On 03/09/2018 a Contract - Other Contract case was filed by LARRY HERNANDEZ against TAPIA ENTERPRISES INC in the jurisdiction of Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California.
Pending - Other Pending
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
DOES 1 THROUGH 10
TAPIA ENTERPRISES INC.
TAPIA ENTERPRISES INC. DBA TAPIA BROTHERS
5/10/2018: OPPOSITION BY PLAINTIFF TO DEMURRER BROUGHT BY DEFENDANTS; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
5/25/2018: Minute Order
6/26/2018: CIVIL DEPOSIT
6/26/2018: CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
6/26/2018: NOTICE OF POSTING JURY FEES
7/2/2018: CROSS-COMPLAINT FOR IMPLIED INDEMNITY, EQUITABLE INDEMNITY AND DECLARATORY RELIEF
7/5/2018: NOTICE RE; CONTINUANCE OF HEARING
7/6/2018: SUMMONS CROSS-COMPLAINT
8/3/2018: Minute Order
8/22/2018: PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS
2/14/2019: Minute Order
3/29/2019: Minute Order
4/2/2019: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)
4/2/2019: Notice of Ruling
5/15/2019: Minute Order
4/13/2018: DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF HEARING ON DEMURRER AND DEMURRER TO THE COMPLAINT; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF
3/9/2018: VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR: 1)BREACH OF CONTRACT; ETC
at 09:30 AM in Department 56; Jury Trial - Not Held - Advanced and Continued - by CourtRead MoreRead Less
at 09:00 AM in Department 56; Informal Discovery Conference (IDC) - HeldRead MoreRead Less
Minute Order ( (Informal Discovery Conference (IDC))); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
at 08:32 AM in Department 56; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Advanced and Continued - by CourtRead MoreRead Less
Notice of Ruling; Filed by Tapia Enterprises, Inc. (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint) (Corrected proof of Service of Notice of Ruling); Filed by Tapia Enterprises, Inc. (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
at 08:30 AM in Department 56; Hearing on Ex Parte Application ( to Continue Trial; Decl of Rybarczyk & Proposed Order) - Held - Motion GrantedRead MoreRead Less
Ex Parte Application (Ex Parte App of Defendant to Continue Trial; Decl of Rybarczyk & Proposed Order); Filed by Tapia Enterprises, Inc. (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
Minute Order ( (Hearing on Ex Parte Application to Continue Trial; Decl of R...)); Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
Declaration (Declaration re Ex Parte Notice); Filed by Tapia Enterprises, Inc. (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
Declaration; Filed by Tapia Enterprises, Inc. (Defendant)Read MoreRead Less
Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint); Filed by Larry Hernandez (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONSRead MoreRead Less
Notice of Case Management Conference; Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE HEARINGRead MoreRead Less
NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCERead MoreRead Less
OSC-Failure to File Proof of Serv; Filed by ClerkRead MoreRead Less
Complaint; Filed by Larry Hernandez (Plaintiff)Read MoreRead Less
SUMMONSRead MoreRead Less
VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR: 1)BREACH OF CONTRACT; ETCRead MoreRead Less
Case Number: BC697350 Hearing Date: December 27, 2019 Dept: 56
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT
LARRY HERNANDEZ, etc.,
TAPIA ENTERPRISES, INC., etc., et al.,
CASE NO.: BC697350
[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
Date: December 27, 2019
Time: 8:30 a.m.
Jury Trial: February 10, 2020
MOVING PARTY: Defendant Tapia Enterprises, Inc.
The Court has considered the moving papers. No opposition papers were filed, and no courtesy copy of any opposition papers were provided to the Court. Any opposition papers were required to have been filed and served by Friday, December 13, 2019. (Code Civ. Proc. § 1005(b).)
Plaintiff filed a complaint that arises from an alleged breach of contract. Plaintiff’s complaint alleges causes of action against Defendants for: (1) breach of contract; (2) breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing; and (3) common count.
Defendant filed a motion for summary judgment, or in the alternative, summary adjudication of issues in its favor against Plaintiff. Defendant’s motion is made on the grounds that: (1) there are no genuine issues of material fact; (2) the undisputed material facts prove that one or more essential elements of Plaintiff’s claims cannot be established; (3) Plaintiff never had a contractual relationship with Defendant; (4) Defendant never requested that Plaintiff perform any work at its distribution facility in Phoenix, Arizona; and (5) Plaintiff, by his own admission, is and always has been an unlicensed contractor and is barred from maintaining any action for unpaid compensation. Plaintiff failed to opposed Defendant’s motion.
Due to Defendant’s motion being unopposed, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s motion for summary judgment in its entirety. (Sexton v. Superior Court (1997) 58 Cal.App.4th 1403, 1410.)
Moving party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.
Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMC_DEPT56@lacourt.org as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org. If the department does not receive an email and there are no appearances at the
hearing, the motion will be placed off calendar.
Dated this 27th day of December 2019
Hon. Holly J. Fujie
Judge of the Superior Court