Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. vs. Hellman

7 Wells Fargo TENTATIVE RULING: Bank, N.A. vs. Hellman Motion to Vacate

Plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., moves to vacate the dismissal and enter judgment against Defendant Cheyenne Hellman pursuant to the parties’ stipulation. For the following reasons, the motion is DENIED without prejudice.

Plaintiff served the motion on Defendant at 1010E Yorba Linda Blvd, Apt 1083, Placentia, CA 92870. According to the most recent document filed by Defendant, a Case Management Statement filed on June 23, 2022, Defendant is represented by Daniel S. March in Tustin. No substitution of attorney has been filed since.

According to the Stipulation for Entry of Judgment executed by Defendant, “All notices, correspondence or communications of any type from Plaintiff to Defendant shall be directed to Defendant, unless Plaintiff is otherwise directed by Defendant, or someone acting on Defendant’s behalf. Furthermore, notices maybe sent by fax or email.” (Mulhorn Dec., Ex. 1 at ¶ 14.) But this motion is not a “notice, correspondence, or communication.”

The court notes that Plaintiff has previously filed a substantially similar motion in 2024, in which the court already addressed these service defects. Despite the court previously continuing the hearing on the prior motion to give Plaintiff an opportunity to cure the service defect, Plaintiff failed to do so, which led to the denial of Plaintiff’s previous motion.

Yet, two years later, Plaintiff files the same motion, containing the same service defects without explanation.

To the extent that Plaintiff intends on filing any further motions to vacate under § 664.6, service must be made on both Defendant and Defendant’s counsel.

Plaintiff to give notice.

8 Amaro Lebron OFF CALENDAR vs. Mazda Motor Corporation 9 Bolanos vs. TENTATIVE RULING: General Motors, LLC For the reasons set forth below, Defendant General Motors, LLC’s motion for summary judgment is DENIED, without prejudice.