Search

Attributes

This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 06/10/2019 at 08:05:35 (UTC).

VICKI JEAN MACK VS DENISSEE MARIE CACERES ET AL

Case Summary

On 08/01/2017 VICKI JEAN MACK filed a Personal Injury - Motor Vehicle lawsuit against DENISSEE MARIE CACERES. 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.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****0608

  • Filing Date:

    08/01/2017

  • 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

Presiding Judge

STEPHEN I. GOORVITCH

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner

MACK VICKI JEAN

Defendants and Respondents

VILLA-VELAZQUEZ ROSARIA R.

VILLAVELAZQUEZ ROSARIO R.

DOES 1 TO 100

CACERES DENISSEE MARIE

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorneys

COHEN & MARZBAN

CASSANDRA GIORGIO JR.

 

Court Documents

Minute Order

1/15/2019: Minute Order

Unknown

4/25/2019: Unknown

Order - Dismissal

4/25/2019: Order - Dismissal

Minute Order

4/25/2019: Minute Order

Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Dismissal

5/28/2019: Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Dismissal

STATEMENT OF DAMAGES (PERSONAL INJURY OR WRONGFUL DEATH)

3/2/2018: STATEMENT OF DAMAGES (PERSONAL INJURY OR WRONGFUL DEATH)

REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT

3/2/2018: REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT

STATEMENT OF DAMAGES (PERSONAL INJURY OR WRONGFUL DEATH)

3/2/2018: STATEMENT OF DAMAGES (PERSONAL INJURY OR WRONGFUL DEATH)

REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT

3/2/2018: REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT

PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

10/20/2017: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

10/20/2017: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

SUMMONS

8/1/2017: SUMMONS

COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES: 1. MOTOR VEHICLE 2. GENERAL NEGLIGENCE

8/1/2017: COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES: 1. MOTOR VEHICLE 2. GENERAL NEGLIGENCE

1 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 05/28/2019
  • Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Dismissal; Filed by Vicki Jean Mack (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/25/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 5, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Order to Show Cause Re: (dismissal for failure to enter default judgments) - Not Held - Vacated by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/25/2019
  • Minute Order ( (Order to Show Cause Re: dismissal for failure to enter defaul...)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/25/2019
  • Certificate of Mailing for (Minute Order (Order to Show Cause Re: dismissal for failure to enter defaul...) of 04/25/2019); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/25/2019
  • Order - Dismissal; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/01/2019
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 5, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Jury Trial - Not Held - Advanced and Vacated

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/15/2019
  • at 10:00 AM in Department 5, Stephen I. Goorvitch, Presiding; Final Status Conference - Not Held - Vacated by Court

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/15/2019
  • Minute Order ((Final Status Conference)); Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/02/2018
  • STATEMENT OF DAMAGES (PERSONAL INJURY OR WRONGFUL DEATH)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/02/2018
  • REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT

    Read MoreRead Less
3 More Docket Entries
  • 03/02/2018
  • REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/02/2018
  • Default Entered; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/02/2018
  • Default Entered; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/20/2017
  • Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by Vicki Jean Mack (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/20/2017
  • PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/20/2017
  • Proof-Service/Summons; Filed by Vicki Jean Mack (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/20/2017
  • PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/01/2017
  • COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES: 1. MOTOR VEHICLE 2. GENERAL NEGLIGENCE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/01/2017
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/01/2017
  • Complaint; Filed by Vicki Jean Mack (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC670608    Hearing Date: March 29, 2021    Dept: 32

PLEASE NOTE: Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at sscdept32@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org. If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar. If a party submits on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative. If the parties do not submit on the tentative, they should arrange to appear in-person or remotely.

TENTATIVE RULING

DEPARTMENT

32

HEARING DATE

March 29, 2021

CASE NUMBER

BC670608

MOTION

Motion to Set Aside Default Judgments

MOVING PARTIES

Defendants Denissee Marie Caceres and Rosario R. Villavelazquez

OPPOSING PARTY

Plaintiff Vicki Jean Mack

MOTION

Defendants Denissee Marie Caceres (“Caceres”) and Rosario R. Villavelazquez (“Villavelazquez,” collectively, “Defendants”) move to set aside the defaults and default judgments that Plaintiff Vicki Jean Mack (“Plaintiff”) took against them. Plaintiff opposes the motion. The Court previously considered this motion on March 12, 2021, and continued the motion to this date.

ANALYSIS

Defendants contend they did not receive notice of this action because Plaintiff did not properly serve them. Where the plaintiff has not properly served the summons and complaint on a defendant, any resulting default or default judgment is void, and the defendant may move to set it aside at any time. (Peralta v. Heights Medical Center, Inc. (1988) 485 U.S. 80, 84.)

Plaintiff purportedly served Defendants via substituted service. A plaintiff may serve an individual defendant “by leaving a copy of the summons and complaint at the person's dwelling house, usual place of abode, usual place of business, or usual mailing address . . . , in the presence of a competent member of the household . . . , at least 18 years of age, who shall be informed of the contents thereof, and by thereafter mailing a copy of the summons and of the complaint by first-class mail, postage prepaid to the person to be served at the place where a copy of the summons and complaint were left.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 415.20, subd. (b).)

Here, the proofs of service Plaintiff filed reflect that Plaintiff properly served Defendants via substituted service. While Defendants argue that Plaintiff did not thereafter mail the documents to Defendants, the proofs of service reflect that Plaintiff did mail the summons and complaint to Defendants. (See Declaration of Gene Stone & Declaration of Cynthia Allred.)

In reply, Defendants advance their own declarations. In her declaration, Caceres states that, while the proof of service of the summons on her reflects service via John Hancky (“Hancky”) as a co-occupant, Hancky was not a co-occupant and did not reside with Caceres. (See Declaration of Denissee Marie Caceres, ¶¶ 3-6.) In her declaration, Velasquez states that she did not receive notice of this action because the proof of service of the summons reflects service on her husband, who was ill at the time, and she did not receive the summons in the mail. (See Declaration of Rosario Villa Veasquez, ¶¶ 3-6.)

Defendants’ declarations meet their burdens to show that Plaintiff did not validly serve Defendants such that the defaults Plaintiff took against them are void.

Accordingly, the Court grants Defendants’ motion to set aside the defaults entered against Defendants, and orders Defendants to file and serve their answers to the operative complaint within 10 days of the hearing on the motion.

Defendants are to give notice of this order, and file proof of service of such.

Case Number: BC670608    Hearing Date: March 12, 2021    Dept: 32

PLEASE NOTE: Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at sscdept32@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org. If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar. If a party submits on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative. If the parties do not submit on the tentative, they should arrange to appear in-person or remotely.

TENTATIVE RULING

DEPARTMENT

32

HEARING DATE

March 12, 2021

CASE NUMBER

BC670608

MOTION

Motion to Set Aside Default

MOVING PARTIES

Defendants Denissee Marie Caceres and Rosario R. Villavelazquez

OPPOSING PARTY

Plaintiff Vicki Jean Mack

MOTION

Defendants Denissee Marie Caceres and Rosario R. Villavelazquez (“Defendants”) move to set aside the default that Plaintiff Vicki Jean Mack (“Plaintiff”) took against them. Plaintiff opposes the motion.

ANALYSIS

Defendants contend they did not receive notice of this action because Plaintiff did not properly serve them. Where the plaintiff has not properly served the summons and complaint on a defendant, any resulting default or default judgment is void, and the defendant may move to set it aside at any time. (Peralta v. Heights Medical Center, Inc. (1988) 485 U.S. 80, 84.)

Plaintiff purportedly served Defendants via substituted service. A plaintiff may serve an individual defendant “by leaving a copy of the summons and complaint at the person's dwelling house, usual place of abode, usual place of business, or usual mailing address . . . , in the presence of a competent member of the household . . . , at least 18 years of age, who shall be informed of the contents thereof, and by thereafter mailing a copy of the summons and of the complaint by first-class mail, postage prepaid to the person to be served at the place where a copy of the summons and complaint were left.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 415.20, subd. (b).)

Here, the proofs of service Plaintiff filed reflect that Plaintiff properly served Defendants via substituted service. While Defendants argue that Plaintiff did not thereafter mail the documents to Defendants, the proofs of service reflect that Plaintiff did mail the summons and complaint to Defendants. (Declaration of Gene S. Stone, Exhibit C.)

In reply, Defendants advance their own declarations. The Court cannot consider this evidence, as Plaintiff has not had an opportunity to respond. (See In re Marriage of Hoffmeister (1984) 161 Cal.App.3d 1163, 1171.) Accordingly, the Court continues the matter to _____________________. Plaintiff may file a supplemental opposition, and Defendants may file a supplemental reply, per the deadlines set forth in Code of Civil Procedure section 1005, subdivision (b).

Defendants are to give notice of this order, and file a proof of service of such.