Search

Attributes

This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 07/02/2019 at 08:45:52 (UTC).

ADRIAN RODRIGO MUNOZ ET AL VS KATIE LOPEZ CASTANEDA

Case Summary

On 03/06/2015 ADRIAN RODRIGO MUNOZ filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against KATIE LOPEZ CASTANEDA. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The case status is Disposed - Judgment Entered.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****4181

  • Filing Date:

    03/06/2015

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Judgment Entered

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

 

Party Details

Plaintiffs and Petitioners

GODINEZ ALDO

MUNOZ ADRIAN RODRIGO

MUNOZ LUIS

SANCHEZ JASON

Defendants and Respondents

CASTANEDA KATIE LOPEZ

DOES 1 TO 50

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorney

KHORSHIDI LAW FIRM APC

 

Court Documents

Minute Order

2/22/2018: Minute Order

NOTICE OF REJECTION - APPLICATION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT BY COURT - CONTRACT OR TORT

4/3/2018: NOTICE OF REJECTION - APPLICATION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT BY COURT - CONTRACT OR TORT

Minute Order

5/9/2018: Minute Order

JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT BY CLERK

5/23/2018: JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT BY CLERK

REQUEST FOR COURT JUDGMENT

5/23/2018: REQUEST FOR COURT JUDGMENT

REQUEST FOR COURT JUDGMENT

5/23/2018: REQUEST FOR COURT JUDGMENT

REQUEST FOR COURT JUDGMENT

5/23/2018: REQUEST FOR COURT JUDGMENT

PLAINTIFFS' CASE SUMMARY IN SUPPORT OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT

5/23/2018: PLAINTIFFS' CASE SUMMARY IN SUPPORT OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT

JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT BY CLERK

5/23/2018: JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT BY CLERK

JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT BY CLERK

5/23/2018: JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT BY CLERK

COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

3/6/2015: COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

SUMMONS

3/6/2015: SUMMONS

Minute Order

8/19/2016: Minute Order

Minute Order

3/7/2017: Minute Order

Proof of Service by Substituted Service

7/25/2017: Proof of Service by Substituted Service

Minute Order

8/8/2017: Minute Order

REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT

9/12/2017: REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT

5 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 05/23/2018
  • Miscellaneous-Other; Filed by Adrian Rodrigo Munoz (Plaintiff); Aldo Godinez (Plaintiff); Luis Munoz (Plaintiff) et al.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/23/2018
  • REQUEST FOR COURT JUDGMENT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/23/2018
  • PLAINTIFFS' CASE SUMMARY IN SUPPORT OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/23/2018
  • JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT BY CLERK

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/23/2018
  • JUDGMENT BY DEFAULT BY CLERK

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/23/2018
  • Default Judgment; Filed by Adrian Rodrigo Munoz (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/23/2018
  • Default Judgment; Filed by Luis Munoz (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/23/2018
  • Default Judgment; Filed by Jason Sanchez (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/23/2018
  • Request; Filed by Adrian Rodrigo Munoz (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/23/2018
  • Request; Filed by Luis Munoz (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
16 More Docket Entries
  • 07/25/2017
  • Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by Adrian Rodrigo Munoz (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/25/2017
  • Proof of Service by Substituted Service

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/07/2017
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 97; (OSC RE Dismissal; Matter continued) -

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/07/2017
  • Minute Order

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/06/2016
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 97; (Trial; Off Calendar) -

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/19/2016
  • at 10:00 AM in Department 97; Final Status Conference (Final Status Conference; Off Calendar) -

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/19/2016
  • Minute Order

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/06/2015
  • COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/06/2015
  • Complaint; Filed by Adrian Rodrigo Munoz (Plaintiff); Aldo Godinez (Plaintiff); Luis Munoz (Plaintiff) et al.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/06/2015
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC574181    Hearing Date: July 23, 2020    Dept: 32

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 32

adrian rodrigo munoz, et al.

Plaintiffs,

v.

katie lopez castaneda,

Defendant.

Case No.: BC574181

Hearing Date: July 23, 2020

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

DEFENDANT’s motion to Vacate DEFAULT

Plaintiffs Adrian Rodrigo Munoz, Luis Munoz, Aldo Godinez, and Jason Sanchez (“Plaintiffs”) filed this action against Defendant Katie Lopez Castaneda (“Defendant”) following a motor vehicle collision. Defendant moves to set aside the default judgment Plaintiffs took against Defendant. Under Code of Civil Procedure section 473.5, the court may vacate a default “[w]hen service of a summons has not resulted in actual notice to a party in time to defend the action and a default or default judgment has been entered against him.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 473.5.) The phrase “actual notice” means “genuine knowledge of the party litigant” and does not include imputed notice. (Tunis v. Barrow (1986) 184 Cal.App.3d 1069, 1077.)

Plaintiffs filed a proof of service of the summons and complaint, which reflects that Plaintiffs served Defendant on July 18, 2017 by leaving the documents with her purported co-occupant, her mother. (Declaration of Ibrahim N. Muhtaseb, Exh. #2.) However, Defendant relies upon her own declaration stating that she lived in Tucson, Arizona from 2013 until March 1, 2017, after which she moved to Phoenix, Arizona, where she currently lives. (Declaration of Katie Lopez Castaneda, ¶¶ 3-5.) Defendant states that she did not reside with her mother when the summons and complaint were served. (Id., ¶ 5.) Defendant also states that her mother does not read or speak English and never informed her about the summons and complaint. (Id., ¶ 6.) Defendant states that she only learned of this action in February 2019, from her insurance carrier. (Id., ¶ 7.) This evidence is sufficient to establish that Defendant did not have actual knowledge of the lawsuit until after Plaintiff took a default judgment against her, constituting good cause to grant the motion.

Plaintiff argues that Defendant delayed in filing this motion. Under Code of Civil Procedure section 4735.5, a Defendant must move to set aside a default judgment within two years of the default judgment or 180 days after service of written notice that the default judgment has been entered, whichever is earlier. (Code Civ. Proc., § 473.5, subd. (a).) Plaintiffs proffer no evidence establishing that they provided Defendant written notice of the default judgment. Therefore, Defendant’s deadline to file this motion was May 23, 2020, and the motion was filed on January 30, 2020.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Defendant’s motion to set aside the default judgment is granted. The Court sets the following dates:

Final Status Conference: July 15, 2021, at 10:00 a.m.

Trial: July 30, 2021, at 8:30 a.m.

The discovery and motions cut-off shall be based on the new trial date. Defendant shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.

DATED: July 23, 2020 ___________________________

Stephen I. Goorvitch

Judge of the Superior Court

Case Number: BC574181    Hearing Date: January 08, 2020    Dept: 5

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 5

ADRIAN RODRIGO MUNOZ, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

KATIE LOPEZ CASTANEDA, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.: BC574181

Hearing Date: January 8, 2020

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

DEFENDANT’S motion to set aside dEFAULT

On March 6, 2015, Plaintiffs Adrian Rodrigo Munoz, Aldo Godinez, Luis Munoz, and Jason Sanchez (collectively “Plaintiffs”) filed this action against Defendant Katie Lopez Castaneda (“Defendant”) following a motor vehicle collision. A default judgment was entered against Defendant on May 23, 2018. Now, Defendant seeks to set aside the default and default judgment on the ground that she did not receive actual notice pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 473.5(a). However, Defendant’s declaration does not state that she had no actual notice. Instead, Defendant asserts that she did not reside at the address where substitute service was made. Thus, this motion is more appropriately analyzed under CCP § 473(d), but Defendant did not move for relief on that ground. Therefore, this motion is denied without prejudice to Defendant filing a motion seeking relief under section 473.5 with an amended declaration, or Defendant filing a motion seeking relief under section 473(d), or a motion seeking relief on both grounds. Defendant shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.

DATED: January 8, 2020 ___________________________

Hon. Stephen I. Goorvitch

Judge of the Superior Court