This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 07/17/2019 at 01:18:10 (UTC).

MICHAEL EGHBALI VS SEAN JACOBI

Case Summary

On 03/19/2018 MICHAEL EGHBALI filed a Contract - Debt Collection lawsuit against SEAN JACOBI. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Santa Monica Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is NANCY L. NEWMAN. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****9016

  • Filing Date:

    03/19/2018

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Debt Collection

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Santa Monica Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

NANCY L. NEWMAN

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

EGHBALL MICHAEL

Defendants

YAGHOBI SHAHIN

JOCOBI SHAROK

YAGHOBI SHAHROKH

JACOBI SEAN

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

NOVIAN FARHAD

Defendant Attorney

PAYA BRIAN

 

Court Documents

Summons

3/19/2018: Summons

Complaint

3/19/2018: Complaint

Civil Case Cover Sheet

3/19/2018: Civil Case Cover Sheet

Legacy Document

4/24/2018: Legacy Document

Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

6/12/2018: Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

6/19/2018: Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

Motion to Quash

8/30/2018: Motion to Quash

Opposition

10/24/2018: Opposition

Case Management Statement

10/30/2018: Case Management Statement

Notice of Case Reassignment and Order for Plaintiff to Give Notice

11/16/2018: Notice of Case Reassignment and Order for Plaintiff to Give Notice

Motion to Vacate

12/18/2018: Motion to Vacate

Case Management Statement

1/24/2019: Case Management Statement

Minute Order

1/31/2019: Minute Order

Objection

6/20/2019: Objection

Opposition

6/20/2019: Opposition

Declaration

6/20/2019: Declaration

Answer

7/3/2019: Answer

Minute Order

7/3/2019: Minute Order

16 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 07/03/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department P; Case Management Conference - Held - Continued

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/03/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department P; Hearing on Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Default (CCP 473.5) - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/03/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department P; Hearing on Motion to Vacate (entry of default) - Not Held - Vacated by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/03/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Motion by Defendant Sean Jacobi, aka Shahin Yaghobi and Sharo...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/03/2019
  • Answer; Filed by SEAN JACOBI (Defendant); SHAHIN YAGHOBI (Legacy Party)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/21/2019
  • DEFENDANTS? REPLY TO PLAINTIFF MICHAEL EGHBALI?S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS SEAN JACOBI AND SHAHIN JACOBI?S MOTION TO VACATE ENTRY OF DEFAULT; Filed by SEAN JACOBI (Defendant); SHAHIN YAGHOBI (Legacy Party)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/20/2019
  • EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS IN SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS SEAN JACOBI AND SHAHIN JACOBI?S MOTION TO VACATE ENTRY OF DEFAULT; Filed by MICHAEL EGHBALL (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/20/2019
  • OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS SEAN JACOBI AND SHAHIN JACOBI?S MOTION TO VACATE ENTRY OF DEFAULT; Filed by MICHAEL EGHBALL (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/20/2019
  • DECLARATION OF ANDREW B. GOODMAN IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF MICHAEL EGHBALI?S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS SEAN JACOBI AND SHAHIN JACOBI?S MOTION TO VACATE ENTRY OF DEFAULT; Filed by MICHAEL EGHBALL (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/18/2019
  • Case Management Statement; Filed by MICHAEL EGHBALL (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
32 More Docket Entries
  • 06/12/2018
  • Default Entered; Filed by MICHAEL EGHBALL (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/16/2018
  • Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/16/2018
  • Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by MICHAEL EGHBALL (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/24/2018
  • Declaration; Filed by MICHAEL EGHBALL (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/24/2018
  • Declaration (DECLARATION OF REASONABLE DILLGENCE ); Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/19/2018
  • Complaint Filed

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/19/2018
  • Summons; Filed by Plaintiff

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/19/2018
  • Complaint; Filed by MICHAEL EGHBALL (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/19/2018
  • Civil Case Cover Sheet

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/19/2018
  • Summons Filed; Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: SC129016    Hearing Date: November 14, 2019    Dept: P

 

TENTATIVE RULING

Michael Eghbali v. Sean Jacobi et al. Case No. SC129016

Motion to Stay Default Judgment Proceedings/Attorney Fees Request

Hearing Date: November 14, 2019

The court previously granted defendant Sharok Jacobi’s motion to vacate entry of default and denied defendant Sean Jacobi’s motion to vacate. Plaintiff represented he intends to dismiss Sharok if a default judgment is entered against Sean. A prove-up hearing regarding Sean Jacobi is scheduled for November 14, 2019. Defendant Sharok argues that since both he and Sean are alleged to be jointly and severally liable and possess similar or identical defenses, the prove-up hearing must be continued until after Sharok’s trial.

Generally, it is improper to enter judgment against a defaulted defendant where other appearing parties have raised defenses which, if proven, would establish the non-liability of the defaulted defendant. Adams Mfg. & Eng. Co. v. Coast Centerless Grind. Co. (1960) 184 Cal.App.2d 649, 655. However, in an action against several defendants “the court may, in its discretion, render judgment against one or more of them, leaving the action to proceed against the others, whenever a several judgment is proper.” Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §579.

The court agrees it would be unjust to enter default judgment against defendant Sean if defendant Sharok is able to present a defense at trial that would defeat liability for both defendants. Plaintiff is correct that because he has the absolute right to dismiss the action against Sharok at will, continuing Sean’s default prove-up hearing would serve no purpose. A dismissal of Sharok would leave Sean as the only remaining defendant, at which point it would be appropriate to immediately enter default judgment against Sean.

The motion is DENIED. Sanctions will not be awarded, as the motion addresses a valid and good-faith concern regarding the possibility inconsistent judgments against each party.