This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 10/09/2020 at 08:18:11 (UTC).

WESTLAKE SERVICES, LLC VS FORMULA ONE MOTORS,, ET AL.

Case Summary

On 10/30/2018 WESTLAKE SERVICES, LLC filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against FORMULA ONE MOTORS. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is JON R. TAKASUGI. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******3715

  • Filing Date:

    10/30/2018

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Spring Street Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

JON R. TAKASUGI

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

WESTLAKE SERVICES LLC DBA WESTLAKE FINANCIAL SERVICES A LIMITED LIABILTY COMPANY

Defendants

FORMULA ONE MOTORS

ZAHERI MICHAEL

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorneys

YADEGARI ARASH E.

FRIEDMAN JOSHUA P

Defendant Attorney

REISENAUER PETER JONATHAN

 

Court Documents

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

8/10/2020: Request for Entry of Default / Judgment - Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Quash Service of Summons)

7/6/2020: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Quash Service of Summons)

Reply (name extension) - Reply to Plaintiff's Opp to Defendant's Motion to Quash

6/26/2020: Reply (name extension) - Reply to Plaintiff's Opp to Defendant's Motion to Quash

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

6/8/2020: Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

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

6/3/2020: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint) - Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

Minute Order - Minute Order (Court Order Re: Non-Jury Trial)

5/19/2020: Minute Order - Minute Order (Court Order Re: Non-Jury Trial)

Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Court Order Re: Non-Jury Trial) of 05/19/2020

5/19/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (Court Order Re: Non-Jury Trial) of 05/19/2020

Request for Dismissal - Request for Dismissal

5/27/2020: Request for Dismissal - Request for Dismissal

Substitution of Attorney - Substitution of Attorney

2/4/2020: Substitution of Attorney - Substitution of Attorney

Request for Dismissal - Request for Dismissal

2/13/2020: Request for Dismissal - Request for Dismissal

Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order - Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

3/27/2020: Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order - Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

Memorandum of Points & Authorities - Memorandum of Points & Authorities

4/9/2020: Memorandum of Points & Authorities - Memorandum of Points & Authorities

Proof of Service by Mail - Proof of Service by Mail

4/9/2020: Proof of Service by Mail - Proof of Service by Mail

Notice of Motion - Notice of Motion

4/9/2020: Notice of Motion - Notice of Motion

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

4/15/2020: Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

10/30/2018: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

Complaint - Complaint

10/30/2018: Complaint - Complaint

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

10/30/2018: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

11 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 11/02/2021
  • Hearing11/02/2021 at 10:30 AM in Department 25 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Order to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/13/2021
  • Hearing05/13/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department 25 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Non-Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/10/2020
  • DocketRequest for Entry of Default / Judgment; Filed by: Westlake Services, LLC (Plaintiff); As to: Michael Zaheri (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/10/2020
  • DocketDefault entered as to Michael Zaheri; On the Complaint filed by Westlake Services, LLC on 10/30/2018

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/06/2020
  • DocketMinute Order (Hearing on Motion to Quash Service of Summons)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/06/2020
  • DocketHearing on Motion to Quash Service of Summons scheduled for 07/06/2020 at 09:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 updated: Result Date to 07/06/2020; Result Type to Held - Motion Denied

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/26/2020
  • DocketReply to Plaintiff's Opp to Defendant's Motion to Quash; Filed by: Michael Zaheri (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/08/2020
  • DocketProof of Service by Substituted Service; Filed by: Westlake Services, LLC (Plaintiff); As to: Michael Zaheri (Defendant); Proof of Mailing Date: 03/02/2020; Service Cost: 113.95; Service Cost Waived: No

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/04/2020
  • DocketNotice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/04/2020
  • DocketOn the Court's own motion, Hearing on Motion to Quash Service of Summons scheduled for 07/06/2020 at 10:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 Not Held - Advanced and Continued - by Court was rescheduled to 07/06/2020 09:30 AM

    Read MoreRead Less
18 More Docket Entries
  • 02/13/2020
  • DocketOn the Complaint filed by Westlake Services, LLC on 10/30/2018, entered Request for Dismissal without prejudice filed by Westlake Services, LLC as to Formula One Motors,

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/04/2020
  • DocketSubstitution of Attorney; Filed by: Westlake Services, LLC (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/04/2019
  • DocketCase reassigned to Stanley Mosk Courthouse in Department 94 - Hon. James E. Blancarte; Reason: Inventory Transfer

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/09/2018
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 04/28/2020 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/09/2018
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 11/02/2021 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/30/2018
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: Westlake Services, LLC (Plaintiff); As to: Formula One Motors, (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/30/2018
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Westlake Services, LLC (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/30/2018
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/30/2018
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/30/2018
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. Jon R. Takasugi in Department 94 Stanley Mosk Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 18STLC13715    Hearing Date: July 06, 2020    Dept: 25

MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE

(CCP § 418.10)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Defendant Michael Zaheri’s Motion to Quash Service is DENIED.

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 June 3, 2020 [   ] Late [   ] None

REPLY: Filed on June 26, 2020 [   ] Late [   ] None

ANALYSIS:

  1. Background

On October 30, 2018, Plaintiff Westlake Services, LLC dba Westlake Financial Services (“Plaintiff”) filed an action for breach of contract and common counts against Defendants Formula One Motors (“Formula One”) and Michael Zaheri (“Zaheri”). On February 18, 2020, Defendant Formula One was dismissed from the action. (2/13/20 Minute Order.) On April 15, 2020, Plaintiff filed a proof of service demonstrating that, on March 1, 2020, Defendant Zaheri was served by substitute service. (4/15/20 Proof of Service.)

On April 9, 2020, Defendant Zaheri filed the instant Motion to Quash Service (the “Motion”). On June 3, 2020, Plaintiff filed an Opposition, and on June 26, 2020, Defendant filed a Reply.  

  1. Legal Standard & Discussion

“A defendant, on or before the last day of his or her time to plead or within any further time that the court may for good cause allow, may serve and file a notice of motion for one or more of the following purposes: ¶ To quash service of summons on the ground of lack of jurisdiction of the court over him or her.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 418.10, subd. (a)(1).)  A defendant has 30 days after the service of the summons to file a responsive pleading, or 40 days if service was effectuated by substitute service.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 412.20, subd. (a)(3); Code Civ. Proc., § 415.20, subd. (b).)

Defendant Zaheri’s Motion is timely. He argues that, pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.110, service was untimely because Defendant Zaheri was served well after 60 days from the date the Complaint was filed. (Mot., p. 2:7-18.) As a result, he argues, the Court is required to quash service of the Summons and Complaint. (Id.) In Opposition, Plaintiff argues that the remedy for failing to comply with Rule 3.110, subdivision (b) is an award of sanctions, not dismissal of the summons and complaint. (Oppo., p. 2:8-21.) In Reply, Defendant Zaheri argues that Plaintiff’s interpretation essentially renders Rule 3.110 meaningless. (Reply, p. 3:5-9.)

Rule 3.110, subdivision (b) states that the Complaint must be served on all named defendants and proofs of service on those defendants must be filed with the court within 60 days after filing the complaint. Indeed, the remedy for failure to serve within 60 days is potential award of sanctions, not an order quashing the Summons and Complaint. Rule 3.110, subdivision (f) provides that “[i]f a party fails to serve and file pleadings as required under this rule and has not obtained an order extending time to serve its pleadings, the court may issue an order to show cause why sanctions shall not be imposed.” Defendant Zaheri has not provided any authority providing otherwise.  

  1. Conclusion & Order

For the foregoing reasons, Defendant Michael Zaheri’s Motion to Quash Service is DENIED.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.

Case Number: 18STLC13715    Hearing Date: July 02, 2020    Dept: 25

MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE

(CCP § 418.10)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Defendant Michael Zaheri’s Motion to Quash Service is DENIED.

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 June 3, 2020 [ ] Late [ ] None

REPLY: Filed on June 26, 2020 [ ] Late [ ] None

ANALYSIS:

  1. Background

On October 30, 2018, Plaintiff Westlake Services, LLC dba Westlake Financial Services (“Plaintiff”) filed an action for breach of contract and common counts against Defendants Formula One Motors (“Formula One”) and Michael Zaheri (“Zaheri”). On February 18, 2020, Defendant Formula One was dismissed from the action. (2/13/20 Minute Order.) On April 15, 2020, Plaintiff filed a proof of service demonstrating that, on March 1, 2020, Defendant Zaheri was served by substitute service. (4/15/20 Proof of Service.)

On April 9, 2020, Defendant Zaheri filed the instant Motion to Quash Service (the “Motion”). On June 3, 2020, Plaintiff filed an Opposition, and on June 26, 2020, Defendant filed a Reply.

  1. Legal Standard & Discussion

“A defendant, on or before the last day of his or her time to plead or within any further time that the court may for good cause allow, may serve and file a notice of motion for one or more of the following purposes: ¶ To quash service of summons on the ground of lack of jurisdiction of the court over him or her.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 418.10, subd. (a)(1).) A defendant has 30 days after the service of the summons to file a responsive pleading, or 40 days if service was effectuated by substitute service. (Code Civ. Proc., § 412.20, subd. (a)(3); Code Civ. Proc., § 415.20, subd. (b).)

Defendant Zaheri’s Motion is timely. He argues that, pursuant to California Rules of Court, rule 3.110, service was untimely because Defendant Zaheri was served well after 60 days from the date the Complaint was filed. (Mot., p. 2:7-18.) As a result, he argues, the Court is required to quash service of the Summons and Complaint. (Id.) In Opposition, Plaintiff argues that the remedy for failing to comply with Rule 3.110, subdivision (b) is an award of sanctions, not dismissal of the summons and complaint. (Oppo., p. 2:8-21.) In Reply, Defendant Zaheri argues that Plaintiff’s interpretation essentially renders Rule 3.110 meaningless. (Reply, p. 3:5-9.)

Rule 3.110, subdivision (b) states that the Complaint must be served on all named defendants and proofs of service on those defendants must be filed with the court within 60 days after filing the complaint. Indeed, the remedy for failure to serve within 60 days is potential award of sanctions, not an order quashing the Summons and Complaint. Rule 3.110, subdivision (f) provides that “[i]f a party fails to serve and file pleadings as required under this rule and has not obtained an order extending time to serve its pleadings, the court may issue an order to show cause why sanctions shall not be imposed.” Defendant Zaheri has not provided any authority providing otherwise.

  1. Conclusion & Order

For the foregoing reasons, Defendant Michael Zaheri’s Motion to Quash Service is DENIED.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.