CREDIT CORP SOLUTIONS, INC. VS. COOPER
Order to Show Cause Re: Sanctions
Motion type
Monetary amounts referenced
Parties
Attorneys
Ruling
granted based on an attorney’s affidavit of fault, direct the attorney to pay reasonable compensatory legal fees and costs to opposing counsel or parties. However, this section shall not lengthen the time within which an action shall be brought to trial pursuant to Section 583.310. CCP § 473(b).
However, where the court grants relief from a default or default judgment pursuant to this section based upon the affidavit of the defaulting party’s attorney attesting to the attorney’s mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect, the relief shall not be made conditional upon the attorney’s payment of compensatory legal fees or costs or monetary penalties imposed by the court or upon compliance with other sanctions ordered by the court. CCP § 473(c)(2).
Defendant moved only under the mandatory provision of CCP § 473(b) and specifically asserted that the delay “was not the fault of Defendant herself, but rather came about as the result of surprise or excusable neglect of counsel in being unable to calendar the correct deadline response date.” Fuson Decl. ¶ 7. Entry of default was discovered by Defendant on April 13, 2026, and the motion was filed just three days later. Because an attorney’s sworn affidavit attesting to the attorney’s surprise or neglect was filed, relief is mandatory. Even if relief were not mandatory, the Court finds that Defendant has established excusable neglect, has acted diligently since discovering that default was entered, and that setting aside the default is in the interest of justice. The default entered April 8, 2026, is ordered set aside.
Plaintiff requested attorney fees and provided an invoice totaling $5,260 in legal fees. It is unclear from the invoice what services are being billed and who performed the work. The Court notes that some entries were billed at $150 per hour and some were billed at $250 per hour. A number of the entries appear to be related to the entire case, not just this motion. The Court finds that a reasonable compensatory legal fee for this matter is $1,000.
The motion is GRANTED. The default entered on April 8, 2026, is set aside. Compensatory legal fees are set at $1,000 and are due within thirty days of today. While Defendant provided a proposed Answer and proposed Cross-Complaint, they are stapled to the Opposition. The Court cannot separate a filed document. Defendant is granted ten days leave to file the Answer and Cross-Complaint. Defendant did not provide a proposed Order as required by Local Rule of Court 5.17(D). However, Plaintiff provided a proposed Order that will be modified to reflect the Court’s ruling.
CREDIT CORP SOLUTIONS, INC. VS. COOPER CASE NUMBER: 25CVG-01439 Tentative Ruling on Order to Show Cause Re: Sanctions: An Order to Show Cause Re: Sanctions issued on April 9, 2026 to Plaintiff Credit Corp Solutions, Inc. and Counsel Patenaude & Felix, APC for failure to timely seek entry of default as required by CRC 3.110(g). The Proof of Service of Summons filed September 15, 2025 reflects personal service on July 27, 2025. “If a responsive pleading is not served within the time limits specified in this rule and no extension of time has been granted, the plaintiff must file a request for entry of default within 10 days after the time for service has elapsed.” CRC 3.110(g). Plaintiff should have sought default over eight months ago. Plaintiff did not file a written response to the Order to Show Cause.
With no sufficient excuse for the delay, sanctions are imposed in the amount of $250 against Plaintiff and counsel. The clerk is instructed to prepare a separate Order of Sanctions. An appearance is necessary on today’s calendar to discuss the reason for the delay and when Plaintiff expects that Defendant will either appear or be defaulted.
2
Cited authorities
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.