Preview
1 Vlad Cirmati
2
4546 Marble Way
Carmichael, CA 95608
FILED/ENDORSED
Phone
3
Email
JUN 1 7 2022
4
By:. S. Cade
Plaintiff in pro per
5
6
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
7 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO
8
9 DOMUS CONSTRUCTION & DESIGN, INC., Case No.: 34-2021-00301500
10 Plaintiff
11 vs. DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE
AND VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT
12
VLAD A. CIRMATI, DATE:
13
Defendant. DEPT: S 7 TIME:^
14
NOTICE OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE DEFAULT
15
JUDGMENT
16
July J? lcV\/ ^,0^
17
You are notified that on July 17 ?n:?l? -(Bate), at;d*0O (am), or as soon thereafter as the Defendant
18
can he heard, in the Civil Department Courthouse of the Superior Court of California for the
19
County of Sacramento, located at 720 9"' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814, Vlad A. Cirmati wil
20
21 bring on for hearing his Motion to Vacate Default judgment for the reasons stated in the attached
22 Motion.
23
Dated this 17* day of June, 2022.
24
25 Uy Submitted
26
27
*d A. Cirmati
Defendant in pro pei
28
DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT - 1
1 Vlad Cirmati
4546 Marble Way
2
Carmichael, CA 95608
3 Phone
Email
4
Plaintiff in pro per
5
6
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
7 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO
8
9 DOMUS CONSTRUCTION & DESIGN, INC., Case No.: 34-2021-00301500
D/B/A STATEWIDE RESTORATION, INC..
10
Plaintiff
11 DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE
AND VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT
vs.
12
13 VLAD A. CIRMATI,
14 Defendant.
15
16 NOW COMES Vlad A. Cirmati, Defendant, and files this Motion to Set Aside and Vacate
17 Default Judgment, and for cause would show this Honorable Court as follows:
18
19
RELEVANT PROCEDURAL HISTORY
20
1. Plaintiff filed a Complaint against Defendant on May 28, 2021. It made some
21
22 allegations and brought claims of foreclosure of mechanic's lien, breach of prompt payment
23 statutes, and breach of confract.
24
2. Plaintiff filed a Request for Entry of Default against Plaintiff on December 1, 2021
25
3. This Court entered default judgment against Defendant as requested by Plaintiff or
26
27
February 8, 2022. A copy was filed and endorsed on that same day.
28 4. Defendant was served with the copy of the default judgment on [Insert Date|.
DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT - 2
1 5. Defendant now moves for an Order to Set Aside and Vacate Default Judgment
2
entered against him on February 8, 2022. For the reasons stated in this Memorandum and in the
3
attached Declaration, this Court should set aside the default and any judgment thereon taken
4
against Defendant.
5
6
7 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION
8
TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE SUMMARY IUDGMENT
9
6. Code of Civil Procedure Section 473(b) provides in pertinent part as follows: "The
10
11
court may, upon any terms as may be just, relieve a party of his or her legal representative from a
12 judgment, dismissal, order ot other proceeding taken against him or her through his or her mistake
13 inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect. Application for this relief shall be accompanied by a
14
copy of the answer or other pleading proposed to be filed therein, ... and shall be made in
15
reasonable time, in no case exceeding six months, after the judgment, order or proceeding was
16
taken." A trial court has wide jurisdiction to grant relief under Code of Civil Procedure Section
17
18 473. Berman v. Klassman (1971) 17 Cal. App. 3d 900, 909, 95 Cal. Rptr. 417.
19 7. This Motion is timely as it has been filed less than six months after the default
20
judgment was entered against Defendant.
21
8. The policy of the law is that confroversies should be heard and disposed of on theii
22
23 merits. Fasuyi v. Permatex, Inc. (2008) 167 Cal. App. 4"^ 681, 694-703, 84 Cal. Rpfr. 3d 351.
24 9. Defendant was served with the Request for Default Judgment, granted, filed and
25
endorsed by this Court on [Insert Date of Service]. Initially, the foregoing document was served
26
at the wrong address. It was served at 4549 Marble Way, Carmichael, CA 95608 whereas
27
Defendant resides at 4546 Marble Way, Carmichael, CA 95608. That leads Defendant to believe
28
DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT - 3
1 that there might be other pleading(s) that were served at the wrong address.
2
10, Defendant was never given the opportunity to contest the Request for Enfry ol
3
Default. Had Defendant been given an opportunity to contest the Request for Entry of Default, he
4
would have filed a Motion to Show Cause why default judgment should not be entered against
5
6 him. The default judgment entered against him is prejudicial as it was entered without presenting
7 Defendant with an opportunity to contest it.
8
11, In the present case. Defendant did not file a timely response to the complaint foi
9
the reasons stated in the attached declaration. The policy of the law is to have every case tried or
10
11
its merits and that policy views with disfavor a party who, regardless of the merits, attempts to
12 take advantage of the mistake, inadvertence, or neglect of his adversary. This policy is so strong
13 that "any doubts in applying section 473 must be resolved in favor of the party seeking relief from
14
default." Elston v. CPtyofTurlock, (1985) 38 Cal. App. 3d 747, 753.
15
12, Plaintiffs Complaint lacks merit since the supposed facts consist of inaccurate
16
17
allegations. The inaccurate allegations go on to support PlaintifTs frivolous claims of foreclosure
18 of mechanic's lien, breach of prompt payment statutes and breach of contract against Defendants
19 There exist issues that should go to trial.
20
13, "And the elements of a cause of action for breach of contract are (1) the existence
21
of the contract, (2) plaintiffs performance or excuse for nonperformance, (3) defendant's breach
22
23 and (4) the resulting damage to the plaintiff." Oasis West Realty, LLC v. Goldman, 250 P.3d 11 If
24 (2011), citing Reicfiert v. General Ins. Co. (1968) 68 Cal. 2d 822. 830 [69 Cal. Rpfr. 321. 442 P.2c
25 377).
26
14, In its Complaint. Plaintiff falsely states that it performed all of its obligations undei
27
the contract, except for those excused by Defendant Owner. Plaintiff attempts to mislead the courl
28
DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT - 4
1 by concealing the reason Defendant asked it to stop working on the property. Defendant avers thai
2
Plaintiff did not perform all its obligations in the contract.
3
15. Defendant hired Plaintiff to conduct repairs to his house after a fire incident. A;
4
5
agents and/or employees of Plaintiff were working, Defendant noticed that they were not following
6 the scope of work agreed upon and the directions from the insurance comppany. There were cleai
7 directions as to how the renovation should be done in the scope of work from the insurance
8
company which were agreed upon and signed by the plaintiff and the deffendant. After the
9
demolition and removal of debris, conducted by JW Environmental, Statewide Restoration insteac
10
11
of replacing the burnt wood beams in the garage, they painted them with a white solution thai
12 would conceal the smell of burned wood as they would in the rest of the home where there was
13 smoke damage to the framing. While that is a great method practiced in the industry it is nott to be
14
applied to areas where the fire has damaged the stmcture but only on smoke damaged portions
15
The scope of work clearly dictated that the garage framing was to be re-built from ground up as
16
17 the charred wood caused by the fire clearly weakened the structure and would not be safe to builc
18 and place the rooffrusseson. Defendant asked them why they were doing that and they said was
19 it to mask the smell from coming out. Defendant knew that as a result of their actions, the strength
20
of the burnt wooden stmcture could not have been preserved. Defendant had to ask Plaintiff to
21
stop working on his property as the actions of its agents and/or employees were performing with
22
23 unacceptable acts of neglect towards the project and the safety during and thereafter. The defendani
24 Reached out to the insurance company who was and found out that in the scope of work the entire
25
framing of the garage was to be removed entirely and rebuilt from ground up. had defendant nol
26
mentioned and inquired the stmcture in the garage would not have been replaced but insteac
27
painted With the concealing white solution. The wooden beams that were charred could not have
28
DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT - 5
1 held thefrussesof the roof and the safety of living or even being around the premises was at risk
2
not only then but any moment after the constmction would have been done. Through the causes ol
3
action of foreclosure of mechanic's lien and breach of prompt payment statutes. Plaintiff seeks to
4
recover payment for work poorly done on Defendant's property. For context. Plaintiffs work was
5
6 so poor that Defendant had to hire another company to do the work properly.
7 16. Plaintiff is barred from recovering the above claims by the doctrine of unclean
8
hands. The doctrine of unclean hands arises from the maxim, "He who comes into equity musi
9
come with clean hands." Blain v. Doctor's Co. (1990) 222 Cal. App. 3d 1048. 1059, 272 Cal. Rpfr
10
11
250.
12 17. The doctrine demands that a plaintiff act fairly in the matter for which he seeks c
13 remedy. He must come to court with clean hands, and keep them clean, or he will be denied relief
14
regardless of the merits of his claim. Precision Co. v. Automotive Co., (1945) 324 U.S. 806, 814
15
815, 65 S. Ct. 993, 89 L. Ed. 1381; Hall v. Wright, (9"' Cfr. 1957) 240 F.2d 787, 794-795. Plaintifi
16
17 did not act fairly in regard to repairing the subject matter. Poor workmanship then asking foi
18 payment for work poorly done does not amount to acting fairly.
19 18. Whether the doctrine of unclean hands applies is a matter of fact. CrossTall
20
Productions Inc. v. Jacobson, (1998) 65 Cal. Appl. 4"^ 631. 76 Cal. Rpfr. 2d 615.
21
19. The unclean hands doctrine protects judicial integrity and promotes justice. Il
22
23 protects judicial integrity because allowing a plaintiff with unclean hands to recover in an action
24 creates doubts as to the justice provided by the judicial system. Thus, precluding recovery to the
25
unclean plaintiff protects the courts, rather than the opposing party's interests. Fireboard Paper
26
Products Corp. v. East Bay Union of Machinists (1964) 227 Cal. App. 2d 675, 728. 39 Cal. Rpfr
27
64; Gaudiosi v. Mellon (3"^ Cir. 1959) 269 F.2d 873, 881. The enfry of default judgment against
28
DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT - 6
1 Defendants constitutes allowing Plaintiff to recover in an action with unclean hands. This Motior
2
presents an opportunity for this Court to protect judicial integrity and promote justice by nol
3
allowing Plaintiff to recover damages for work poorly done.
4
5
20. The doctrine promotes justice by making a plaintiff answer for his own misconduct
6 in the action. It prevents "a wrongdoer from enjoying the fruits of his transgression." Keystone Co
7 V. Excavator Co. (1933) 290 U.S. 240, 245. 54 S. Ct. 146, 78 L. Ed 293, This lawsuit is an attempt
8
by Plaintiff to enjoy the fruits of its own transgression, poor workmanship that if not addressee
9
would have
10
11
21. The doctrine of unclean hands does not deny relief to a plaintiff guilty of any pasi
12 misconduct; only misconduct directly related to the matter in which he seeks relief triggers the
13 defense. (11 Witkin, Summary of Cal. Law (9'*' ed. 1990) Equity, § 10, p. 686). Plaintiffs
14
misconduct constituting unclean hands is in the poor workmanship of its agents and/or employees
15
Defendant hired Plaintiff to conduct repairs on his property but the work done by its its agents
16
and/or employees was detrimental to the property and not following the scope of work drawn by
17
18 the insurance company signed by both the plaintiff and the defendant.
19 PRAYER FOR RELIEF
20
REASONS WHEREFORE. PREMISES CONSIDERED. Defendant respectfully requests
21
this Honorable Court to set aside and vacate the default judgment entered, filed and endorsed or
22
23 February 8. 2022, and any judgment thereon taken against Defendant.
24
Dated this 17"^ day of June, 2022.
25
26 espectf&lly Submitted
27
Â¥
28
Vlad A. Cirmati
Defendant in pro per
DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT - 7
1 VERIFICATION
2
Under penalties as provided by law, the undersigned certifies that the statements set forth in the
3
Defendant's Motion to Set Aside and Vacate Default Judgment arefrueand correct, except as to
4
matters therein stated to be on information and belief and as to such matters the undersigned
5
6 certifies as aforesaid that he verily believes the same to be true.
7
8
Dated this 17th"^ day of June, 2022.
9
espectfully Submitted
10
11
Vlad A. Cirmati
12 Defendant in pro per
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT - 8
Preview
1 Vlad Cirmati 2 4546 Marble Way Carmichael, CA 95608 FILED/ENDORSED Phone 3 Email JUN 1 7 2022 4 By:. S. Cade Plaintiff in pro per 5 6 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 7 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO 8 9 DOMUS CONSTRUCTION & DESIGN, INC., Case No.: 34-2021-00301500 10 Plaintiff 11 vs. DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT 12 VLAD A. CIRMATI, DATE: 13 Defendant. DEPT: S 7 TIME:^ 14 NOTICE OF DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE DEFAULT 15 JUDGMENT 16 July J? lcV\/ ^,0^ 17 You are notified that on July 17 ?n:?l? -(Bate), at;d*0O (am), or as soon thereafter as the Defendant 18 can he heard, in the Civil Department Courthouse of the Superior Court of California for the 19 County of Sacramento, located at 720 9"' Street, Sacramento, CA 95814, Vlad A. Cirmati wil 20 21 bring on for hearing his Motion to Vacate Default judgment for the reasons stated in the attached 22 Motion. 23 Dated this 17* day of June, 2022. 24 25 Uy Submitted 26 27 *d A. Cirmati Defendant in pro pei 28 DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT - 1 1 Vlad Cirmati 4546 Marble Way 2 Carmichael, CA 95608 3 Phone Email 4 Plaintiff in pro per 5 6 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 7 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO 8 9 DOMUS CONSTRUCTION & DESIGN, INC., Case No.: 34-2021-00301500 D/B/A STATEWIDE RESTORATION, INC.. 10 Plaintiff 11 DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT vs. 12 13 VLAD A. CIRMATI, 14 Defendant. 15 16 NOW COMES Vlad A. Cirmati, Defendant, and files this Motion to Set Aside and Vacate 17 Default Judgment, and for cause would show this Honorable Court as follows: 18 19 RELEVANT PROCEDURAL HISTORY 20 1. Plaintiff filed a Complaint against Defendant on May 28, 2021. It made some 21 22 allegations and brought claims of foreclosure of mechanic's lien, breach of prompt payment 23 statutes, and breach of confract. 24 2. Plaintiff filed a Request for Entry of Default against Plaintiff on December 1, 2021 25 3. This Court entered default judgment against Defendant as requested by Plaintiff or 26 27 February 8, 2022. A copy was filed and endorsed on that same day. 28 4. Defendant was served with the copy of the default judgment on [Insert Date|. DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT - 2 1 5. Defendant now moves for an Order to Set Aside and Vacate Default Judgment 2 entered against him on February 8, 2022. For the reasons stated in this Memorandum and in the 3 attached Declaration, this Court should set aside the default and any judgment thereon taken 4 against Defendant. 5 6 7 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF MOTION 8 TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE SUMMARY IUDGMENT 9 6. Code of Civil Procedure Section 473(b) provides in pertinent part as follows: "The 10 11 court may, upon any terms as may be just, relieve a party of his or her legal representative from a 12 judgment, dismissal, order ot other proceeding taken against him or her through his or her mistake 13 inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect. Application for this relief shall be accompanied by a 14 copy of the answer or other pleading proposed to be filed therein, ... and shall be made in 15 reasonable time, in no case exceeding six months, after the judgment, order or proceeding was 16 taken." A trial court has wide jurisdiction to grant relief under Code of Civil Procedure Section 17 18 473. Berman v. Klassman (1971) 17 Cal. App. 3d 900, 909, 95 Cal. Rptr. 417. 19 7. This Motion is timely as it has been filed less than six months after the default 20 judgment was entered against Defendant. 21 8. The policy of the law is that confroversies should be heard and disposed of on theii 22 23 merits. Fasuyi v. Permatex, Inc. (2008) 167 Cal. App. 4"^ 681, 694-703, 84 Cal. Rpfr. 3d 351. 24 9. Defendant was served with the Request for Default Judgment, granted, filed and 25 endorsed by this Court on [Insert Date of Service]. Initially, the foregoing document was served 26 at the wrong address. It was served at 4549 Marble Way, Carmichael, CA 95608 whereas 27 Defendant resides at 4546 Marble Way, Carmichael, CA 95608. That leads Defendant to believe 28 DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT - 3 1 that there might be other pleading(s) that were served at the wrong address. 2 10, Defendant was never given the opportunity to contest the Request for Enfry ol 3 Default. Had Defendant been given an opportunity to contest the Request for Entry of Default, he 4 would have filed a Motion to Show Cause why default judgment should not be entered against 5 6 him. The default judgment entered against him is prejudicial as it was entered without presenting 7 Defendant with an opportunity to contest it. 8 11, In the present case. Defendant did not file a timely response to the complaint foi 9 the reasons stated in the attached declaration. The policy of the law is to have every case tried or 10 11 its merits and that policy views with disfavor a party who, regardless of the merits, attempts to 12 take advantage of the mistake, inadvertence, or neglect of his adversary. This policy is so strong 13 that "any doubts in applying section 473 must be resolved in favor of the party seeking relief from 14 default." Elston v. CPtyofTurlock, (1985) 38 Cal. App. 3d 747, 753. 15 12, Plaintiffs Complaint lacks merit since the supposed facts consist of inaccurate 16 17 allegations. The inaccurate allegations go on to support PlaintifTs frivolous claims of foreclosure 18 of mechanic's lien, breach of prompt payment statutes and breach of contract against Defendants 19 There exist issues that should go to trial. 20 13, "And the elements of a cause of action for breach of contract are (1) the existence 21 of the contract, (2) plaintiffs performance or excuse for nonperformance, (3) defendant's breach 22 23 and (4) the resulting damage to the plaintiff." Oasis West Realty, LLC v. Goldman, 250 P.3d 11 If 24 (2011), citing Reicfiert v. General Ins. Co. (1968) 68 Cal. 2d 822. 830 [69 Cal. Rpfr. 321. 442 P.2c 25 377). 26 14, In its Complaint. Plaintiff falsely states that it performed all of its obligations undei 27 the contract, except for those excused by Defendant Owner. Plaintiff attempts to mislead the courl 28 DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT - 4 1 by concealing the reason Defendant asked it to stop working on the property. Defendant avers thai 2 Plaintiff did not perform all its obligations in the contract. 3 15. Defendant hired Plaintiff to conduct repairs to his house after a fire incident. A; 4 5 agents and/or employees of Plaintiff were working, Defendant noticed that they were not following 6 the scope of work agreed upon and the directions from the insurance comppany. There were cleai 7 directions as to how the renovation should be done in the scope of work from the insurance 8 company which were agreed upon and signed by the plaintiff and the deffendant. After the 9 demolition and removal of debris, conducted by JW Environmental, Statewide Restoration insteac 10 11 of replacing the burnt wood beams in the garage, they painted them with a white solution thai 12 would conceal the smell of burned wood as they would in the rest of the home where there was 13 smoke damage to the framing. While that is a great method practiced in the industry it is nott to be 14 applied to areas where the fire has damaged the stmcture but only on smoke damaged portions 15 The scope of work clearly dictated that the garage framing was to be re-built from ground up as 16 17 the charred wood caused by the fire clearly weakened the structure and would not be safe to builc 18 and place the rooffrusseson. Defendant asked them why they were doing that and they said was 19 it to mask the smell from coming out. Defendant knew that as a result of their actions, the strength 20 of the burnt wooden stmcture could not have been preserved. Defendant had to ask Plaintiff to 21 stop working on his property as the actions of its agents and/or employees were performing with 22 23 unacceptable acts of neglect towards the project and the safety during and thereafter. The defendani 24 Reached out to the insurance company who was and found out that in the scope of work the entire 25 framing of the garage was to be removed entirely and rebuilt from ground up. had defendant nol 26 mentioned and inquired the stmcture in the garage would not have been replaced but insteac 27 painted With the concealing white solution. The wooden beams that were charred could not have 28 DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT - 5 1 held thefrussesof the roof and the safety of living or even being around the premises was at risk 2 not only then but any moment after the constmction would have been done. Through the causes ol 3 action of foreclosure of mechanic's lien and breach of prompt payment statutes. Plaintiff seeks to 4 recover payment for work poorly done on Defendant's property. For context. Plaintiffs work was 5 6 so poor that Defendant had to hire another company to do the work properly. 7 16. Plaintiff is barred from recovering the above claims by the doctrine of unclean 8 hands. The doctrine of unclean hands arises from the maxim, "He who comes into equity musi 9 come with clean hands." Blain v. Doctor's Co. (1990) 222 Cal. App. 3d 1048. 1059, 272 Cal. Rpfr 10 11 250. 12 17. The doctrine demands that a plaintiff act fairly in the matter for which he seeks c 13 remedy. He must come to court with clean hands, and keep them clean, or he will be denied relief 14 regardless of the merits of his claim. Precision Co. v. Automotive Co., (1945) 324 U.S. 806, 814 15 815, 65 S. Ct. 993, 89 L. Ed. 1381; Hall v. Wright, (9"' Cfr. 1957) 240 F.2d 787, 794-795. Plaintifi 16 17 did not act fairly in regard to repairing the subject matter. Poor workmanship then asking foi 18 payment for work poorly done does not amount to acting fairly. 19 18. Whether the doctrine of unclean hands applies is a matter of fact. CrossTall 20 Productions Inc. v. Jacobson, (1998) 65 Cal. Appl. 4"^ 631. 76 Cal. Rpfr. 2d 615. 21 19. The unclean hands doctrine protects judicial integrity and promotes justice. Il 22 23 protects judicial integrity because allowing a plaintiff with unclean hands to recover in an action 24 creates doubts as to the justice provided by the judicial system. Thus, precluding recovery to the 25 unclean plaintiff protects the courts, rather than the opposing party's interests. Fireboard Paper 26 Products Corp. v. East Bay Union of Machinists (1964) 227 Cal. App. 2d 675, 728. 39 Cal. Rpfr 27 64; Gaudiosi v. Mellon (3"^ Cir. 1959) 269 F.2d 873, 881. The enfry of default judgment against 28 DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT - 6 1 Defendants constitutes allowing Plaintiff to recover in an action with unclean hands. This Motior 2 presents an opportunity for this Court to protect judicial integrity and promote justice by nol 3 allowing Plaintiff to recover damages for work poorly done. 4 5 20. The doctrine promotes justice by making a plaintiff answer for his own misconduct 6 in the action. It prevents "a wrongdoer from enjoying the fruits of his transgression." Keystone Co 7 V. Excavator Co. (1933) 290 U.S. 240, 245. 54 S. Ct. 146, 78 L. Ed 293, This lawsuit is an attempt 8 by Plaintiff to enjoy the fruits of its own transgression, poor workmanship that if not addressee 9 would have 10 11 21. The doctrine of unclean hands does not deny relief to a plaintiff guilty of any pasi 12 misconduct; only misconduct directly related to the matter in which he seeks relief triggers the 13 defense. (11 Witkin, Summary of Cal. Law (9'*' ed. 1990) Equity, § 10, p. 686). Plaintiffs 14 misconduct constituting unclean hands is in the poor workmanship of its agents and/or employees 15 Defendant hired Plaintiff to conduct repairs on his property but the work done by its its agents 16 and/or employees was detrimental to the property and not following the scope of work drawn by 17 18 the insurance company signed by both the plaintiff and the defendant. 19 PRAYER FOR RELIEF 20 REASONS WHEREFORE. PREMISES CONSIDERED. Defendant respectfully requests 21 this Honorable Court to set aside and vacate the default judgment entered, filed and endorsed or 22 23 February 8. 2022, and any judgment thereon taken against Defendant. 24 Dated this 17"^ day of June, 2022. 25 26 espectf&lly Submitted 27 ¥ 28 Vlad A. Cirmati Defendant in pro per DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT - 7 1 VERIFICATION 2 Under penalties as provided by law, the undersigned certifies that the statements set forth in the 3 Defendant's Motion to Set Aside and Vacate Default Judgment arefrueand correct, except as to 4 matters therein stated to be on information and belief and as to such matters the undersigned 5 6 certifies as aforesaid that he verily believes the same to be true. 7 8 Dated this 17th"^ day of June, 2022. 9 espectfully Submitted 10 11 Vlad A. Cirmati 12 Defendant in pro per 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE AND VACATE DEFAULT JUDGMENT - 8