This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 10/01/2021 at 03:27:49 (UTC).

ULTIMATE ACTION, LLC, A NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY VS LARA KAMEN

Case Summary

On 03/04/2020 ULTIMATE ACTION, LLC, A NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY filed a Property - Other Property Fraud lawsuit against LARA KAMEN. 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:

    *******0349

  • Filing Date:

    03/04/2020

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Judgment Entered

  • Case Type:

    Property - Other Property Fraud

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

ULTIMATE ACTION LLC A NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

Defendant

KAMEN LARA AKA LARA FUCHS AKA LARA KAMEN FUCHS

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

WHITE JOHNNY

 

Court Documents

Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE OF JUDGMENT DEBTOR'S EXAMINATION

8/6/2021: Notice - NOTICE NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE OF JUDGMENT DEBTOR'S EXAMINATION

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON APPLICATION FOR ORDER FOR APPEARANCE AND EXAMINATI...)

8/6/2021: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON APPLICATION FOR ORDER FOR APPEARANCE AND EXAMINATI...)

Stipulation and Order - STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE JUDGMENT DEBTOR EXAMINATION OF LARA KAMEN

8/6/2021: Stipulation and Order - STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE JUDGMENT DEBTOR EXAMINATION OF LARA KAMEN

Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

8/6/2021: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

Declaration - DECLARATION DECLARATION OF S. DAVID KOZICH IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT

6/23/2021: Declaration - DECLARATION DECLARATION OF S. DAVID KOZICH IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT

Declaration - DECLARATION DECLARATION OF JULIE BUTLER, LEGAL DOCUMENT SPECIALIST FOR ONE LEGAL, LLC

6/23/2021: Declaration - DECLARATION DECLARATION OF JULIE BUTLER, LEGAL DOCUMENT SPECIALIST FOR ONE LEGAL, LLC

Proof of Personal Service

6/23/2021: Proof of Personal Service

Motion to Vacate - MOTION TO VACATE NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF S. DAVID KOZICH; [PROPOSED] ORDER

6/23/2021: Motion to Vacate - MOTION TO VACATE NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION OF S. DAVID KOZICH; [PROPOSED] ORDER

Application and Order for Appearance and Examination

6/10/2021: Application and Order for Appearance and Examination

Notice - NOTICE OF ENTRY OF JUDGMENT

4/14/2021: Notice - NOTICE OF ENTRY OF JUDGMENT

Writ of Execution - WRIT OF EXECUTION (LOS ANGELES)

4/14/2021: Writ of Execution - WRIT OF EXECUTION (LOS ANGELES)

Notice - NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE OF ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL/ENTRY OF JUDGMENT

12/21/2020: Notice - NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE OF ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: DISMISSAL/ENTRY OF JUDGMENT

Request for Dismissal

2/16/2021: Request for Dismissal

Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

2/16/2021: Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

Summary of the Case

2/16/2021: Summary of the Case

Memorandum of Costs (Summary)

2/16/2021: Memorandum of Costs (Summary)

Default Judgment

2/22/2021: Default Judgment

Objection - OBJECTION EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO DECLARATION OF ATTORNEY S. DAVID KOZICH IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT

3/19/2021: Objection - OBJECTION EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO DECLARATION OF ATTORNEY S. DAVID KOZICH IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO SET ASIDE JUDGMENT

24 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 11/23/2021
  • Hearing11/23/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department M at 1725 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401; Hearing on Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Judgment (CCP 473)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/01/2021
  • Hearing10/01/2021 at 09:00 AM in Department M at 1725 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA 90401; Hearing on Application for Order for Appearance and Examination

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/06/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department M; Hearing on Application for Order for Appearance and Examination (As To Lara Kamen) - Held - Continued

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/06/2021
  • DocketNotice (NOTICE OF CONTINUANCE OF JUDGMENT DEBTOR'S EXAMINATION); Filed by Ultimate Action, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/06/2021
  • DocketProof of Service (not Summons and Complaint); Filed by Ultimate Action, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/06/2021
  • DocketMinute Order ( (Hearing on Application for Order for Appearance and Examinati...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/06/2021
  • DocketStipulation and Order (to Continue Judgment Debtor Examination of Lara Kamen); Filed by Lara Kamen (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/23/2021
  • DocketMotion to Vacate (Notice of Motion and Motion to Set Aside Judgment; Memorandum of Points and Authorities; Declaration of S. David Kozich; [Proposed] Order); Filed by Lara Kamen (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/23/2021
  • DocketDeclaration (Declaration of S. David Kozich in Support of the Motion to Set Aside Judgment); Filed by Lara Kamen (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/23/2021
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by Ultimate Action, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
25 More Docket Entries
  • 05/06/2020
  • DocketRequest for Entry of Default / Judgment; Filed by Ultimate Action, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/05/2020
  • DocketNotice (Notice of Continuance of Case Management Conference); Filed by Ultimate Action, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/28/2020
  • DocketNotice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/20/2020
  • DocketNotice (of Case Management Conference); Filed by Ultimate Action, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/20/2020
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS, COMPLAINT AND OTHER CASE INITIATING DOCUMENTS ON DEFENDANT LARA KAMEN; Filed by Ultimate Action, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/05/2020
  • DocketNotice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/04/2020
  • DocketSummons (on Complaint); Filed by Ultimate Action, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/04/2020
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/04/2020
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by Ultimate Action, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/04/2020
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by Ultimate Action, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 20SMCV00349    Hearing Date: April 2, 2021    Dept: M

CASE NAME: Ultimate Action, LLC, et al. v. Lara Kamen, et al.

CASE NO.: 20SMCV00349

MOTION: Defendant’s Motion to Set Aside Default

DATE: 04/02/2021

BACKGROUND

On March 4, 2020, Plaintiff Ultimate Action, LLC filed a complaint against Defendant Lara Kamen seeking to void certain transfers. On March 20, 2020, Plaintiff filed a proof of service of the complaint with the Court indicating that Defendant had been personally served on March 13, 2020. On May 6, 2020, Plaintiff filed a request for entry of default, which was processed by the Clerk on the same date. On October 29, 2020, Defendant filed a motion to set aside the default and default judgment. Defendant moves to set aside default under Code of Civil Procedure section 473(b), invoking “mistake, surprise, and inadvertence of her counsel.”

Legal Standard

For mandatory relief under Code of Civil Procedure section 473(b), “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.”

(Code Civ. Proc., § 473(b).)

“It is the policy of the law to favor, wherever possible, a hearing on the merits, and appellate courts are much more disposed to affirm an order where the result is to compel a trial upon the merits than they are when the judgment by default is allowed to stand and it appears that a substantial defense could be made. Stated another way, the policy of the law is to have every litigated case tried upon its merits, and it looks with disfavor upon a party, who, regardless of the merits of the case, attempts to take advantage of the mistake, surprise, inadvertence, or neglect of his adversary.” (Weitz v. Yankosky (1966) 63 Cal.2d 849, 854–855.)

EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS

Plaintiff filed objections to the declaration of S. David Kozich.

Objections 1-5 are sustained.

Analysis

Defendant moves to set aside default under Code of Civil Procedure section 473(b), invoking “mistake, surprise, and inadvertence of her counsel.” The Court finds that this motion is timely. Defendant seeks to set aside a “judgment” entered against her on May 6, 2020. The Clerk entered default, not default judgment. Defendant argues that setting aside the judgment is required under the code if Defendant provides an attorney affidavit of fault, which Defendant contends that she has done. Defendant also argues that she is entitled to equitable relief, but only makes this argument in passing. Defendant did not provide specific reasons as to why the Court should set aside the default based on the Court’s equitable powers and treats this issue as being waived.

Plaintiff argues that Defendant has not presented the Court with admissible evidence of attorney fault. Plaintiff also provides evidence that his office never corresponded with Mr. David Kozich and that all of his prior communications were with Ryan Streckfus. (See White Decl. ¶ 11.) Plaintiff argues that Defendant has also not presented a basis for which to grant equitable relief under the statute.

Here, Defendant did not provide her own declaration. In addition, Defendant has not provided the Court with admissible evidence. Even if the Court had not sustained the objections to the declaration provided by Defendant’s former counsel, the Court would find that Defendant has not provided an attorney affidavit of fault because the attorney blames a third party for not filing the Answer on time. The motion is DENIED.

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where ULTIMATE ACTION LLC A NEVADA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY DERIVATIVELY ON BEHALF OF 357 SOUTH BROADWAY LLC A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY is a litigant