This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 09/17/2021 at 20:45:26 (UTC).

LENSKY LAW FIRM, APC VS PARALLAX HEALTH SCIENCES, INC.

Case Summary

On 01/28/2021 LENSKY LAW FIRM, APC filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against PARALLAX HEALTH SCIENCES, INC. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Santa Monica Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The case status is Disposed - Judgment Entered.
Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******0212

  • Filing Date:

    01/28/2021

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Judgment Entered

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

LENSKY LAW FIRM APC

Defendant

PARALLAX HEALTH SCIENCES INC.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

LENSKY ARTHUR L.

 

Court Documents

Memorandum of Costs After Judgment, Acknowledgment of Credit, and Declaration of Accrued Interest

9/8/2021: Memorandum of Costs After Judgment, Acknowledgment of Credit, and Declaration of Accrued Interest

Notice of Rejection - Post Judgment

9/8/2021: Notice of Rejection - Post Judgment

Notice of Rejection - Post Judgment

9/8/2021: Notice of Rejection - Post Judgment

Writ of Execution - WRIT OF EXECUTION (LOS ANGELES)

9/8/2021: Writ of Execution - WRIT OF EXECUTION (LOS ANGELES)

Notice of Rejection - Post Judgment

9/8/2021: Notice of Rejection - Post Judgment

Notice of Rejection - Post Judgment

9/8/2021: Notice of Rejection - Post Judgment

Notice of Rejection - Post Judgment

9/8/2021: Notice of Rejection - Post Judgment

Memorandum of Costs After Judgment, Acknowledgment of Credit, and Declaration of Accrued Interest

9/7/2021: Memorandum of Costs After Judgment, Acknowledgment of Credit, and Declaration of Accrued Interest

Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF ENTRY OF JUDGMENT

7/8/2021: Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF ENTRY OF JUDGMENT

Judgment - [PROPOSED] JUDGEMENT BY COURT

4/26/2021: Judgment - [PROPOSED] JUDGEMENT BY COURT

Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

4/12/2021: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

Request for Dismissal

4/12/2021: Request for Dismissal

Application - APPLICATION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGEMENT AGAINST DEFENDANT; DECLARATION OF LENSKY

4/12/2021: Application - APPLICATION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGEMENT AGAINST DEFENDANT; DECLARATION OF LENSKY

Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

4/12/2021: Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

Proof of Service by Mail

2/23/2021: Proof of Service by Mail

Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

3/16/2021: Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

Proof of Service by Mail

3/17/2021: Proof of Service by Mail

Notice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case

1/28/2021: Notice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case

10 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 09/08/2021
  • DocketNotice of Rejection - Post Judgment; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/08/2021
  • DocketNotice of Rejection - Post Judgment; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/08/2021
  • DocketNotice of Rejection - Post Judgment; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/08/2021
  • DocketMemorandum of Costs After Judgment, Acknowledgment of Credit, and Declaration of Accrued Interest; Filed by Lensky Law Firm, APC (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/08/2021
  • DocketNotice of Rejection - Post Judgment; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/08/2021
  • DocketNotice of Rejection - Post Judgment; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/08/2021
  • DocketWrit of Execution ((Los Angeles)); Filed by Lensky Law Firm, APC (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/07/2021
  • DocketMemorandum of Costs After Judgment, Acknowledgment of Credit, and Declaration of Accrued Interest; Filed by Lensky Law Firm, APC (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/27/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department O; Case Management Conference - Not Held - Vacated by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/08/2021
  • DocketNotice (Notice of Entry of Judgment); Filed by Lensky Law Firm, APC (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
3 More Docket Entries
  • 04/12/2021
  • DocketRequest for Dismissal; Filed by Lensky Law Firm, APC (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/12/2021
  • DocketRequest for Entry of Default / Judgment; Filed by Lensky Law Firm, APC (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/17/2021
  • DocketProof of Service by Mail; Filed by Lensky Law Firm, APC (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/16/2021
  • DocketRequest for Entry of Default / Judgment; Filed by Lensky Law Firm, APC (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/23/2021
  • DocketProof of Service by Mail; Filed by Lensky Law Firm, APC (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/29/2021
  • DocketNotice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/29/2021
  • DocketSummons (on Complaint); Filed by Lensky Law Firm, APC (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/28/2021
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/28/2021
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by Lensky Law Firm, APC (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/28/2021
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Lensky Law Firm, APC (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: *******0212 Hearing Date: March 17, 2022 Dept: O

Case Name: Lensky Law Firm, APC v. Parallax Health Sciences, Inc.

Case No.: *******0212

Complaint Filed: 1-29-21

Hearing Date: 3-17-22

Discovery C/O: None

Calendar No.: 7

Discover Motion C/O: None

POS: OK

Trial Date: None

SUBJECT: MOTION TO VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT

MOVING PARTY: Defendant Parallax Health Sciences, Inc.

RESP. PARTY: Plaintiff Lensky Law Firm, APC

TENTATIVE RULING

Defendant Parallax Health Sciences, Inc.’s Motion to Vacate Default Judgment is DENIED.

Pursuant to CCP 473(b), discretionary relief must be sought within a reasonable time, in no case exceeding six months after the judgment, dismissal, order or other proceeding taken against a defendant. The six-month time limit for granting statutory relief is jurisdictional and the court may not consider a motion for relief made after that period has elapsed. See Manson, Iver & York v. Black (2009) 176 Cal.App.4th 36, 42.

Default was entered against Defendant on 3-16-21. Default judgment was entered against Defendant on 4-25-21. The motion was filed on 1-7-22. The motion was untimely brought more than six months after entry of the default and default judgment. The Court lacks jurisdiction to grant relief.

Defendant relies on the declaration of its current CEO to establish excusable neglect. CEO Choi’s declaration fails to establish that Defendant’s failure to respond was the product of excusable negligence. Choi was not the CEO when Defendant was served. Choi testifies that it was “obvious” that Arena was “extremely distracted” during his tenure and when response to the action was due. See Motion, Dec. of S. Choi, 1-2. Choi’s testimony regarding former CEO Paul Arena’s state of mind and motivation lacks foundation and is speculative. See Motion, Dec. of S. Choi, 1-2. Choi fails to offer any admissible evidence as to why Defendant failed to respond to this action.

Plaintiff’s failure to arbitrate prior to filing this action does not establish excusable neglect, nor does it alone establish a meritorious defense. A right to compel arbitration may be waived. See Diaz v. Continental Airlines, Inc. (1997) 59 Cal.App.4th 205, 211. Here, Plaintiff served Defendant with a notice of right to arbitrate on 2-14-20, but Defendant did not respond. See Opposition, Dec. of R. Rosenberg, 5. Plaintiff only filed this action after Defendant failed to respond to the timely notice of right to arbitrate. Id.

On reply, Defendant argues it was no longer operating at the served address when notice of entry of default was served. There is no evidence to support this assertion. Moreover, the notice of entry of default was served on Defendant’s registered agent, Paracorp Incorporated, and Defendant. See Notice of Entry of Default Judgment filed on 7-8-21, p. 2.



related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where PARALLAX HEALTH SCIENCES INC is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer LENSKY ARTHUR