Search

Attributes

This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 06/01/2019 at 05:13:38 (UTC).

ANTHONY CAMPBELL VS CAHUENGA BICYCLE LLC

Case Summary

On 09/05/2017 ANTHONY CAMPBELL filed a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury lawsuit against CAHUENGA BICYCLE LLC. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is LAURA A. SEIGLE. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****4698

  • Filing Date:

    09/05/2017

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

LAURA A. SEIGLE

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner

CAMPBELL ANTHONY

Defendants and Respondents

CAHUENGA BICYCLE LLC

DOES 1 TO 25

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

LAW OFFICES OF KENECHI R. AGU

AGU KENECHI REUBEN ESQ.

 

Court Documents

Minute Order

2/19/2019: Minute Order

PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

11/14/2017: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

11/14/2017: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

SUMMONS

9/5/2017: SUMMONS

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

9/5/2017: COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

 

Docket Entries

  • 03/05/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 4B, Laura A. Seigle, Presiding; Non-Jury Trial - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/19/2019
  • at 10:00 AM in Department 4B, Laura A. Seigle, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/19/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Final Status Conference)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/14/2017
  • PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/14/2017
  • PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/05/2017
  • COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/05/2017
  • Complaint; Filed by Anthony Campbell (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/05/2017
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC674698    Hearing Date: April 14, 2021    Dept: 27

[TENTATIVE] ORDER DEFENDANT CAHUENGA BICYCLE LLC’S MOTION TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENT his throat with a knife.  Plaintiff alleges Defendants failed to check the assailant for weapons before letting him enter the property and failed to warn and notify Plaintiff of the assailant’s presence.  

At Plaintiff’s request, the clerk entered default against Defendant on October 29, 2019.  On March 23, 2020, the Court entered judgment in favor of Plaintiff in the amount of $539, 440.49.  Defendant moves to set aside the default on the grounds of inadvertence, surprise, mistake, or inexcusable neglect under Code of Civil Procedure section 473(b).  

The Cruz v. Fagor subdivision (b) contains two distinct provisions for relief from default.  The first provision is discretionary and broad in scope, providing: “The court may, upon any terms as may be just, relieve a party or his or her legal representative from a judgment, dismissal, order, or other proceeding taken against him or her through his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect.  Application for this relief shall be accompanied by a copy of the answer or other pleading proposed to be filed therein, otherwise the application shall not be granted, and shall be made within a reasonable time, in no case exceeding six months, after the judgment, dismissal, order, or proceeding was taken.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 473, subd. (b).)

The second provision is mandatory and narrowly covers only dismissals, , subd. (b).)

Where a party moves for discretionary relief, “[t]he general rule is that the six-month period within which to bring a motion to vacate under section 473 runs from the date of the default and not from the default judgment taken thereafter.”  Rutan v. Summit Sports, Inc. 173 see also Pulte Homes Corp. v. Williams Mechanical, Inc. “The reason for this rule is that vacation of the judgment alone ordinarily would constitute an idle act; if the judgment were vacated the default would remain intact and permit immediate entry of another judgment giving the plaintiff the relief to which his complaint entitles him.”  (Rutan, 173 see also Pulte Homes, supra, 2 Cal.App.5th at p. 273 [“[B]ecause court has no authority under section 473, subdivision (b), to excuse a party's noncompliance with the six-month time limit.”  (Arambula

However, where a party moves for mandatory relief under section 473, the six-month deadline runs from the entry of default judgment.  (See Sugasawara Newland th

Here, the Motion to set aside default judgment was filed on September 16, 2020, which exceeds the deadline for a motion to set aside default based on the discretionary provision of section 473(b).  Furthermore, There include any testimony regarding any inadvertence, surprise, mistake or neglect As Defendant’s sole basis for its motion is based on section 473(b), the Court will not address Plaintiff’s arguments in opposition regarding any potential ground for Defendant to bring a motion to set aside the default based on the Court’s equitable powers.  

Defendant’s

Moving party to give notice.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.

Why is this public record being published online?