Tanguay v. Lavallee CA4/3

Filed 10/25/24 Tanguay v. Lavallee CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

KAYLYNN LEE TANGUAY,

Plaintiff and Respondent, G063471

v. (Super. Ct. No. CVRI2000715)

RILEY LEE LAVALLEE, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Riverside County, Irma Poole Asberry, Judge. Affirmed. Melissa Raskey for Defendant and Appellant. John L. Dodd & Associates, John L. Dodd; and Rob Schelling for Plaintiff and Respondent. * * *

FACTS In December 2020, Tanguay filed a complaint for partition of real property against Lavallee related to their jointly held home. Lavallee did not file a timely response; on April 26, 2021, Tanguay filed a request for entry of default against him. The court scheduled a case management conference for July 19, 2021, which was continued to November 2021. On July 15, 2021, four days before the initial case management conference date, the court issued two orders to show cause (OSC) why sanctions should not be imposed for Tanguay’s failure to file: (1) a timely proof of service, and (2) a request for entry of default for all named defendants. In November 2021, Tanguay’s counsel filed a declaration in response to the OSCs, explaining that Lavallee had been served with the summons and complaint, that his default was entered on April 26, 2021, and that the other named defendants had appeared. Counsel explained Tanguay was encountering difficulty obtaining the financial documents she needed to support her default prove-up, that she anticipated receiving them shortly, and that she expected to file her prove-up package within 45 days. The court discharged the OSCs and issued a new OSC requiring Tanguay to appear on March 15, 2022, to explain why monetary sanctions or dismissal should not be imposed for failure to timely obtain a default judgment. On March 9, 2022, Tanguay’s counsel filed a declaration in response to the new OSC, explaining that Tanguay had recently obtained the documents needed to complete the default prove-up, and counsel anticipated filing the prove-up package within about 30 days. The court continued the hearing on the OSC to June 14, 2022.