Tyler Handley v. David La Melza et al
| Tyler Handley |
| David La Melza, Doe Defendants 1 through 10, David La Melza an individual doing business as Provisn LLC and Does 1 through 10 inclusive |
| 2:2022cv00797 |
| February 4, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Central District of California |
| Margo A Rocconi |
| Mark C Scarsi |
| Contract: Other |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 29, 2023. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 84 MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Mark C. Scarsi: ORDER RE: DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO RECALL BENCH WARRANT #76 .Defendant David La Melza moves to recall a bench warrant issued in this case on September 6, 2022. Plaintiff Tyler Handley opposed the motion, and Defendant replied, The Court heard oral argument on September 25, 2023. Without deciding whether the judgment extinguishes the Court's inherent authority to enforce the writ of attachment and/or orders imposing sanctions, the Court GRANTS Defendant's motion. The bench warrant (ECF No. 49) is RECALLED. The parties are hereby placed on notice that the Court reserves the right to reconsider this Order (SEE DOCUMENT FOR SPECIFICS). (lc) |
| Filing 83 MINUTES OF Motion Hearing held before Judge Mark C. Scarsi: RE Motion for Relief from Court's Bench Warrant Issued September 6, 2022 #76 . The motion hearing is held. Counsel address the Court. The Court takes the Motion UNDER SUBMISSION and a ruling will be issued. Court Recorder: CourtSmart. (lc) |
| Filing 82 REPLY to Opposition to NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Relief from COURT'S BENCH WARRANT ISSUED SEPTEMBER 6, 2022 #76 filed by Defendant David La Melza. (Kenney, Karren) |
| Filing 81 MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Mark C. Scarsi: ORDER RE DEFENDANTS MOTION TO STRIKE AND PLAINTIFFS EX PARTE APPLICATION TO FILE UNTIMELY OPPOSITION #78 , #79 . The Court deems these matters appropriate for decision without oral argument. Despite Plaintiff's counsel's inattention to the docket, Plaintiff is entitled to the requested relief under the Pioneer factors. Plaintiff is put on notice that any further failure to follow the Courts clear orders will not be deemed excusable neglect and may result in sanctions. The application is GRANTED, and the Court accepts the opposition brief as filed. Defendant shall have until September 20, 2023, to file his reply brief. Defendants motion to strike is DENIED. (lc) |
| Filing 80 MEMORANDUM in Opposition to EX PARTE APPLICATION for Leave to file Opposition to Judgment Debtor's Motion For Relief from Bench Warrant #79 filed by Defendant David La Melza. (Kenney, Karren) |
| Filing 79 EX PARTE APPLICATION for Leave to file Opposition to Judgment Debtor's Motion For Relief from Bench Warrant filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Michael D. Lane, #2 Proposed Order) (Hogue, Michael) |
| Filing 78 MOTION TO STRIKE UNTIMELY OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM COURTS BENCH WARRANT ISSUED SEPTEMBER 6, 2022 AND RESPONSE re: NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Relief from COURT'S BENCH WARRANT ISSUED SEPTEMBER 6, 2022 #76 filed by Defendant David La Melza. (Kenney, Karren) Modified on 9/14/2023 (lc). Modified on 9/14/2023 (lc). |
| Filing 77 OPPOSITION to NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Relief from COURT'S BENCH WARRANT ISSUED SEPTEMBER 6, 2022 #76 filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley. (Hogue, Michael) |
| Filing 76 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Relief from COURT'S BENCH WARRANT ISSUED SEPTEMBER 6, 2022 filed by defendant David La Melza. Motion set for hearing on 9/25/2023 at 09:00 AM before Judge Mark C. Scarsi. (Attachments: #1 Declaration, #2 Proposed Order) (Kenney, Karren) |
Filing 75
ORDER RE: DEFENDANTS EX PARTE APPLICATION TO CONTINUE DEADLINE TO FILE MOTION TO RECALL BENCH WARRANT #74 by Judge Mark C. Scarsi: The deadline for the noticed motion referenced in the Courts June 30, 2023 Order DenyingDefendant's ex parte application, (Order, ECF No. 73), is extended to August 11, 2023. (lc)
|
| Filing 74 EX PARTE APPLICATION for Extension of Time to File Noticed Motion to Recall Bench Warrant filed by defendant David La Melza. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Kenney, Karren) |
| Filing 73 MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Mark C. Scarsi: ORDER RE: DEFENDANT'S EX PARTEAPPLICATION TO RECALL BENCH WARRANT #70 . Following entry of final judgment, Defendant David La Melza applies for ex parte relief to recall the bench warranted issued by this Court on September 6, 2022. Plaintiff Tyler Scott Handley filed an opposition. The Court deems this matter appropriate for decision without oral argument. The issues involved in Defendants application are relatively unusual. Proper adjudication of any such request would best be achieved following a full and thorough briefing by both parties. Defendants ex parte application does not satisfy the requisite standards for emergency relief and is accordingly DENIED. Defendant shall refile the application as a properly noticed motion no later than July 10, 2023, in accordance with the appropriate local rules. (lc) |
| Filing 72 OPPOSITION to EX PARTE APPLICATION for Relief from Bench Warrant Issued - REQUEST TO RECALL BENCH WARRANT ISSUED SEPTEMBER 6, 2022 #70 filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Michael R. Hogue, #2 Exhibit 1, #3 Exhibit 2)(Hogue, Michael) |
| Filing 71 NOTICE TO FILER OF DEFICIENCIES in Electronically Filed Document RE: EX PARTE APPLICATION for Relief from Bench Warrant Issued - REQUEST TO RECALL BENCH WARRANT ISSUED SEPTEMBER 6, 2022 #70 by defendant David La Melza. The following error(s) was/were found: Proposed document was not submitted or was not submitted as a separate attachment. Missing proposed order. Other error(s) with document(s): As an alternative, prepare and e-file a formal Notice of Lodging, to be docketed only under its specific event: Notice of Lodging, to which the formal proposed order is submitted as a Separate Attachment thereto. In response to this notice, the Court may: (1) order an amended or correct document to be filed; (2) order the document stricken; or (3) take other action as the Court deems appropriate. You need not take any action in response to this notice unless and until the Court directs you to do so. (lc) |
| Filing 70 EX PARTE APPLICATION for Relief from Bench Warrant Issued - REQUEST TO RECALL BENCH WARRANT ISSUED SEPTEMBER 6, 2022 filed by defendant David La Melza. (Kenney, Karren) |
| Filing 69 NOTICE of Appearance filed by attorney Karren Kenney on behalf of Defendant David La Melza (Attorney Karren Kenney added to party David La Melza(pty:dft))(Kenney, Karren) |
| Filing 68 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley, re Order on Motion for Default Judgment,,,,, #67 served on June 2, 2023. (Lane, Michael) |
| Filing 67 ENTRY OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT AGAINST DEFENDANTS DAVID LA MELZA AND DAVID LA MELZA D/B/A PROVISN LLC #61 by Judge Mark C. Scarsi: On May 12, 2023, the Court ordered Plaintiff to submit a proposed judgment in accordance with the Court's terms, as stated in the May 12, 2023 Order. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's Application and ORDERS that Default judgment shall be entered against Defendants David Michael La Melza, as an individual and d/b/a Provisn LLC, and Plaintiff Tyler Scott Handley is entitled to recover from Defendant a total of $585,754.98 in damages as follows: 1. Nominal damages for Defendant's breach of contract in the amount of $1.00; 2. Compensatory damages for Defendant's misrepresentation in the amount of $364,530.00; 3. Prejudgment interest in the amount of $26,921.16, which has been calculated using an interest rate of 7% on $125,000.00 from April 18, 2020; 4. Prejudgment interest in the amount of $24,930.70, which has been calculated using an interest rate of 7% on $125,000.00 from July 10, 2020; 5. Prejudgment interest in the amount of $19,372.12, which has been calculated using an interest rate of 7% on $114,530.00 from December 15, 2020; and 6. Punitive damages in amount of 150,000.00. (Made JS-6. Case Terminated.) (lc) |
| Filing 66 MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Mark C. Scarsi: ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF ORDER RE: AMOUNT OF SANCTIONS OWED #63 . Without resolving whether Plaintiff is entitled to recover sanctions, the Court denies the request without prejudice (SEE DOCUMENT FOR SPECIFICS). Court adopts the judgment Plaintiff proposed that omits the requested award of contempt sanctions. Any relief sought from this Order and the judgment shall be filed in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) or 60(b). (lc) |
| Filing 65 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley, re REQUEST for Order for Entry of Order Re Amount of Sanctions Owed #63 served on May 19, 2023. (Lane, Michael) |
| Filing 64 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley, re Notice of Lodging #62 served on May 19, 2023. (Lane, Michael) |
| Filing 63 REQUEST for Order for Entry of Order Re Amount of Sanctions Owed filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley. (Attachments: #1 Proposed Order) (Hogue, Michael) |
| Filing 62 NOTICE OF LODGING filed Re [Proposed] Entry of Default Judgment Against Defendants re Order on Motion for Default Judgment,,,, #61 (Attachments: #1 Proposed Entry of Default Judgment)(Hogue, Michael) |
| Filing 61 MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Mark C. Scarsi: FURTHER ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF'S APPLICATION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT #54 . The Court concludes that Plaintiff has supplied sufficient evidence to warrant $1 in nominal damages for Defendant's breach of contract, $364,530 in compensatory damages for his misrepresentation, prejudgment interest of 7% on $125,000 calculated from April 18, 2020, $125,000 calculated from July 10, 2020, and $114,530 calculated from December 15, 2020, as well as punitive damages of $150,000. Based on these findings, the Court confirms that the fourth Eitel factor, the sum of money at stake, is commensurate with the magnitude of Defendant's wrongdoing, see Vogel v. Rite Aid Corp., 992 F. Supp. 2d 998, 1012 (C.D. Cal. 2014), and that the Eitel factors on balance favor entry of default judgment. Plaintiff must submit a proposed judgment in accordance with these terms no later than seven days from the date of this order. Failure to timely submit a proposed judgment consistent with this Order will result in denial of Plaintiff' motion for default judgment. (lc) |
| Filing 60 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley, re Declaration (Motion related), #59 served on April 28, 2023. (Lane, Michael) |
| Filing 59 DECLARATION of Tyler Scott Handley in Support of (and in Response to Tentative Order (ECF 58)) APPLICATION for Default Judgment against Defendant David La Melza #54 filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D)(Lane, Michael) |
|
Filing 58
TENTATIVE ORDER RE: PLAINITFF'S APPLICATION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT #54 by Judge Mark C. Scarsi: (SEE DOCUMENT FOR COURT'S DISCUSSION ON ALL ENUMERATED FACTORS). Notwithstanding the Court's incomplete analysis of the fourth factor, the Court tentatively concludes that the Eitel factors favor granting default judgment. Without further evidence as to remedies, however, it would be in appropriate to grant default judgment at this time. Rather than deny Plaintiffs application, the Court authorizes Plaintiff to provide a supplemental declaration or affidavit to address the deficiencies in proof of remedies identified in this Order. The Plaintiff must submit any supplemental declaration or affidavit within seven days of the date of this Order. The supplemental materials should supply evidence from which the Court can conclude Plaintiff is entitled to a specific quantum of damages under each theory of liability asserted and, where remedies are available only in the alternative, specify a preferred remedy. (lc)
|
| Filing 57 DECLARATION of Michael R. Hogue in support of APPLICATION for Default Judgment against Defendant David La Melza #54 SUPPLEMENTAL filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley. (Hogue, Michael) |
| Filing 56 MINUTES OF Application for Default Judgment Against Defendant David LaMelza #54 Hearing held before Judge Mark C. Scarsi: No appearance by defendant nor his purported attorney. Counsel address the Court. The Court orders Mr. Lane to promptly file documentation verifying that Mr. Dressler, possible counsel for defendant David La Melza, was served with a copy of the notice for today's hearing. The Court takes the application UNDER SUBMISSION and a ruling will be issued. Court Recorder: CourtSmart. (lc) |
| Filing 55 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley, re APPLICATION for Default Judgment against Defendant David La Melza #54 served on February 6, 2023. (Lane, Michael) |
| Filing 54 APPLICATION for Default Judgment against Defendant David La Melza filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley. Application set for hearing on 3/20/2023 at 09:00 AM before Judge Mark C. Scarsi. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Michael D. Lane, #2 Proposed Order) (Hogue, Michael) |
| Filing 53 RESPONSE filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handleyto Order to Show Cause #51 Supplemental (Lane, Michael) |
| Filing 52 RESPONSE filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handleyto Order to Show Cause #51 (Lane, Michael) |
|
Filing 51
Order to Show Cause (LOP) by Judge Mark C. Scarsi. Response to Order to Show Cause due by 11/21/2022. (smo)
|
| Filing 50 TEXT ONLY ENTRY (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Mark C. Scarsi. The Court has revised its procedures regarding mandatory chambers copies in civil cases newly assigned to Judge Scarsi. The Court authorizes the parties to this case to follow the new procedures in lieu of the procedures stated in Initial Standing Order 9(e). More information about the new procedures is available at https://www.cacd.uscourts.gov/honorable-mark-c-scarsi THERE IS NO PDF DOCUMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THIS ENTRY. (cbr) TEXT ONLY ENTRY |
| Filing 49 SEALED WARRANT as to David La Melza issued. (lc) |
|
Filing 48
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS by Judge Mark C. Scarsi: ORDER RE: BENCH WARRANT. The Court found Defendant David La Melza in civil contempt. The Court ordered him to show cause within 14 days of personal service of the contempt order why a bench warrant should not issue against him for his misconduct. (Order, ECF No. 46.) La Melza received personal service of the contempt order on August 18, 2022. (Proof of Service, ECF No. 47.) To date, La Melza has not filed any response to the order to show cause. The Court orders that a bench warrant be issued for the arrest of David La Melza. (lc) Modified on 10/6/2022 (lc).
|
| Filing 47 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley, re Order,,,,, #46 served on August 18, 2022. (Lane, Michael) |
|
Filing 46
ORDER #36 by Judge Mark C. Scarsi. The Court has examined the Motion and the supporting documents and exhibits filed by Plaintiff. The Court also has considered the facts certified by the Magistrate Judge. In light of the papers on file in this matter, the Court vacates the Magistrate Judge's denial of the Motion #42 , GRANTS Plaintiff's Motion, and ORDERS as follows: The Court finds Defendant in contempt of court. Defendant shall deposit $1,011,055.19 (the Attachment Amount) into the Court Deposit Account that is identified in the Attachment Orders (ECF Nos. 15, 16). Defendant shall file a status report on compliance each day after service of this Order until Defendant is in full compliance with this Court's Attachment Orders. Defendant shall pay to Plaintiff the sum of $10,000 for each day after service of this Order in which Defendant remains out of compliance with this Court's Attachment Orders. The Court issues an Order to Show Cause why a bench warrant should not issue against Defendant for his misconduct. Defendant shall file a written response within 14 days after service of this Order. The Court awards Plaintiff his reasonable attorney's fees relating to service of the Attachment Orders, and for preparing and filing this Motion. See order for deadlines and other details. (lom)
|
| Filing 45 AFFIDAVIT by affiant: Leon Moore re Order on Motion for Contempt,,,,, #42 Affidavit of Due Diligence filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley (Lane, Michael) |
| Filing 44 MINUTES OF Motion for Contempt (ECF No. #37 ) Motion Hearing held before Judge Mark C. Scarsi. The motion hearing is held. The Court questions Mr. Lane regarding providing notice of today's hearing. For reasons stated on the record, the Court takes the motion UNDER SUBMISSION pending the submission of additional documentation re: service and a ruling will be issued. [Contempt hearing held that relates to the motion before the magistrate] Court Reporter: Kathy Stride. (lom) |
| Filing 43 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley, re Order on Motion for Contempt,,,,, #42 served on July 13, 2022. (Lane, Michael) |
|
Filing 42
MINUTES (In Court) MINUTE ORDER RE: MOTION FOR CONTEMPT, DKT. 37 by Magistrate Judge Margo A. Rocconi: Plaintiff's Motion is DENIED, but Defendant is ORDERED to appear on Monday, August 1, 2022, at 9:00 a.m. in the Courtroom of the Honorable Mark C. Scarsi, U.S. District Judge, located at First Street Courthouse, 350 W. 1st Street, Courtroom 7C, 7th Floor, Los Angeles, California 90012, to show cause why he should not be adjudged in contempt by reason of the facts certified in this Order. Denying #37 MOTION for Contempt. See Order for further details. (es)
|
| Filing 41 NOTICE OF NON-OPPOSITION to Amended NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Contempt against David Michael La Melza #37 , NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Contempt against David La Melza #36 Notice of Non-Receipt of Opposition filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley. (Hogue, Michael) |
| Filing 40 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Tyler Scott Handley Tyler Handley, re Minutes of In Chambers Order/Directive - no proceeding held,,, Set/Reset Motion Hearing and R&R Deadlines,, #39 served on June 28, 2022. (Lane, Michael) |
|
Filing 39
MINUTE ORDER (In Chambers) MINUTE ORDER RE: MOTION FOR CONTEMPT BRIEFING SCHEDULE, DKTS. 3637 by Magistrate Judge Margo A. Rocconi: Plaintiff has filed a Motion for Contempt against Defendant La Melza ("Motion"). ECF Docket Nos. ("Dkts.") #36 - #37 . The Court ORDERS as follows: 1. Defendant shall file and serve an Opposition on or before July 5, 2022. 2. Plaintiff may file a Reply no later than July 12, 2022. The Motion will be taken under submission when briefing is complete, without a hearing, unless ordered otherwise. Accordingly, the July 20, 2022 hearing is VACATED. (es)
|
| Filing 38 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley, re Amended NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Contempt against David Michael La Melza #37 , NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Contempt against David La Melza #36 served on June 16, 2022. (Hogue, Michael) |
| Filing 37 Amended NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Contempt against David Michael La Melza filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley. Motion set for hearing on 7/20/2022 at 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge Margo A. Rocconi. (Hogue, Michael) |
| Filing 36 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Contempt against David La Melza filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley. Motion set for hearing on 7/6/2022 at 10:00 AM before Magistrate Judge Margo A. Rocconi. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Tyler Scott Handley, #2 Exhibit 1, #3 Exhibit 2, #4 Exhibit 3, #5 Exhibit 4, #6 Exhibit 5, #7 Exhibit 6, #8 Exhibit 7, #9 Exhibit 8, #10 Exhibit 9, #11 Exhibit 10, #12 Declaration of Eric Allen Levine, #13 Declaration of Dorothy Groza, #14 Declaration of Edward Beyer, #15 Proposed Order) (Lane, Michael) |
| Filing 35 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley, upon DefendantDavid La Melza d/b/a PROVISN, LLC served on 3/24/2022, answer due 4/14/2022. compliance with statute not specified by personal service.(lc) |
| Filing 34 PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN RE SEIZURE (USM-285) including summons and Complaint RE David La Melza. ( SEE DOCUMENT - DUPLICATE OF USM -285 filed 5/12/022 docket no. #28 and Proof of service filed 5/12/2022 docket no. #25 now combined and filed on 5/18/2022 as one pdf ) (lc) Modified on 5/19/2022 (lc). |
| Filing 33 DEFAULT BY CLERK F.R.Civ.P.55(a) as to David La Melza, David La Melza dba Provisn LLC, (per 5/18/2022 Minute Order) (lc) |
| Filing 32 MINUTES (IN CHAMBERS) by Judge Mark C. Scarsi: ORDER RE: REQUESTS FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT #26 , #30 . Plaintiff Tyler Handley thrice requested entry of default against Defendant David La Melza, both as an individual and d/b/a PROVISN LLC. (1st Req., ECF No. 19; 2d Req., ECF No. 26; 3d Req., ECF No. 30.) The Clerk identified procedural errors in all three requests and accompanying proofs of service of summons, denied the first request, and referred the latter two requests to the Court. Based on this record, the Court surmises Plaintiff claims service was completed on both defendants in compliance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(e)(2)(A). Service of PROVISN LLC may be done under that rule if, as Plaintiff alleges, it is an individual and not a distinct business entity. The Court renders no opinion on whether service of either defendantwas effective, but any motion for entry of default judgment against these defendants should brief the issue thoroughly. The Court grants the third request for entry of default (ECF No. 30) and directs the Clerk to enter default against David La Melza and David La Melza d/b/a PROVISN LLC. The second request (ECF No. 26) is denied as moot. The Court discharges the order to show cause why the action should not be dismissed without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) (ECF No. 24). No response is necessary. (lc) |
| Filing 31 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY Re: Third REQUEST for Clerk to Enter Default against Defendant David La Melza #30 . The Clerk cannot enter the requested relief as: Proof of Service is lacking required information. Request for Entry of Default has been forwarded to the assigned Judge. Filer's second Request was forwarded to the Judge on 5/12/2022. The Court has not issued a ruling to date. Clerk Notes filer corrected the proof of service and the name of the default party. However the Proper Service of Process Statute cite is still missing. Not found on proof nor in set of default documents (FRCP 12 is not applicable). Again clerk is unable to determine the propriety of proof of service as refiled. As such and due to Matter still pending before the Judge, clerk has to forward this 3rd Request to the Judge.. (lc) |
| Filing 30 Third REQUEST for Clerk to Enter Default against Defendant David La Melza filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Michael D. Lane) (Lane, Michael) |
| Filing 29 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley, upon Defendant Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon David La Melza dba PROVISN, LLC in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by personal service.Original Summons returned. (Lane, Michael) |
| Filing 28 PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN RE SEIZURE (USM-285) WITH ATTACHED PROOF OF SERVICE of summons and Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 served by personal service, by Federal statute, upon David La Melza on 3/24/2022 answer due 4/14/2022. (lc) |
| Filing 27 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY Re: Second REQUEST for Clerk to Enter Default against Defendant David La Melza #26 . The Clerk cannot enter the requested relief as: The name of the person served does not exactly match the person named in complaint. Proof of Service is lacking required information. Request for Entry of Default has been forwarded to the assigned Judge. This is filers Second Attempt for default. However clerk is unable to determine the propriety of service and has forwarded the request to the Judge : 1) The proof of service on file is in response to the Court's OSC... Names the defendant as David La Melza ONLY. 2) Case docket names the defendant completely as David La Melza an individual doing business as Provisn LLC...as does the Request for default. 2) Missing the written cite of the one applicable Service of Process Statute. Not found on the proof Nor in filers request or declaration. (lc) |
| Filing 26 Second REQUEST for Clerk to Enter Default against Defendant David La Melza filed by Plaintiff's Tyler Handley. (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Michael D. Lane) (Lane, Michael) |
| Filing 25 PROOF OF SERVICE Executed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley, upon Defendant David La Melza served on 3/24/2022, answer due 4/14/2022. Service of the Summons and Complaint were executed upon David La Melza in compliance with Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by personal service.Original Summons returned. (Lane, Michael) |
|
Filing 24
MINUTE ORDER IN CHAMBERS Order to Show Cause (4m) by Judge Mark C. Scarsi. Response to Order to Show Cause due by 5/25/2022. (smo)
|
| Filing 23 NOTICE of Change of address by Soyeon Jeong attorney for Plaintiff Tyler Handley. Changing attorneys address to Soyeon Jeong, Greenberg Traurig, LLP, 101 Second St., Ste. 2200, San Francisco, CA 94105-3668. Filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley. (Jeong, Soyeon) |
| Filing 22 NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY Re: REQUEST for Entry of Default against Defendants All Defendants, DAVID LA MELZA, as an individual and d/b/a PROVISN LLC #19 . The Clerk cannot enter the requested relief as: No proof of service/waiver of service on file. Requesting party shall file a new Request/Application with noted deficiencies corrected in order to have default reconsidered. (lc) Modified on 5/11/2022 (lc). |
| Filing 21 PROOF OF SERVICE filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley, re REQUEST for Entry of Default against Defendants All Defendants PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST TO ENTER DEFAULT #19 PROOF OF SERVICE served on 1. PLAINTIFFS REQUEST TO ENTER DEFAULT; and 2.DECLARATION OF MICHAEL D. LANE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS REQUEST TO ENTER DEFAULT. (Hogue, Michael) |
| Filing 20 NOTICE of Change of address by Michael R Hogue attorney for Plaintiff Tyler Handley. Changing attorneys address to 101 Second Street, Suite 2200, San Francisco, CA 94105. Filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley. (Hogue, Michael) |
| Filing 19 REQUEST for Entry of Default against Defendants All Defendants PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST TO ENTER DEFAULT filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley. (Attachments: #1 Declaration DECLARATION OF MICHAEL D. LANE IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS REQUEST TO ENTER DEFAULT) (Hogue, Michael) |
| Filing 18 PROCESS RECEIPT AND RETURN (USM-285) re Seizure of Writ Issued #16 returned unexecuted for David La Melza on 3/24/22. Remarks: Service Fee: 585.00; Total Mileage Charge: 19,89, Total Charge 604.89. Mr. La Melza was present at the address listed above. He informed USMS personnel that he did not have the ability to satisfy the amount noted on the writ at this time. No. of Deputies: 3; Total Deputy time: 9 hours; R/T Mileage 34 hours; No of Vehicles 1. See attached writ of attachment. (lom) |
| Filing 17 FINANCIAL ENTRY: Received $10,000.00 into the registry of the Court from Tyler Handley on 02/25/2022. Re: Order on Motion for Writ,,,, #11 . Receipt number LA234990. (jco) |
| Filing 16 WRIT OF ATTACHMENT EX PARTE issued. (jp) |
|
Filing 15
RIGHT TO ATTACH ORDER AND ORDER FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF ATTACHMENT by Magistrate Judge Margo A. Rocconi granting Ex Parte Right to Attach Order and Order for Issuance of Writ of Attachment #13 . (jp)
|
| Filing 14 Proposed Order to Seize Property Held in Private Place in Re Ex Parte Application for Writ of Attachment filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley re: Order on Motion for Writ,,,, #11 (Hogue, Michael) |
| Filing 13 Ex Parte Right to Attach Order and Order for Issuance of Writ of Attachment filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley re: Order on Motion for Writ #11 (Hogue, Michael). Modified on 2/17/2022 (jp). |
| Filing 12 NOTICE of Undertaking filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley. (Hogue, Michael) |
|
Filing 11
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER GRANTING EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF ATTACHMENT by Magistrate Judge Margo A. Rocconi: Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs Ex Parte Application and ORDERS as follows: (1) Pursuant to Local Rule 7-19.2, the Court waives the notice requirement of Local Rule 7-19.1 because the interest of justice requires that the Ex Parte Application be heard without notice, and alerting Defendant to this action and the Ex Parte Application would allow him to transfer, dissipate, or conceal the disputed assets. (2) The Court issues a Writ of Attachment against Defendant's assets in the amount of $1,011,055.19 (the "Writ of Attachment"). (3) Plaintiff shall file a $10,000 undertaking. See Cal. Civ. Proc. Code 489.220. At the time of the filing of the undertaking, plaintiff shall submit proposed Right to Attach Orders and Orders for Issuance of Writ of Attachment (CV-4D), fully consistent with this Order. Granting #10 EX PARTE APPLICATION for Writ. (es)
|
| Filing 10 EX PARTE APPLICATION for Writ of Attachment filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley. (Attachments: #1 Declaration Declaration of Tyler Handley, #2 Proposed Order Proposed Order, #3 Proposed Order Proposed Writ of Attachment, #4 Exhibit Exh. A to Handley Decl., #5 Exhibit Exh. B to Handley Decl., #6 Exhibit Exh. C to Handley Decl., #7 Exhibit Exh. D to Handley Decl., #8 Exhibit Exh. E to Handley Decl., #9 Exhibit Exh. F to Handley Decl., #10 Exhibit Exh. G to Handley Decl., #11 Exhibit Exh. H to Handley Decl.) (Lane, Michael) |
|
Filing 9
INITIAL STANDING ORDER FOR CIVIL CASES ASSIGNED TO JUDGE MARK C. SCARSI upon filing of the complaint by Judge Mark C. Scarsi. (smo)
|
| Filing 8 21 DAY Summons Issued re Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening) #1 as to Defendant David La Melza. (et) |
| Filing 7 Notice to Counsel Re Consent to Proceed Before a United States Magistrate Judge. (et) |
| Filing 6 NOTICE TO PARTIES OF COURT-DIRECTED ADR PROGRAM filed. (et) |
| Filing 5 NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT to District Judge Mark C. Scarsi and Magistrate Judge Margo A. Rocconi. (et) |
| Filing 4 CERTIFICATE of Interested Parties filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley, (Hogue, Michael) |
| Filing 3 Request for Clerk to Issue Summons on Complaint (Attorney Civil Case Opening), #1 filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley. (Hogue, Michael) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL COVER SHEET filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley. (Hogue, Michael) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT Receipt No: ACACDC-32742629 - Fee: $402, filed by Plaintiff Tyler Handley. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit F, #7 Exhibit G) (Attorney Michael R Hogue added to party Tyler Handley(pty:pla))(Hogue, Michael) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the California Central District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
