[quote=gzz]”QT default judgments cannot stick without defendant being given this opportunity … regardless of if they defaulted.”
The one time I got a default judgment against a deep pocketed defendant I had to do two prove up hearings and mail notice of the hearings. I was not aware of this particular rule, but I would always expect that the judge would want to have some sort of hearing with additional notice outside of small collections type cases.[/quote]
gzz, as you know, your two “prove-up” hearings you noticed and showed up for to obtain your default judgment are nowhere near the amount of work and preparation that an evidentiary hearing would be, not to mention the time and cost for witness prep and expert fees (if needed).
[quote=gzz]I did not need a marketing budget because I was the only lawyer in California who would take a certain type of real estate case on contingency during the real estate crisis eight years ago, so I just publicized my first few cases and Google searches did the rest.[/quote]
If you worked on RE cases during the “real estate crisis,” that crisis had been largely wound down by January of 2012, when the Harbour Vista, LLC v HSBC Mtg Svcs opinion was published. I can understand why you would not be familiar with it if you haven’t taken any RE cases since then. See my earlier post to the OP on this thread, below. It seems that the court here is further clarifying CCP 764.010, including the need (or not) for oral argument:
The court shall examine into and determine the plaintiff’s title against the claims of all the defendants. The court shall not enter judgment by default but shall in all cases require evidence of plaintiff’s title and hear such evidence as may be offered respecting the claims of any of the defendants, other than claims the validity of which is admitted by the plaintiff in the complaint. The court shall render judgment in accordance with the evidence and the law.
[quote=bearishgurl]I should add that “you will not be able to take a(n) automatic default judgment.” Whether or not the defendant shows up at the evidentiary hearing, the court will make a ruling on the “quiet title” action only. The plaintiff is not obligated to serve or notify the defendant of the evidentiary hearing … only to set the date with the court. Procedurally, the court will then send the defendant a Notice of Hearing. If the plaintiff has other causes of action pending in their complaint, they will NOT be adjudicated at the evidentiary hearing (Harbour Vista, LLC, v. HSBC Mortgage Services Inc. (2011) 201 Cal.App.4th 1496 at 1508-1509).[/quote][bold added]
