None

ANALYSIS:

  1. Background

On September 1, 2020, Plaintiff Felix Rodriguez (“Plaintiff”) filed an action for violation of the Unruh Civil Rights Act against Defendants Hooman Nissani (“Nissani”) and NBA Automotive, Inc. (“NBA Automotive”). Following Defendants’ failure to respond, default was entered against them on October 23, 2020. A default judgment against Defendants was entered on November 2, 2020 in the amount of $5,220.00. (11/2/20 Judgment.)

On December 2, 2020, Defendants filed the instant Motion to Set Aside Entry of Default and Default Judgment (the “Motion”). Plaintiff filed an Opposition on December 11, 2020. No reply brief was filed.

  1. Legal Standard & Discussion

Defendants seek relief pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (b). (Mot., p. 2.) Under this statute, an application for relief must be made no more than six months after entry of the order from which relief is sought and must be accompanied by an affidavit of fault attesting to the mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect of the moving party or its attorney. (Code Civ. Proc., § 473, subd. (b); English v. IKON Business Solutions (2001) 94 Cal.App.4th 130, 143.)

Defendants’ Motion is timely. Defendants seek to set aside the default and default judgment entered against them based on Defendants’ counsel’s mistake and inadvertence. (Mot., p. 3:11-13.) Specifically, Defendants’ counsel states that after he received the Complaint against Defendants, he prepared an Answer. (Id., McCreary Decl., ¶ 3.) Counsel mistakenly believed the answer was filed. (Id.) As a result of this error, default and default judgment were entered against Defendants. (Id.)

Based on the timely request to vacate supported by an attorney affidavit of fault, Defendants’ request to set aside the default and default judgment is GRANTED.

“The court shall, whenever relief is granted based on an attorney’s affidavit of fault, direct the attorney to pay reasonable compensatory legal fees and costs to opposing counsel or parties.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 473, subd. (b).) Plaintiff seeks to recover $1,377.50 in legal fees he incurred as a result of Defendants’ failure to timely file a responsive pleading. (Oppo, pp. 1:16-2:3.) The fees incurred are based on 2.9 hours of attorney time billed at $475.00 per hour (Id., Mehrban Decl., ¶ 4.)

Having reviewed Plaintiff’s counsel’s breakdown of the fees incurred, the Court finds them to be reasonable. Defendants’ counsel is ordered to pay attorney’s fees of $1,377.50 within thirty (30) days of notice of this order.

  1. Conclusion & Order

For the foregoing reasons, Defendants Hooman Nissani and NBA Automotive, Inc.’s Motion to Set Aside Entry of Default and Default Judgment is GRANTED. The default entered on October 23, 2020 and default judgment entered on November 2, 2020 against Defendants are HEREBY VACATED.

In addition, Defendants’ counsel is ordered to pay Plaintiff’s counsel attorney’s fees of $1,377.50 within thirty (30) days of service of this order.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where NBA AUTOMOTIVE INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION DBA NISSANI BROS CHEVROLET is a litigant