What is the test for a motion for reconsideration of a default judgment?

Even if these declarations were sufficient to rebut the presumption established by the process server's proof of service, it was for the trial court to "consider the declarations [], assess credibility, and determine the facts." (Fredrics v. Paige (1994)

Page 7

29 Cal.App.4th 1642, 1647.) Here, the trial court held a hearing, received and weighed the evidence from both sides, and apparently found the defendant's evidence "suspect and unbelievable," while finding the plaintiff's evidence "clear and persuasive." " 'When an issue is tried on affidavits . . . and where there is a substantial conflict in the facts stated, a determination of the controverted facts by the trial court will not be disturbed.' " (Weathers v. Kaiser Foundation Hospitals (1971) 5 Cal.3d 98, 108.) It was within the trial court's discretion to reject the defendant's declarations and accept those submitted by the plaintiffs. Accordingly, we will not disturb the trial court's determination that the defendant did not meet his burden of showing good cause for relief from default.

Furthermore, the defendant did not meet his burden of "provid[ing] an affidavit showing under oath that his [] lack of actual notice in time to defend was not caused by inexcusable neglect or avoidance of service. [Citations.]" (Anastos v. Lee, supra, 118 Cal.App.4th at p. 1319.) The trial court was particular concerned about this latter issue, but defendant's supporting declaration did not address it. On appeal, the defendant cites to evidence - some of which was submitted in support of the motion for reconsideration - explaining why he used multiple out-of-state addresses to receive mail while this case was pending in the trial court. However, according to the record before us, that evidence was not before the trial court when the defendant moved to set aside the default, and therefore, we cannot consider it on appeal from that order.