On 07/28/2017 SHAHID KAHN filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against TANAYUTH NOOCHLAOR. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is STEPHEN I. GOORVITCH. The case status is Disposed - Dismissed.
****0482
07/28/2017
Disposed - Dismissed
Los Angeles County Superior Courts
Stanley Mosk Courthouse
Los Angeles, California
STEPHEN I. GOORVITCH
KAHN SHAHID
DOES 1 TO 5
NOOCHLAOR TANAYUTH
1/11/2019: Minute Order
1/28/2019: Unknown
1/28/2019: Order - Dismissal
1/28/2019: Minute Order
7/28/2017: COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)
7/28/2017: Unknown
7/28/2017: SUMMONS
at 08:30 AM in Department 5, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Jury Trial - Not Held - Vacated by Court
Certificate of Mailing for (Minute Order (Jury Trial) of 01/28/2019); Filed by Clerk
Minute Order ( (Jury Trial)); Filed by Clerk
Order - Dismissal; Filed by Clerk
at 10:00 AM in Department 5, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Court
Minute Order ((Final Status Conference)); Filed by Clerk
SUMMONS
ORDER ON COURT FEE WAIVER
Complaint; Filed by Shahid Kahn (Plaintiff)
COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)
Case Number: BC670482 Hearing Date: March 11, 2020 Dept: 32
|
shahid kahn, Plaintiff, v.
tanayuth noochlaor, Defendant. |
Case No.: BC670482
Hearing Date: March 11, 2020
[TENTATIVE] order RE: plaintiff’s motion to set aside dismissal |
Plaintiff Shahid Kahn (“Plaintiff”) filed this action on July 28, 2017, and the Court set a final status conference date of January 11, 2019, and a trial date of January 28, 2019. Plaintiff’s counsel did not appear at the final status conference. Nor did Plaintiff’s counsel appear on the trial date. Therefore, the Court dismissed the case pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 581(b)(3) based upon Plaintiff’s counsel’s failure to appear for trial. Then, on February 22, 2020, Plaintiff filed a motion to set aside the dismissal.
Per Code of Civil Procedure, section 473, subdivision (b), a court may “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.” The party must seek such relief “within a reasonable time, in no case exceeding six months, after the judgment, dismissal, order, or proceeding was taken.” (Ibid.)
Plaintiff filed this motion on February 11, 2020, which is one year and 14 days after the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s complaint. The motion is not timely under the statute, and Plaintiff cites no authority giving the Court discretion to grant the motion. Although Plaintiff cites cases establishing that the Court has wide discretion, none addresses whether the Court may grant this motion after the statutory time limit has expired. Therefore, the motion is denied. Notice is not required since Defendant was never served with the summons and complaint.
DATED: March 11, 2020 ___________________________
Stephen I. Goorvitch
Judge of the Superior Court