Partner Assessment Corporation dba Partner Engineering and Science, Inc. v. Suncroft Capital LLC

(Spring Street Courthouse: Dept. 26) August 25, 2026 DEPARTMENT 26 LAW AND MOTION RULINGS

If you desire to submit on the Court's tentative ruling, you may do so by e-mailing Department 26 at the Spring Street Courthouse until the morning of the motion hearing. The e-mail address is [email protected] The heading on your e-mail should contain the case name, number, hearing date, and that you submit. The message should indicate your name, contact information, and the party you represent.

Please note that if you submit on the court's tentative ruling and do not appear, another party may appear to argue and the court may change its tentative ruling after the oral argument. If there are no appearances by either side and no submission on the Court's tentative ruling, the court will adopt its tentative ruling as its final ruling.

The deadline for a party to withdraw a pending motion, or take it off calendar, is TWO COURT DAYS before the hearing on the motion. The court will enter its tentative ruling on motions that remain on calendar after that deadline.

Please note, the above e-mail address is to inform the court of your submission on the tentative ruling. All other inquiries to this e-mail will not receive a response.

Parties may schedule remote appearances for hearings on motions via LACourtConnect (https://mylacourt.org/laccwelcome). Remote appearances are not permitted for trial or Applications for Order for Appearance and Examination proceedings absent leave of court. **Please note we no longer use CourtCall**

RULING: P laintiff Partner Assessment Corporation dba Partner Engineering and Science, Inc.'s Motion to Amend Judgment is denied. The Court on its own motion will correct the clerical error in the Judgment by amending the Judgment nunc pro tunc to identify the parties' names. Plaintiff is ordered to file a proposed amended judgment consistent with this Order within ten days of this Order. The Court sets a non-appearance case review re: filing of the proposed amended judgment for September 2, 2026.

Analysis: On June 26, 2024, P laintiff Partner Assessment Corporation dba Partner Engineering and Science, Inc. filed the instant action against Defendant Suncroft Capital LLC ("Defendant"). The Court entered default judgment on December 9, 2024. On May 29, 2026, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Amend Judgment. No opposition has been filed to date.

Discussion

The Motion is not accompanied by a proof of service of the moving papers and notice of the hearing date upon Defendant. Failure to give notice of the papers and hearing date is a violation of due process and of the statutory notice requirements. (Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 1005; Jones v. Otero (1984) 156 Cal.App.3d 754, 757.)

Additionally, the Motion is not accompanied by a memorandum of points and authorities, as required by the California Rules of Court. "The memorandum must contain a statement of facts, a concise statement of the law, evidence and arguments relied on, and a discussion of the statutes, cases, and textbooks cited in support of the position advanced." (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1113(b).) The Court cannot grant a Motion with these procedural defects. The Motion is denied.

Nonetheless, the Court may on its own motion correct clerical errors in judgments pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure, Sec. 473(d). That section states that, "The court may, upon motion of the injured party, or its own motion, correct clerical mistakes in its judgment or orders as entered, so as to conform to the judgment or order directed." (Code Civ. Proc., Sec. 473(d).)

Here, the error is truly clerical. The Judgment entered and signed by the Court omitted both parties' names in paragraph 5. There are only two parties in this case. Defendant Suncroft Capital LLC defaulted. "It has been held repeatedly that an order correcting a clerical error in the record of a judgment may be made by the court ex parte without notice and on the court's own motion." (In re Hultin's Est., 29 Cal. 2d 825, 829.) The Court will exercise this authority here.

The proposed judgment submitted with the Motion is inaccurate. It does not identify the Defendant correctly, and includes an "et al." even though this case concerns one defendant. The Court orders Plaintiff to submit a corrected proposed judgment within ten days of this Order. The corrected proposed judgment must identify the parties as they are identified on the docket in this case, that is: Plaintiff: Partner Assessment Corporation, a California corporation, and Defendant: Suncroft Capital LLC, a New York limited liability corporation.

Conclusion

P laintiff Partner Assessment Corporation dba Partner Engineering and Science, Inc.'s Motion to Amend Judgment is denied. The Court on its own motion will correct the clerical error in the Judgment by amending the Judgment nunc pro tunc to identify the parties' names. Plaintiff is ordered to file a proposed amended judgment consistent with this Order within ten days of this Order. The Court sets a non-appearance case review re: filing of the proposed amended judgment for September 2, 2026. Moving party to give notice. |