This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 10/15/2021 at 08:18:30 (UTC).

THE HERTZ CORPORATION VS DINA BACKUS BECK

Case Summary

On 06/05/2019 THE HERTZ CORPORATION filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against DINA BACKUS BECK. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is WENDY CHANG. The case status is Disposed - Judgment Entered.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******5398

  • Filing Date:

    06/05/2019

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Judgment Entered

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

WENDY CHANG

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

THE HERTZ CORPORATION

Defendant

BECK DINA BACKUS

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorneys

MENDELSON LEE M

GOLDSMITH STEPHEN R

 

Court Documents

Judgment - Judgment COURT JUDGMENT

9/8/2021: Judgment - Judgment COURT JUDGMENT

Minute Order - Minute Order (Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal for Failure to File Default...)

7/20/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal for Failure to File Default...)

Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal for Failure to File Default...) of 07/20/2021

7/20/2021: Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal for Failure to File Default...) of 07/20/2021

Request for Entry of Default / Judgment - Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

7/15/2021: Request for Entry of Default / Judgment - Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

Declaration (name extension) - Declaration COURT JUDGMENT

7/15/2021: Declaration (name extension) - Declaration COURT JUDGMENT

Request for Dismissal - Request for Dismissal

7/15/2021: Request for Dismissal - Request for Dismissal

Declaration Pursuant to 585 CCP in Support of Default Judgment - Declaration Pursuant to 585 CCP in Support of Default Judgment

7/15/2021: Declaration Pursuant to 585 CCP in Support of Default Judgment - Declaration Pursuant to 585 CCP in Support of Default Judgment

Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Hearing on Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Judgment (CCP 473)) of 07/13/2021

7/13/2021: Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Hearing on Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Judgment (CCP 473)) of 07/13/2021

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Judgment (CCP 473))

7/13/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Judgment (CCP 473))

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

6/17/2021: Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court) - Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)

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

6/17/2021: Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court) - Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)

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

6/17/2021: Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court) - Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)

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

6/17/2021: Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court) - Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)

Answer - Answer

6/14/2021: Answer - Answer

Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Judgment - Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Judgment

6/14/2021: Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Judgment - Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Judgment

Minute Order - Minute Order (Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal for Failure to File Default...)

4/19/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal for Failure to File Default...)

Substitution of Attorney - Substitution of Attorney

1/26/2021: Substitution of Attorney - Substitution of Attorney

Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

3/16/2020: Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

15 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 09/08/2021
  • DocketDefault judgment by Court entered for Plaintiff The Hertz Corporation against Defendant Dina Backus Beck on the Complaint filed by The Hertz Corporation on 06/05/2019 for damages of $12,536.00 and costs of $370.00 for a total of $12,906.00.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/08/2021
  • DocketJudgment COURT JUDGMENT; Signed and Filed by: The Hertz Corporation (Plaintiff); As to: Dina Backus Beck (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/08/2021
  • DocketUpdated -- Judgment COURT JUDGMENT: As To Parties changed from Dina Backus Beck (Defendant) to Dina Backus Beck (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/08/2021
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Dismissal for Failure to File Default Judgment scheduled for 10/20/2021 at 09:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26 Not Held - Vacated by Court on 09/08/2021

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/20/2021
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Dismissal for Failure to File Default Judgment scheduled for 10/20/2021 at 09:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/20/2021
  • DocketMinute Order (Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal for Failure to File Default...)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/20/2021
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for (Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal for Failure to File Default...) of 07/20/2021; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/20/2021
  • DocketPursuant to the request of plaintiff, Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal for Failure to File Default Judgment scheduled for 07/20/2021 at 09:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26 Held - Continued was rescheduled to 10/20/2021 09:30 AM

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/16/2021
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 06/08/2022 at 10:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26 Not Held - Advanced and Vacated on 03/16/2020

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/15/2021
  • DocketRequest for Entry of Default / Judgment; Filed by: The Hertz Corporation (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
41 More Docket Entries
  • 06/24/2019
  • DocketDeclaration Declaration of Non-Service; Filed by: The Hertz Corporation (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/14/2019
  • DocketDeclaration Declaration of Non-Service; Filed by: The Hertz Corporation (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/06/2019
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 06/08/2022 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/06/2019
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 12/02/2020 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/06/2019
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. Wendy Chang in Department 94 Stanley Mosk Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/05/2019
  • DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/05/2019
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/05/2019
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: The Hertz Corporation (Plaintiff); As to: Dina Backus Beck (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/05/2019
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: The Hertz Corporation (Plaintiff); As to: Dina Backus Beck (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/05/2019
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: The Hertz Corporation (Plaintiff); As to: Dina Backus Beck (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

b'

Case Number: 19STLC05398 Hearing Date: July 13, 2021 Dept: 26

MOTION TO VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT

(CCP § 473(b))

TENTATIVE RULING:

Defendant Dina Backus Beck’s Motion to Vacate Default is DENIED.

ANALYSIS:

On June 5, 2019, Plaintiff The Hertz Corporation (“Plaintiff”) filed the instant action for breach of lease agreement against Dina Backus Beck (“Defendant”). Following Defendant’s failure to respond the Complaint, the Court entered default on October 22, 2020.

Defendant filed the instant Motion to Vacate Default on June 14, 2021. No opposition has been filed.

Discussion

First, the Motion is not accompanied by a proof of service demonstrating service of the moving papers and notice of hearing on Plaintiff. Failure to give notice of a motion is not only a violation of the statutory requirements but of due process. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1005; Jones v. Otero (1984) 156 Cal.App.3d 754, 757.) The Court cannot grant a motion for which no proper service of the papers or notice of hearing has been provided.

Second, relief is not available under the moving statute. Defendant moves for relief from the default pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (b), under which an application for relief must be made no more than six months after entry of the order from which relief is sought. (Code Civ. Proc., § 473, subd. (b).) The motion must also be accompanied by an affidavit of fault attesting to the mistake, inadvertence, surprise or neglect of the moving party or its attorney and a copy of the moving defendant’s proposed pleading. (Code Civ. Proc., § 473, subd. (b); English v. IKON Business Solutions (2001) 94 Cal.App.4th 130, 143.) When based on an attorney affidavit of fault, the relief sought must be granted if the statutory requirements are satisfied. (Leader v. Health Industries of America, Inc. (2001) 89 Cal.App.4th 603, 612.) When brought pursuant to the provision for discretionary relief based on party fault, the request must have been filed within a reasonable amount of time.

The Motion does not satisfy all these requirements. The Motion is not supported by an affidavit of fault that demonstrates Defendant was not properly served with the Summons and Complaint. Also, more than six months has passed since default was entered on October 22, 2020 and the filing of the Motion on June 14, 2021. The six-month deadline is jurisdictional and not subject to tolling. (Manson, Iver & York v. Black (2009) 176 Cal.App.4th 36, 42.) Therefore, the Court has no discretion to ignore the express statutory deadline.

Conclusion

Defendant Dina Backus Beck’s Motion to Vacate Default is DENIED.

Court clerk to give notice.

'
related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where The Hertz Corporation is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer GOLDSMITH STEPHEN R

Latest cases represented by Lawyer MENDELSON LEE MICHAEL