Cowan

Cowan v. Krayzman

Good Law
126 Cal. Rptr. 3d 793·196 Cal. App. 4th 907·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 786
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 20, 2011No. B218663California4,624 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Bigelow, J.

Defendant and appellant Boris Krayzman appeals from a default judgment entered against him. Krayzman filed a motion to vacate the default. After the trial court issued a tentative ruling denying the motion, Krayzman attempted to withdraw the motion before it was to be heard. He then filed a second version of the motion. The trial court adopted its tentative ruling denying the first version of the motion to vacate as its final order and did not consider the second version of the motion. Krayzman contends the trial court erred by not considering his motion to vacate on its merits. We affirm the judgment.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

In June 2008, Jeffrey W. Cowan filed a breach of contract complaint against Boris Krayzman. According to the complaint, Cowan, an attorney, had successfully defended Krayzman in an earlier lawsuit. The complaint alleged Krayzman failed to pay Cowan for his services and owed him over $45,000 in unpaid legal bills. Cowan’s proof of service of summons indicated that on June 22, 2008, the summons and complaint were personally served on Krayzman. On July 23, 2008, Cowan, representing himself, filed a request for entry of default. The court…

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.