Motion for Order to Set Aside Erroneous Dismissal Pursuant CCP 473(b)
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO 23CV005094: CARTER vs PETER P. BOLLINGER INVESTMENT COMPANY, LLC, et al. 06/03/2026 Hearing on Motion for Order to Set Aside Erroneous Dismissal Pursuant CCP 473(b) in Department 8C
Tentative Ruling NOTICE:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that any oral arguments regarding this tentative ruling will be heard at 1:30 p.m. in Department 8C, located at the Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye Courthouse located at 500 G. Street, Sacramento, CA, the Hon. Richard C. Miadich presiding.
Any party who wishes to contest the tentative ruling below must:
(1) request a hearing by calling the Law and Motion Oral Argument Request Line at (916) 874-2615, by 4:00 p.m. the Court day before the noticed hearing date, and leave a voicemail message (a) identifying themselves as the party requesting oral argument; (b) indicating the specific matter/motion for which they are requesting oral argument; and (c) confirming that they have notified the opposing party of their intention to appear; and
(2) advise the opposing party of the location and time of hearing pursuant to Local Rule 1.06.
If a hearing is not requested by 4:00 p.m. on the Court day before the noticed hearing date, the tentative ruling will become the final order of the Court.
If a hearing is requested, the Court prefers in-person attendance by the parties. However, parties may appear by Zoom unless the Court specifically orders in-person attendance. Parties choosing to appear by Zoom are reminded, however, that a Zoom appearance is still a formal appearance before the Court. Parties appearing via Zoom should do so from a quiet location, free from undue distractions, and wear attire suitable for an in-person court appearance.
The parties may join the Zoom session for hearing on the tentative ruling by audio and/or video through the following link:
https://saccourt-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/16039062174
SIP Address:
16039062174@sip.zoomgov.com
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO 23CV005094: CARTER vs PETER P. BOLLINGER INVESTMENT COMPANY, LLC, et al. 06/03/2026 Hearing on Motion for Order to Set Aside Erroneous Dismissal Pursuant CCP 473(b) in Department 8C
(833) 568-8864
ID: 16039062174
Parties requesting services of a court reporter will need to arrange for private court reporter services at their own expense, pursuant to
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?”
A Stipulation and Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (CV/E-206) is required to be signed by each party, the private court reporter, and the Judge prior to the hearing, if not using a reporter from the Courts Approved Official Reporter Pro Tempore list.
Once the form is signed it must be filed with the clerk. If a litigant has been granted a fee waiver and requests a court reporter, the party must submit a Request for Court Reporter by a Party with a Fee Waiver (CV/E-211) and it must be filed with the clerk at least 10 days prior to the hearing or at the time the proceeding is scheduled if less than 10 days away. Once approved, the clerk will be forward the form to the Court Reporters Office and an official reporter will be provided.
TENTATIVE RULING
***NOTICE: EFFECTIVE APRIL 13, 2026, THIS DEPARTMENT HAS MOVED TO THE TANI G. CANTIL-SAKAUYE COURTHOUSE LOCATED AT 500 G. ST. SACRAMENTO, CA. ALL MOTIONS NOTICED FOR DEPARTMENT 28 WILL BE HEARD IN DEPARTMENT 8C OF THE NEW COURTHOUSE. ALL PAPERS FOR THIS DEPARTMENT MUST BE FILED AT THIS NEW LOCATION AND WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED AT THE HALL OF JUSTICE. ALL HEARINGS WILL TAKE PLACE AT THIS NEW LOCATION**** Plaintiff Kyrron Carters (Plaintiff) motion to set aside an erroneous request for dismissal pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 473(b) is UNOPPOSED and GRANTED.
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO 23CV005094: CARTER vs PETER P. BOLLINGER INVESTMENT COMPANY, LLC, et al. 06/03/2026 Hearing on Motion for Order to Set Aside Erroneous Dismissal Pursuant CCP 473(b) in Department 8C
Facts
This action involved a premises liability claims against Defendants Peter P. Bollinger Investment Company, LLC; Inter-Cal Real Estate Corporation; Nugget Market, Inc.; and Peter P. Bollinger (collectively the Premises Defendants), and an uninsured motorist claim against Defendant 21st Century Insurance Company (21st Century). (Decl. Boggus, ¶ 2.)
On May 30, 2025, Plaintiff reached a settlement with the Premises Defendants only. Plaintiff did not settle the uninsured motorist claim against 21st Century. (Decl. Boggus, ¶ 3.)
Plaintiffs counsel avers that following the settlement, her office prepared and filed a request for dismissal on November 6, 2025, intending to dismiss only the Premises Defendants. (Decl. Boggus, ¶ 4.) However, [d]ue to a clerical error in completing the Judicial Council Request for Dismissal form, item 1.a.(5) (Entire action of all parties and causes of action) was mistakenly checked instead of item 1.a.(6) (Other), which should have specified dismissal as to [the Premises Defendants], leaving the uninsured motorist action against 21st Century Insurance Company pending. (Decl. Boggus, ¶ 5.)
Plaintiffs counsel avers that the dismissal of the entire action was not authorized, not intended, and does not reflect Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs counsels intent. Plaintiffs counsel further avers that the error was purely clerical in nature and resulted from mistake and inadvertence. (Decl. Boggus, ¶ 7.)
Law and Analysis
Code of Civil Procedure section 473(b) provides, in part:
The court may, upon any terms as may be just, relieve a party or the partys legal representative from a judgment, dismissal, order, or other proceeding taken against the party through the partys mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or excusable neglect. Notwithstanding any other requirements of this section, the court
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO 23CV005094: CARTER vs PETER P. BOLLINGER INVESTMENT COMPANY, LLC, et al. 06/03/2026 Hearing on Motion for Order to Set Aside Erroneous Dismissal Pursuant CCP 473(b) in Department 8C
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 attorneys sworn affidavit attesting to the attorneys mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect, vacate any... resulting dismissal entered against the attorneys client, unless the court finds that the default or dismissal was not in fact caused by the attorneys mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect.
The provisions of section 473 of the Code of Civil Procedure are to be liberally construed and sound policy favors the determination of actions on their merits. (See Zamora v. Clayborn Contracting Group, Inc. (2002) 28 Cal. 4th 249, 256.)
Here, Plaintiff did not intend to dismiss all claims or all defendants. Rather, Plaintiff intended to dismiss only the Premises Defendants, and it was only due to counsels mistake and inadvertence that 21st Century was dismissed. Plaintiff acted promptly to move to vacate the dismissal, and submitted an attorney declaration of fault.
In addition, 21st Century does not oppose the motion, and the Court concludes that 21st Century would not be unduly prejudiced by an order setting aside the dismissal.
Disposition
Plaintiffs motion to set aside the dismissal is GRANTED. Plaintiff may file an amended request for dismissal as to the Premises Defendants no later than June 15, 2026.
This minute order is effective immediately. No formal order or other notice is required. (Code Civ. Proc. § 1019.5; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1312.)