On 08/31/2012 PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOCIATES LLC filed a Contract - Debt Collection lawsuit against TORRES JR, ADOLFO F. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The case status is Disposed - Other Disposed.
****3354
08/31/2012
Disposed - Other Disposed
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOCIATES LLC
TORRES JR ADOLFO F
PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOCIATES LLC
Court documents are not available for this case.
PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL FILED.
HEARING DELETED - OFF CALENDAR
DEFAULT JUDGMENT BY CLERK
REQUEST FOR DISMISSAL FOR DOES 1 TO 25 FILED request for dismissal for does 1 to 25 filed
REQUEST FOR DEFAULT FILED AND ENTERED
SUBMISSION FOR DEFAULT AND JUDGMENT PENDING *** DEFAULT PROCESSE
PROOF OF SERVICE TO COMPLAINT FILED
DECLARATION OF REASONABLE DILIGENCE FILED
DECLARATION OF MAILING FILED
OSC SET 03/04/13, 0830 AM, DEPT. 77, NOTICE FILED & MAILED * * DELETED
COMPLAINT FILED - COLLECTION CASE Filing Fee: 181.00
SUMMONS FILED
Case Number: 12K13354 Hearing Date: November 20, 2019 Dept: 94
Portfolio v. Torres, et al.
MOTION TO VACATE DEFAULT AND DEFAULT JUDGMENT
(CCP § 473(b))
TENTATIVE RULING:
Plaintiff Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC’s Motion to Vacate Default and Default Judgment is GRANTED.
ANALYSIS:
I. Background
After default judgment was entered in December of 2012, Plaintiff Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC (“Plaintiff”) brought the instant Motion to Vacate Default and Default Judgment (the “Motion”) on July 17, 2019. Plaintiff contends that after Plaintiff obtained Judgment, Defendant contacted Plaintiff and alleged that he was a victim of identity theft/fraud. (Motion, p. 4, Cook Decl. ¶4.) Plaintiff now seeks an order vacating the judgment and requests the Court dismiss the case concurrently. (Ibid.)
II. Discussion
Plaintiff moves under CCP § 473(b) which states that “[t]he 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.” An application under this section must be made within a reasonable time, in no case exceeding six months, after the judgment. (CCP § 473(b).)
However, although “it is well settled in this state that a court has no power to set aside on motion a judgment or order not void on its face unless the motion is made within a reasonable time, and it has been definitely determined that such time will not extend beyond the limited time fixed by section of the Code of Civil Procedure as at present in force, (Citations)…to the rule just stated there is a well-established exception which provides that although the judgment or order is valid on its face, if the party in favor of whom the judgment or order runs admits facts showing its invalidity, or, without objection on his part, evidence is admitted which clearly shows the existence of such facts, then it is the duty of the court to declare the judgment or order void. (Thompson v. Cook (1942) 20 Cal.2d 564, 568.) Because the default judgment was the result of identity theft, Plaintiff’s Motion to Vacate Default is granted, and the case is dismissed with prejudice.
Court clerk to give notice.
II. Conclusion & Order
The Motion is therefore GRANTED. The default judgment is vacated, and the case is dismissed with prejudice.
Court clerk is to give notice.