Motion to Set-Aside
May 15, 2026 Dept. 9 Tentative Rulings
3. 25CV1880 WILSON v. TESLA Motion to Set-Aside
The Motion does not comply with Local Rules 7.10.05 Repeated failures will be grounds for sanctions pursuant to Local Rules 7.12.13.
Tesla brings this Motion to Set Aside Default under the provisions of CCP § 473(b) on the grounds that default was taken as a result of Tesla’s mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect. Tesla argues that based on improper service attempts prior to a valid service of the Complaint and Summons, counsel inadvertently failed to calendar the deadline for responsive pleading.
[B]ecause the law strongly favors trial and disposition on the merits, any doubts in applying section 473 must be resolved in favor of the party seeking relief from default (Waite v. Southern Pacific Co. (1923) 192 Cal. 467, 470-471 [221 P. 204]; Carli v. Superior Court (1984) 152 Cal.App.3d 1095, 1099 [199 Cal.Rptr. 583] [in the context of deemed admissions § 473 should be applied liberally “so cases can be tried on the merits”]; Flores v. Board of Supervisors, supra, 13 Cal.App.3d at p. 483.) . . . A motion seeking such relief lies within the sound discretion of the trial court, and the trial court's decision will not be overturned absent an abuse of discretion. (Weitz v. Yankosky (1966) 63 Cal.2d 849, 854 [48 Cal.Rptr. 620, 409 P.2d 700]; Martin v. Cook (1977) 68 Cal.App.3d 799, 807 [137 Cal.Rptr. 434].) Elston v. City of Turlock, 38 Cal. 3d 227, 233, 695 P.2d 713 (1985).
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
As required by the caselaw, the Court is not convinced that Defendant has provided a “satisfactory excuse” for not timely filing their responsive pleading; However, the Court recognizes the liberal policy in resolving a case on its merits. Therefore, the Motion is granted and as provided by California Code of Civil Procedure §473(c)(1), the Court orders that counsel for Tesla pay $1,000 to the State Bar Client Security Fund.
TENTATIVE RULING #3: MOTION TO SET-ASIDE DEFAULT IS GRANTED AND COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT IS ORDERED TO PAY $1,000 TO THE STATE BAR CLIENT SECURITY FUND WITHIN 10 DAYS OF THIS ORDER. NO HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE HELD UNLESS A REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT IS TRANSMITTED ELECTRONICALLY THROUGH THE COURT’S WEBSITE OR BY TELEPHONE TO THE COURT AT (530) 621-6551 BY 4:00 P.M. ON THE DAY THE TENTATIVE RULING IS ISSUED. CAL. RULE CT. 3.1308; LOCAL RULE 8.05.07; SEE ALSO LEWIS V. SUPERIOR COURT, 19 CAL.4TH 1232, 1247 (1999).
NOTICE TO ALL PARTIES OF A REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT AND THE GROUNDS UPON WHICH ARGUMENT IS BEING REQUESTED MUST BE MADE BY TELEPHONE OR IN PERSON BY 4:00 P.M. ON THE DAY THE TENTATIVE RULING IS ISSUED. CAL. RULE CT. 3.1308; EL DORADO
May 15, 2026 Dept. 9 Tentative Rulings
COUNTY LOCAL RULE 8.05.07. PROOF OF SERVICE OF SAID NOTICE MUST BE FILED PRIOR TO OR AT THE HEARING.
LONG CAUSE HEARINGS MUST BE REQUESTED BY 4:00 P.M. ON THE DAY THE TENTATIVE RULING IS ISSUED AND THE PARTIES ARE TO PROVIDE THE COURT WITH THREE MUTUALLY AGREEABLE DATES ON FRIDAY AFTERNOONS AT 2:30 P.M. LONG CAUSE ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTS WILL BE SET FOR HEARING ON ONE OF THE THREE MUTUALLY AGREEABLE DATES ON FRIDAY AFTERNOONS AT 2:30 P.M. THE COURT WILL ADVISE THE PARTIES OF THE LONG CAUSE HEARING DATE AND TIME BY 5:00 P.M. ON THE DAY THE TENTATIVE RULING IS ISSUED. PARTIES MAY PERSONALLY APPEAR AT THE HEARING.
5