On August 09, 2018 a
Order
was filed
involving a dispute between
Jenkins Darryl,
Jenkins Lynne,
and
Bayview Loan Servicing Llc,
The Bank Of New York Mellon,
The Bank Of New York Not In Its,
for civil
in the District Court of Los Angeles County.
Preview
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
Civil Division
South Central District, Compton Courthouse, Department A
TC029244 April 18, 2019
DARRYL JENKINS,ET AL. VS. BAYVIEW LOAN 9:00 AM
SERVICING, LLC ET AL.
Judge: Honorable Maurice A. Leiter CSR: None
Judicial Assistant: A. Easley ERM: None
Courtroom Assistant: K. Johnson Deputy Sheriff: None
APPEARANCES:
For Plaintiff(s): No Appearances
For Defendant(s): No Appearances
NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: Hearing on Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Dismissal (CCP 473)
Matter is called for hearing:
Appearance counsel for plaintiff, Chris Hoo, submits on the Court's tentative ruling.
The Court's tentative ruling is adopted as its final ruling:
I. Background
Plaintiffs Darryl Jenkins and Lynne Jenkins allege violations of the California Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act against defendants Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC, and the Bank of New
York Mellon. The action was dismissed for failure to prosecute at the February 15, 2019, when
the plaintiffs failed to appear for the second time for a case management conference.
Plaintiff now moves to set aside the dismissal. The motion is unopposed.
For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants the motion.
II. Standard
The Court may relieve a party or their legal representative from a proceeding taken against them
resulting from their mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. (C.C.P., § 473(b).)
Mistake of fact is when a person understands facts to be other than they are. (Hodge Sheet Metal
Products v. Palm Springs Riviera Hotel (1961) 189 Cal.App.2d 653.) Surprise denotes a
condition or situation in which a party “is unexpectedly placed… without any default or
negligence of his own… which ordinary prudence could not have guarded against.” (McGuire v.
Drew (1890) 83 Cal. 225, 229.) An error is excusable if a reasonably prudent person under the
Minute Order Page 1 of 2
Document Filed Date
April 18, 2019
Case Filing Date
August 09, 2018
Status
Court-Ordered Dismissal - Before Trial - Lack of Prosecution 02/15/2019
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Civil Division South Central District, Compton Courthouse, Department A TC029244 April 18, 2019 DARRYL JENKINS,ET AL. VS. BAYVIEW LOAN 9:00 AM SERVICING, LLC ET AL. Judge: Honorable Maurice A. Leiter CSR: None Judicial Assistant: A. Easley ERM: None Courtroom Assistant: K. Johnson Deputy Sheriff: None APPEARANCES: For Plaintiff(s): No Appearances For Defendant(s): No Appearances NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: Hearing on Motion to Set Aside/Vacate Dismissal (CCP 473) Matter is called for hearing: Appearance counsel for plaintiff, Chris Hoo, submits on the Court's tentative ruling. The Court's tentative ruling is adopted as its final ruling: I. Background Plaintiffs Darryl Jenkins and Lynne Jenkins allege violations of the California Fair Debt Collection Practices Act against defendants Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC, and the Bank of New York Mellon. The action was dismissed for failure to prosecute at the February 15, 2019, when the plaintiffs failed to appear for the second time for a case management conference. Plaintiff now moves to set aside the dismissal. The motion is unopposed. For the reasons set forth below, the Court grants the motion. II. Standard The Court may relieve a party or their legal representative from a proceeding taken against them resulting from their mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. (C.C.P., § 473(b).) Mistake of fact is when a person understands facts to be other than they are. (Hodge Sheet Metal Products v. Palm Springs Riviera Hotel (1961) 189 Cal.App.2d 653.) Surprise denotes a condition or situation in which a party “is unexpectedly placed… without any default or negligence of his own… which ordinary prudence could not have guarded against.” (McGuire v. Drew (1890) 83 Cal. 225, 229.) An error is excusable if a reasonably prudent person under the Minute Order Page 1 of 2