This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 07/10/2019 at 00:36:58 (UTC).

TAK CHEUNG VS M PEMECKY MANAGEMENT CORPORATION

Case Summary

On 01/25/2018 a Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury case was filed by TAK CHEUNG against M PEMECKY MANAGEMENT CORPORATION 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:

    ****1576

  • Filing Date:

    01/25/2018

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Personal Injury - Other Personal Injury

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner

CHEUNG TAK

Respondents and Defendants

M. PEMECKY MANAGEMENT CORPORATION

DOES 1 TO 25

 

Court Documents

SUMMONS

1/25/2018: SUMMONS

COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

1/25/2018: COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

 

Docket Entries

  • 01/25/2018
  • COMPLAINT-PERS. INJURY, PROP DAMAGE, WRONGFUL DEATH (2 PAGES)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/25/2018
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/25/2018
  • Complaint; Filed by Tak Cheung (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC691576    Hearing Date: February 04, 2020    Dept: 32

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 32

tak cheung,

Plaintiff,

v.

M pemecky management corporation,

Defendant.

Case No.: BC691576

Hearing Date: February 4, 2020

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

plaintiff’s motion to set aside dismissal

Plaintiff Tak Cheung (“Plaintiff”) moves to set aside the Court’s order of July 25, 2019, in which the Court dismissed this action for failure to appear at trial. 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.) “[W]hen relief under section 473 is available, there is a strong public policy in favor of granting relief and allowing the requesting party his or her day in court.” (Rappleyea v. Campbell (1994) 8 Cal.4th 975, 981-982, internal quotations omitted.)

Here, Plaintiff has advanced a declaration from counsel, Sepideh Hersel (“Counsel”). Counsel states that she mistakenly failed to calendar the final status conference and trial dates for this case, and therefore Counsel failed to appear at the final status conference or trial. The Court concludes that its order of July 25, 2019 was the result of Counsel’s inadvertence, and grants the motion to set aside the dismissal.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

Plaintiff’s motion to vacate the dismissal is granted. The Court sets the following dates:

Final Status Conference: February 10, 2021, at 10:00 a.m.

Trial: February 24, 2021, at 8:30 a.m.

The discovery and motions cut-off shall be based on the new trial date.

Plaintiff’s counsel represents that her client passed away on May 19, 2019. The Court sets an OSC re: Amendment of Complaint per Code of Civil Procedure section 377.31 for April 10, 2020, at 8:30 a.m. Plaintiff shall provide notice and file proof of such with the Court.

DATED: February 4, 2020 ___________________________

Stephen I. Goorvitch

Judge of the Superior Court