Judge: Alison Mackenzie, Case: 21STCV28216, Date: 2024-06-03 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV28216    Hearing Date: June 3, 2024    Dept: 55

NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS: Defendants and Cross-Complainants Javier Gonzalez and Maria Gonzalez’s Motion for Order for Issuance of Writ of Possession Pursuant to Judgment and Rental Damages.

BACKGROUND

In this case, MARIO GONZALEZ (“Plaintiff”) brought claims related to the residence at 1975 East 110^th Street in Los Angeles (“Property”) against JAVIER GONZALEZ, MARIA GONZALEZ and CARLOS HERNANDEZ (“Defendants”), who also brought claims against Plaintiff. Following trial, the Court entered Judgment providing that, inter alia, Defendants had six months to pay Plaintiff $160,000, title for the Property remains with Defendants, and Plaintiff could continue to reside in the Property for six months and would vacate the Property after receipt of the $160,000 payment.

JAVIER GONZALEZ and MARIA GONZALEZ (“Gonzalez Defendants”) filed a motion requesting an order for issuance of writ of possession against Plaintiff and for an order for Plaintiff to pay rental damages. Plaintiff has not filed an opposition.  

LEGAL STANDARD

Judgments for real property possession are enforceable via writs of possession issued by the clerk of court based on the Judgment. Code Civ. Proc., §§ 712.010-716.030; Highland Springs Conf. & Training Ctr. v. City of Banning (2019) 42 Cal.App.5th 416, 426. Code of Civil Procedure section 187 “grants every court the power and authority to carry its jurisdiction into effect” such as amending a judgment. Ibid.

ANALYSIS

The Gonzalez Defendants argue that the Court has the power to enter orders to enforce a judgment. Further, they state that the Judgment trial provides that Plaintiff will vacate the property upon receipt of $160,000, but he refuses to vacate and is holding over. The Gonzalez Defendants note that based on the uncontradicted testimony at trial, the daily monthly rental value of the Property is $55 per day and request damages for the period from 5/1/24 until Plaintiff vacates the Property.  

Here, the Judgment shows intent for Plaintiff to vacate the Property promptly after receipt of payment commencing six months after the entry of the Judgment. Plaintiff filed an Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment on 5/3/24, which provides that Defendants fully satisfied the Judgment and are thus fully released. Plaintiff has not filed an opposition or otherwise indicated that he has moved out. Given these circumstances, an order clarifying that the Judgment now supports a writ of possession from the Clerk, and an award of rental damages for holding over starting from 5/1/24, is an authorized method for carrying into effect the Court’s jurisdiction.

CONCLUSION

Therefore, the Court grants the motion. The Gonzalez Defendants shall prepare a proposed order for the Court to sign.