DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
23SMCV04144·la·Civil·Motion to Vacate Default
Hearing todayDENIED without prejudice

Harshal Topiwala v. Fereidoun Khalilian, et al.

Defendant's Motion to Vacate Entry of Default and Default Judgment

Hearing date
Sep 1, 2026
Department
205
Prevailing
Opposing Party

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Parties

PlaintiffHarshal Topiwala
DefendantFereidoun Khalilian

Ruling

(Beverly Hills Courthouse: Dept. 205) September 1, 2026 DEPARTMENT 205 LAW AND MOTION RULINGS

Superior Court of California County of Los Angeles - West District Beverly Hills Courthouse / Department 20 5 HARSHAL TOPIWALA, Plaintiff, v. FEREIDOUN KHALILIAN, et al., Defendant s. | Case No.: 2 3 S M CV 0 4144 Hearing Date: September 1, 2026 [TENTATIVE] order RE: D efendant 's MOTION TO VACATE entry of DEFAULT and default judgment | This hear ing is on Defendant Fereidoun Khalilian's motion to vacate entry of default and default judgment.

Defendant's memorandum of points and authorities has multiple procedural defects. The motion is single spaced which violates the¿rule¿against¿single¿spacing. (CRC,¿Rule¿2.108(1).) And given the¿single¿spacing, the 17-page motion also¿ violates the 15 - page limit for non-summary judgment motions. (CRC,¿Rule¿3.1113(d).) A memorandum that exceeds the page limits must be considered in the same manner as a late-filed paper. (Rules of Court, Rule 3.1113(g) .) The Court has discretion to refuse to consider late-filed papers, but if it declines to do so, the minutes or order must so indicate. (Rules of Court, Rule 3.1300(d) .)

The Court declines to consider Defendant's motion to vacate entry of default and default judgment given the procedural defects noted above. The motion is denied without prejudice.

DATED: September 1, 2026 ___________________________ Edward B. Moreton, Jr. Judge of the Superior Court

Case Number: 25SMCV05123 Hearing Date: September 1, 2026 Dept: 205 Superior Court of California County of Los Angeles - West District Beverly Hills Courthouse / Department 20 5 VALENTINE OKIGBO, Plaintiff s, v. ANTONIO CALDERON, et al., Defendant s. | Case No.: 2 5SMCV05123

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

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?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share