On 03/16/2016 USA TULIP INTERNATIONAL INC filed a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury lawsuit against DE GONG XU. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Pomona Courthouse South located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are PETER A. HERNANDEZ and DUKES, ROBERT A.. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
Pending - Other Pending
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Pomona Courthouse South
Los Angeles, California
PETER A. HERNANDEZ
DUKES, ROBERT A.
USA TULIP INTERNATIONAL INC
USA TULIP INTERNATIONAL INC.
XU DE GONG
YCC PRODUCTS INC.
BEAUTY SALON FURNITURE INC.
WONG DOE 4 CHUONG SING
AYC GROUP LLC [DOE 5]
BONG DOE 3 CHOON LAN
BEAUTY SALON FURNITURES DOE 2
BEAUTY SALON FURNITURES INC. ROE 1
KAIPING XITE HARDWARE FACTORY ROE 2
ROES 1-50 INCLUSIVE
YANG DOE 3 DONG TIEN
DESJARDINS & PANITA LLP
DESJARDINS MICHAEL AARON
DESJARDINS MICHAEL A.
NAEVE WILLIAM DANIEL
MURCHISON & CUMMING LLP
LAW OFFICE OF ERIC G. ANDERSON
GOLDBERG TRACEY W. ESQ.
GOLDBERG TRACY WAYNE ESQ.
2/9/2018: DECLARATION OF TRACY W. GOLDBERG IN SUPPORT OF STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL AND FSC DATES AND STIPULATION TO TRANSFER CASE TO EAST DISTRICT
3/29/2018: AMENDMENT TO CROSS-COMPLAINT
5/17/2018: ANSWER-PERSONAL INJURY PROPERTY DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH
1/9/2019: Proof of Service by Mail
1/9/2019: Notice of Settlement
2/28/2019: Request for Entry of Default / Judgment
3/4/2019: Minute Order
6/5/2019: Request for Dismissal
3/30/2016: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS
11/4/2016: CROSS-COMPLAINT OF DE GONG XL) AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 1. DECLARATORY RELIEF 2. INDEMNIFICATION 3. APPORTIONMENT OF FAULT
4/4/2017: NOTICE OF UNAVAILABILITY OF COUNSEL
at 08:30 AM in Department O, Peter A. Hernandez, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement) - HeldRead MoreRead Less
at 08:30 AM in Department O, Peter A. Hernandez, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: (Default as to YCC, if Settlement payment is not paid,) - HeldRead MoreRead Less
Order (Proposed Order for determining good faith settlement); Filed by YCC Products, Inc. (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
Order (Amended [Proposed] Order Determining and Approving Good Faith Settlement Between Plaintiff USA Tulip International, Inc. and Defendant De Gong XU); Filed by De Gong Xu (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
Order - Dismissal; Filed by CourtRead MoreRead Less
Order ([PROPOSED] ORDER DETERMINING AND APPROVING GOOD FAITH SETTLEMENT); Filed by De Gong Xu (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
Minute Order ( (Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal (Settlement); Order to Show...)); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
Request for Dismissal; Filed by USA TULIP INTERNATIONAL, INC. (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
at 08:30 AM in Department O, Peter A. Hernandez, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Vacated by CourtRead MoreRead Less
at 08:30 AM in Department O, Peter A. Hernandez, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: (Failure to File Request Ent of Def) - Not Held - Vacated by CourtRead MoreRead Less
Declaration re: Due Diligence; Filed by USA Tulip International, Inc (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by USA Tulip International, Inc (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint); Filed by USA Tulip International, Inc (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONSRead MoreRead Less
DECLARATION OF REASONABLE DILIGENCERead MoreRead Less
Proof of Service by 1st Class MailRead MoreRead Less
USA TULIP INTERNATIONAL INC. S COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES FOR NEGLIGENCERead MoreRead Less
SUMMONSRead MoreRead Less
Complaint FiledRead MoreRead Less
Complaint; Filed by USA TULIP INTERNATIONAL INC., (Plaintiff); USA Tulip International, Inc (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
Case Number: BC613951 Hearing Date: January 27, 2020 Dept: O
Plaintiff’s application for default judgment is DENIED without prejudice for the following reasons:
1. Mandatory JC Form CIV-100 improperly filled out (Section 2). There is no information concerning the breakdown in costs as reflected in the proposed judgment.
2. The relief sought is not be within amount of prayer of complaint or statement of damages because the First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) fails to state amount in prayer and no statement of damages served. (Greenup v. Rodma (Becker v. S.P.V. Construction Co. (1980) 27 Cal.3d 489, 493.) “[A] defendant must be notified by the prayer [citation] or allegations in the body of the complaint of the damages sought. [Citation.]” (National Diversified Services, Inc., v. Bernstein (1985) 168 Cal.App.3d 410, 417-418.) The Court’s review of the FAC, filed on October 3, 2016, does not show that Defendant AYC Group LLC was provided notice in the prayer or allegations in the body of the FAC of the judgment that would be taken against it.