Account Management Services v. Melahoures CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 3, 2024G063315California2,839 words

Opinion

Opinion

STATEMENT OF FACTS

I.

THE COMPLAINT AND SERVICE OF PROCESS

In June 2022, plaintiff filed a form complaint against Melahoures and Southland asserting causes of action for common counts. Among other things, the complaint alleged both defendants owed money to plaintiff “for work, labor, services and materials rendered at the . . . request of defendant[s] and for which defendant[s] promised to pay.” According to the complaint, “the claim(s) sued on was duly assigned, transferred and set over to plaintiff . . . by Pacific Medical Laboratory, Inc., and plaintiff is now the owner and holder thereof.”

1 The trial court denied the motion to set aside the default and default judgment as to both Melahoures and his company, defendant Southland Family Urgent Care, Inc. (Southland). But the opening brief indicates the only issue on appeal is whether the court erred by refusing to set aside the default judgment against Melahoures. The notice of appeal also appears to have been filed only by Melahoures. We accordingly refer to Melahoures as the appellant even though the opening brief refers to both Melahoures and Southland as appellants.

2 On July 8, 2022, a registered process server served…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.