KATHERINE SANCERI VS BARBARA ANDERSON
Case Summary
On 09/05/2017 KATHERINE SANCERI filed a Property - Other Property Fraud lawsuit against BARBARA ANDERSON. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Norwalk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are BRIAN F. GASDIA, MARGARET MILLER BERNAL, LORI ANN FOURNIER and PATRICK T. MEYERS. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.
Case Details
-
Case Number:
****6546
-
Filing Date:
09/05/2017
-
Case Status:
Pending - Other Pending
-
Court:
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
-
Courthouse:
Norwalk Courthouse
-
County, State:
Los Angeles, California
Judge Details
Presiding Judges
BRIAN F. GASDIA
MARGARET MILLER BERNAL
LORI ANN FOURNIER
PATRICK T. MEYERS
Party Details
Plaintiffs
SANCERI KATHERINE AN INDIVIDUAL
SANCERI KATHERINE
Defendant
ANDERSON BARBARA AN INDIIVDUAL
Attorney/Law Firm Details
Defendant Attorneys
MANSOUR LAW GROUP APLC
MANSOUR JOHN
Court Documents
6/4/2019: Order
9/5/2017: Civil Case Cover Sheet
9/5/2017: Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)
11/6/2017: Legacy Document
2/6/2018: Case Management Statement
2/6/2018: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)
2/14/2018: Minute Order
3/27/2018: Other -
3/27/2018: Declaration
3/27/2018: Legacy Document
3/27/2018: Other -
3/27/2018: Other -
5/24/2018: Legacy Document
5/24/2018: Legacy Document
7/12/2018: Minute Order
10/4/2018: Minute Order
1/15/2019: Proof of Personal Service
2/15/2019: Case Management Statement
Docket Entries
- 06/04/2019
-
at 10:00 AM in Department F, Margaret Miller Bernal, Presiding; Trial Setting Conference - Held
- 06/04/2019
-
at 09:00 AM in Department E, Patrick T. Meyers, Presiding; Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC) - Held
- 06/04/2019
-
at 08:30 AM in Department F, Margaret Miller Bernal, Presiding; Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC) - Held
- 06/04/2019
-
at 08:30 AM in Department F, Margaret Miller Bernal, Presiding; Trial Setting Conference - Held
- 06/04/2019
-
Minute Order ( (Trial Setting Conference)); Filed by Clerk
- 06/04/2019
-
Trial Setting Order; Filed by Clerk
- 06/04/2019
-
Minute Order ( (Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC))); Filed by Clerk
- 06/04/2019
-
Minute Order ( (Trial Setting Conference; Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC))); Filed by Clerk
- 02/22/2019
-
at 09:00 AM in Department R, Brian F. Gasdia, Presiding; Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC) - Held
- 02/22/2019
-
at 08:30 AM in Department F, Margaret Miller Bernal, Presiding; Mandatory Settlement Conference (MSC) - Held
- 09/05/2017
-
Request to Waive Court Fees; Filed by Katherine Sanceri (Plaintiff)
- 09/05/2017
-
Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court); Filed by Clerk
- 09/05/2017
-
Notice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk
- 09/05/2017
-
Civil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by Katherine Sanceri (Plaintiff)
- 09/05/2017
-
Complaint filed-Summons Issued; Filed by Plaintiff, & Plaintiff in Pro Per
- 09/05/2017
-
Complaint filed-Summons Issued; Filed by Katherine Sanceri (Plaintiff)
- 09/05/2017
-
Notice-Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk
- 09/05/2017
-
Order-Court Fee Waiver (AS TO KATHERINE SANCERI ); Filed by Clerk
- 09/05/2017
-
Summons Filed; Filed by Plaintiff, & Plaintiff in Pro Per
- 09/05/2017
-
Request-Waive Court Fees; Filed by Plaintiff, & Plaintiff in Pro Per
Tentative Rulings
Case Number: VC066546 Hearing Date: October 15, 2020 Dept: C
SANCERI v. ANDERSON
CASE NO.: VC066546
HEARING: 10/15/2020
#5
TENTATIVE ORDER
Plaintiff (in pro per) KATHERINE SANCERI’s Motion to Vacate Judgment is DENIED.
Opposing Party to give Notice.
“[T]he power of the court to rule on a motion to set aside and vacate judgment shall expire 75 days from the mailing of notice of entry of judgment by the clerk of the court pursuant to Section 664.5, or 75 days after service upon the moving party by any party of written notice of entry of the judgment, whichever is earlier, or if that notice has not been given, 75 days after the filing of the first notice of intention to move to set aside and vacate the judgment. If the motion is not determined within the 75-day period, or within that period has extended, the effect shall be a denial of the motion without further order of the court.” (CCP §663a(b)).
Here, the mailing of the notice of entry of judgment by the clerk of Court occurred on June 30, 2020—more than 75 days have lapsed and this Court lacks jurisdiction to rule on Plaintiff’s Motion. The Motion is denied on procedural grounds.
Case Number: VC066546 Hearing Date: December 02, 2019 Dept: SEF
SANCERI v. ANDERSON
CASE NO.: VC066546
HEARING: 12/2/19 in Department SE F-Master Calendar
Calendar #2
TENTATIVE ORDER
Defendant Anderson’s motion to continue trial is GRANTED.
Moving Party to give NOTICE.
Defendant Anderson moves to continue trial.
A motion to continue trial is a disfavored motion. “To ensure the prompt disposition of civil cases, the dates assigned for a trial are firm. All parties and their counsel must regard the date set for trial as certain.” (CRC 3.1332(a).)
“The court must look beyond the limited facts which cause a litigant to request a last-minute continuance and consider the degree of diligence in his or her efforts to bring the case to trial, including participating in earlier court hearings, conducting discovery, and preparing for trial.” (Oliveros v. County of Los Angeles (2004) 120 Cal.App.4th 1389, 1395, citing to Link v. Cater (1998) 60 Cal.App.4th 1315, 1324-1325.)
Good cause exists to continue trial in this instance because Defendant was unable to reserve an MSJ hearing prior to the current trial date of 2/19/20. The MSJ is currently set for hearing on 3/12/20.
Accordingly, the motion is GRANTED. The current trial date will be reset.
Dig Deeper
Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases