This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 10/09/2019 at 01:01:36 (UTC).

ADRIAN BRISCO VS LISAELBA RAMIREZ CRUZ ET AL

Case Summary

On 04/05/2018 a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle case was filed by ADRIAN BRISCO against LISAELBA RAMIREZ CRUZ in the jurisdiction of Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****1392

  • Filing Date:

    04/05/2018

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Dismissed

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

CHRISTOPHER K. LUI

 

Party Details

Petitioner and Plaintiff

BRISCO ADRIAN

Respondents and Defendants

MAGANA EDUARDO SALINAS

DOES 1 THROUGH 50 INCLUSIVE

CRUZ LISAELBA RAMIREZ

 

Court Documents

Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (JURY TRIAL) OF 10/07/2019

10/7/2019: Certificate of Mailing for - CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FOR (JURY TRIAL) OF 10/07/2019

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (JURY TRIAL)

10/7/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (JURY TRIAL)

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE)

9/19/2019: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE)

CoverSheet -

4/5/2018: CoverSheet -

Summons -

4/5/2018: Summons -

Complaint -

4/5/2018: Complaint -

 

Docket Entries

  • 10/07/2019
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Jury Trial - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/07/2019
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for ((Jury Trial) of 10/07/2019); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/07/2019
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Jury Trial)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/07/2019
  • DocketOrder - Dismissal; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/19/2019
  • Docketat 10:00 AM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/19/2019
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Final Status Conference)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/05/2018
  • DocketSummons; Filed by Adrian Brisco (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/05/2018
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Adrian Brisco (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/05/2018
  • DocketComplaint

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC701392    Hearing Date: November 14, 2019    Dept: 4A

Motion to Set Aside Dismissal

Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows. No opposing papers were filed.

BACKGROUND

On April 5, 2018, Plaintiff Adrian Brisco (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendants Lisaelba Ramirez Cruz and Eduardo Salinas (“Defendants”) alleging vehicular negligence and negligence per se for an automobile collision that occurred on April 10, 2016.

On October 7, 2019, the Court dismissed the complaint due to the parties’ failure to appear for trial or communicate with the Court as to why there were no appearances.

On October 11, 2019, Plaintiff filed a motion to set aside the October 7, 2019 dismissal pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (b).

PARTIES REQUEST

Plaintiff asks the Court to set aside the October 7, 2019 dismissal on the ground that Plaintiff’s counsel failed to calendar the trial date.

LEGAL STANDARD

California Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (b) states: “The court may, upon any terms as may be just, relieve a party or his or her legal representative from a . . . dismissal . . . taken against him or her through his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.  Application for this relief . . . shall be made within a reasonable time, in no case exceeding six months, after the . . . dismissal . . . . was taken. . . . Notwithstanding any other requirements of this section, the court shall, whenever an application for relief is made no more than six months after entry of judgment, is in proper form, and is accompanied by an attorney's sworn affidavit attesting to his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect, vacate any (1) resulting default entered by the clerk against his or her client, and which will result in entry of a default judgment, or (2) resulting default judgment or dismissal entered against his or her client, unless the court finds that the default or dismissal was not in fact caused by the attorney's mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect. . . .”

Relief is mandatory when an attorney files the required affidavit, even if the attorney's neglect was inexcusable.  (Carmel, Ltd. v. Tavoussi (2009) 175 Cal.App.4th 393, 401 (setting aside a default entered when the attorney failed to file an answer).) No reason need be given for the existence of one of these circumstances and attestation that one of these reasons existed is sufficient to obtain relief, unless the trial court finds that the dismissal did not occur because of these reasons.  (Graham v. Beers (1994) 30 Cal.App.4th 1656, 1660.)

“The court shall, whenever relief is granted based on attorney’s affidavit of fault, direct the attorney to pay reasonable compensatory legal fees and costs to opposing counsel or parties.”  (Code Civ. Proc. § 473, subd. (b).)

DISCUSSION

Plaintiffs counsel declares that the trial date was never properly placed on calendar.  (Panah Decl.) he Court finds Plaintiff’s counsel’s declaration of fault is sufficient.  As such, relief from the October 7, 2019 dismissal is mandatory.

Plaintiffs motion is GRANTED.

The Court sets aside the October 7, 2019 dismissal and sets a trial setting conference for December 15, 2019 at 10:00 a.m.

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of this ruling.