BRITECAP FINANCIAL, LLC v. JAVIER MORA
Motion for judgment on the pleadings
Motion type
Causes of action
Parties
Ruling
MIHIR SUKTHANKAR, et al., Defendants. | Case No.: | 24STCV29503 | Hearing Date: | May 20, 2026 | Hearing Time: | 10:00 a.m. | ORDER RE: REVIEW OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT PACKAGE | Plaintiff James Bailey ("Plaintiff") requests default judgment against Defendants Mihir Sukthankar, Nvest Ventures LLC, Sukthankar Holdings Group, LLC, and Boosted Quant Inc. (Doe 1), jointly and severally, in the total amount of $412,111.40, comprising of $356,441.00 in damages demanded in the complaint, $53,219.25 in interest, and $2,451.15 in costs. The Court finds that Plaintiff sufficiently supported his request with the submitted evidence and declarations. Accordingly, the Court grants Plaintiff's request and will sign the judgment. No appearance is necessary at the hearing on this matter. DATED: May 20, 2026 ________________________________ Hon. Teresa A. Beaudet Judge, Los Angeles Superior Court
Superior Court of California County of Los Angeles Department 508
BRITECAP FINANCIAL, LLC, Plaintiff, vs. JAVIER MORA, an individual and sole proprietor of DJ VENTURA ATTORNEY SERVICES, Defendants. | Case No.: |
| Hearing Date: | May 20, 2026 | Hearing Time: 10:00 a.m. [TENTATIVE] ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF BRITECAP FINANCIAL'S MOTION FOR. JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS | Plaintiff Britecap Financial, LLC ("Britecap") initiated this action against Defendant Javier Mora, an individual and sole proprietor of DJ Ventura Attorney Services ("Mora") on February 11, 2025, with a complaint alleging causes of action for breach of contract. Mora filed an answer on May 7, 2025. On September 19, 2025, Britecap moved for judgment on the pleadings.
On December 3, 2025, the Court ordered Britecap to meet¿and confer¿within 10 days of the Order, and stated that "[i]f the parties are unable to resolve the pleading issues¿or if the parties are otherwise unable to meet and confer in good faith, Britecap is to thereafter file and serve¿a declaration setting forth the efforts to meet and confer in compliance with Code of Civil Procedure section 439 within 15 days of this order." (Order 12/3/25, 2:13-16.) The Court notes that Britecap did not file a declaration.
Accordingly, the motion for judgment on the pleadings is taken off-calendar because it appears that the parties resolved the issues. Britecap is ordered to give notice of this Order. DATED: May 20, 2026 ________________________________
Cited authorities
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?”