Shahedi v. Trimble CA6

Filed 3/26/15 Shahedi v. Trimble CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

TONY SHAHEDI, H040809 (Santa Clara County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. No. 1-08-CV-113931)

v.

CHARLES TRIMBLE,

Defendant and Appellant.

Plaintiff Tony Shahedi obtained a default judgment against defendant Trimbco, Inc. Defendant Charles Trimble appeals the trial court’s order amending that default judgment to add Trimble as a judgment debtor as the alter ego of Trimbco, Inc. Trimble argues the trial court erred because: amending the default judgment to add him as a judgment debtor violated his Fourteenth Amendment due process rights; Trimble is not the alter ego of Trimbco, Inc.; and Shahedi unreasonably delayed his motion to amend the default judgment. For the reasons stated here, we will reverse the amended judgment because adding Trimble as a judgment debtor violated due process. I. TRIAL COURT PROCEEDINGS Shahedi worked for Trimbco, Inc., a California corporation doing business as Sharp Precision Manufacturing (Trimbco). After Shahedi was injured and then terminated from that company, he filed a complaint in June 2008 alleging, among other things, wrongful termination and disability discrimination. Shahedi named “TRIMBCO, INC., a California Corporation doing business as SHARP PRECISION

MANUFACTURING, and DOES 1-20” as defendants. Although the complaint identified Trimble as the president of Trimbco and made factual allegations about his conduct as president, the complaint did not make alter ego allegations and Trimble was not named as a defendant in any capacity. The summons and complaint were served that month on “Lon Tran, machinist, apparently in charge” at Trimbco’s office as a substitute for Trimble as Trimbco’s agent. The trial court entered default at Shahedi’s request when no responsive pleading was filed. In April 2009, the court entered default judgment against Trimbco for over $800,000 in damages, based on supporting evidence presented by Shahedi. More than four years later, Shahedi moved to amend the default judgment in December 2013 to add Trimble as a judgment debtor, arguing that Trimble was the alter ego of Trimbco. Shahedi’s supporting memorandum of points and authorities claimed that Trimble was the sole shareholder of Trimbco when the default judgment was entered, that Trimbco had not observed corporate formalities, and that Trimbco was now a suspended corporation. Trimble filed a written opposition, arguing that adding him as a judgment debtor would violate his due process rights and, alternatively, that he was not the alter ego of Trimbco. Trimble did not appear at the court’s March 2014 hearing on Shahedi’s motion. The court granted Shahedi’s motion to amend the default judgment and entered an amended judgment nunc pro tunc adding Trimble as a judgment debtor. II. DISCUSSION Citing Motores de Mexicali, S.A. v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (1958) 51 Cal.2d 172 (Motores) and NEC Electronics Inc. v. Hurt (1989) 208 Cal.App.3d 772 (NEC),Trimble asserts that amending the default judgment violated his Fourteenth Amendment due process rights. Shahedi does not discuss Motores and argues that NEC is factually distinguishable. As we agree that Motores and NEC control the outcome of this appeal, we will discuss them in detail before addressing the parties’ contentions.