DecisionDepot
California Legal Research
All cases
30-2024-01373426·orange·Civil·Contract
GRANTED

Alliance Funding Group v. Yang Noodle House, Inc., et al.

Motion to vacate dismissal

Hearing date
May 15, 2026
Department
C21
Prevailing
Plaintiff
Next hearing
Oct 9, 2026

Motion type

Other

Parties

PlaintiffAlliance Funding Group
DefendantYang Noodle House, Inc.

Attorneys

Adamsfor Plaintiff

Ruling

# Case Name Tentative 50 Alliance Funding Plaintiff Alliance Funding Group’s unopposed motion to vacate Group v. Yang dismissal is granted. Noodle House, Inc., et al. Relevant Background

On January 16, 2025, Plaintiff filed a notice of settlement of entire case. (ROA 45.) The court set a hearing on an order to show cause re: dismissal on a settled case, which was continued several times. (See 1/17/2025 Minute Order; 2/10/2025 Minute Order; 9/19/2025 Minute Order [ROA 48, 51, 56].)

At the February 6, 2026 hearing, the court noted that Plaintiff did not file a request for dismissal prior to the hearing, did not appear at the hearing, and did not show good cause as to why the action should not be dismissed. Accordingly, the court dismissed the case with prejudice. (2/6/2026 Minute Order; Order After Hearing [ROA 58 & 59].)

Merits

Plaintiff seeks to vacate the February 6, 2026 dismissal of this action. Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (b) provides in relevant part:

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 the attorney's mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect, vacate any (1) resulting default entered by the clerk against the attorney's client, and which will result in entry of a default judgment, or (2) resulting default judgment or dismissal entered against the attorney's client, unless the court finds that the default or dismissal was not in fact caused by the attorney's mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect.

Plaintiff has submitted its counsel’s declaration as to her mistake in failing to appear at the hearing as required by the court. (Adams Decl., at ¶¶ 3-4.) The relief requested is mandatory. No opposition was timely filed. The motion for relief is therefore granted. The February 6, 2026 dismissal is hereby vacated.

The court sets a hearing on an order to show cause re: dismissal on a settled case for October 9, 2026, at 9 am in this Department.

Plaintiff shall give notice of the ruling and of the hearing on the OSC re: dismissal on a settled case.

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…

Extracted by Gemini Flash from the ruling text. Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Powered by Gemini Flash Lite. Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Source

Share