This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 09/14/2019 at 00:07:29 (UTC).

SOUNARIN KIM VS CLAUDIA ANDREA VELASQUEZ

Case Summary

On 03/12/2018 a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle case was filed by SOUNARIN KIM against CLAUDIA ANDREA VELASQUEZ in the jurisdiction of Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****7734

  • Filing Date:

    03/12/2018

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Dismissed

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

CHRISTOPHER K. LUI

 

Party Details

Petitioner and Plaintiff

KIM SOUNARIN

Defendants and Respondents

VELASQUEZ CLAUDIA ANDREA

DOES 1 - 50

 

Court Documents

Certificate of Mailing for

9/12/2019: Certificate of Mailing for

Minute Order

9/12/2019: Minute Order

Order - Dismissal

9/12/2019: Order - Dismissal

Minute Order

8/26/2019: Minute Order

SUMMONS

3/12/2018: SUMMONS

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1. NEGLIGENCE

3/12/2018: COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1. NEGLIGENCE

 

Docket Entries

  • 09/12/2019
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Jury Trial - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/12/2019
  • DocketCertificate of Mailing for ((Jury Trial) of 09/12/2019); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/12/2019
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Jury Trial)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/12/2019
  • DocketOrder - Dismissal; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/26/2019
  • Docketat 10:00 AM in Department 4A, Christopher K. Lui, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/26/2019
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Final Status Conference)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/12/2018
  • DocketCOMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1. NEGLIGENCE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/12/2018
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Sounarin Kim (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/12/2018
  • DocketSUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC697734    Hearing Date: October 29, 2019    Dept: 4A

Motion to Set Aside Dismissal Pursuant to C.C.P. §473(b)

Having considered the moving papers, the Court rules as follows. No opposition was filed.

BACKGROUND

On March 12, 2018, Plaintiff Sounarin Kim (“Plaintiff”) filed a complaint against Defendants Claudia Andrea Velasquez and DOES 1 through 50, asserting a cause of action for negligence. Plaintiff alleged Defendant Claudia Andrea Velasquez negligently operated her vehicle, resulting in a collision. Plaintiff alleged he sustained injuries and damages as result of Defendant Claudia Andrea Velasquez’s negligence.

On September 12, 2019, the court entered an order dismissing the instant action without prejudice.

PARTY’S REQUEST

Plaintiff moves for an order setting aside dismissal of the instant action.

LEGAL STANDARD

C.C.P. §473(b) provides, in pertinent part, as follows:

…Notwithstanding any other requirements of this section, the court shall, whenever an application for relief is made no more than six months after entry of judgment, is in proper form, and is accompanied by an attorney’s sworn affidavit attesting to his or her mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect, vacate any (1) resulting default entered by the clerk against his or her client, and which will result in entry of a default judgment, or (2) resulting default judgment or dismissal entered against his or her client, unless the court finds that the default or dismissal was not in fact caused by the attorney’s mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect…

Under C.C.P. §473(b)’s attorney affidavit provision set forth above, “a party is relieved from the consequences of his or her attorney's mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect. Relief is available regardless of whether the attorney's neglect is excusable. [Citations] Moreover, if the requirements of this provision are met, then relief is mandatory. [Citations]” (Lorenz v. Commercial Acceptance Insurance Company (1995) 40 Cal.App.4th 981, 989.)

DISCUSSION

Plaintiff Sounarin Kim (“Plaintiff”) moves for an order setting aside dismissal of the instant action, pursuant to C.C.P. §473(b).

On September 12, 2019, the Court dismissed the instant action, pursuant to C.C.P. §581(b)(3), without prejudice.

Relief from dismissal is mandatory under C.C.P. §473(b). Plaintiff filed the instant motion on September 17, 2019, five days after entry of the dismissal. Plaintiff’s motion is accompanied by an attorney affidavit of fault. Plaintiff’s counsel, D. Hess Panah (“Panah”), declared he does not know how the trial in this matter escaped the correct date entry on his calendars, but he has serious doubts as to whether or not the date was ever properly placed in the file and on the calendar. (Declaration of Panah 6:7-9.) Panah declared that, although it is unclear whether the error was a mis-transcription on his part or a mis-communication, there should be no doubt that it was an excusable error. (Declaration of Panah 6:10-11.) Panah declared “no undue prejudice was caused to either party and this matter is ready to proceed to trial.” (Declaration of Panah 6:11-12.)

Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that the dismissal occurred as a result of attorney fault. Plaintiff’s motion to set aside the dismissal entered on September 12, 2019 is GRANTED.

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of this Court’s ruling.