Claiming Party’s Counsel Continued To Use East L.A. Address For Pleadings, Even Though Moving To Simi Valley, Such That Clerk’s Entry Notice To East L.A. Address Supported Striking Costs Memorandum, Which Was Filed Almost Five Months Later.
I guess we can say that the moral of AV Sikh Center v. Antelope Valley Sikh Center, Case No. B289045 (2d Dist., Div. 8 Aug. 21, 2019) (unpublished) is if you move your law practice to a new address, make sure your pleadings are consistent with that move to make sure you do not blow deadlines.
In this one, a prevailing party’s counsel moved from an east L.A. office address to Simi Valley, even filing a change of address with the court. However, counsel continued to file pleadings listing the east L.A. address, with the superior court clerk sending a notice of entry of judgment to counsel at the same east L.A. address. Almost five months after the clerk served notice of entry of judgment, counsel filed a costs memorandum on behalf of his client, although indicating that he checked the internet docket along the way. The trial judge found the costs memorandum was untimely, striking it because it was way after the 15-day deadline under CRC 3.1700. The appellate court affirmed the result based on counsel’s confusing conduct and testimony that he checked the docket—if counsel had, the entry of judgment would have popped up.
Lesson here: if you change offices and send a change of location, stick to that new change!
Comments