Judge: Alison Mackenzie, Case: BC583661, Date: 2023-11-08 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: BC583661    Hearing Date: December 18, 2023    Dept: 55

NATURE OF PROCEEDINGS:  Motion of Plaintiff to Vacate Dismissal Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure §664.6.

The unopposed motion is granted. CCP § 664.6.

The 11/9/15 order is vacated only as to the dismissal.

The Court will sign and file the proposed order to vacate dismissal and judgment from the moving party. 

On 5/29/15, Plaintiff, a student loan trust, filed a Complaint for Breach of Contract, alleging that Defendant owed Plaintiff $54,367.20.   On 10/16/2015, Parties entered a Conditional Stipulated Settlement Agreement.

Moving party requests an order vacating the dismissal entered by the Court on 11/9/2015 and instead entering judgment on a settlement, per CCP § 664.6, on grounds including the following:   1) On 11/09/2015, the Judge signed the Order Dismissing this Case Without Prejudice and Retaining Jurisdiction Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure § 664.6;  2) Defendant THOMAS K MAHONEY made payments towards the balance due, totaling  $30,200.00, but the last payment made was on 09/22/2021;  3)  therefore, Plaintiff is requesting the judgment in the amount of $54,367.20, plus court costs of $562.50, minus credits  for payments made of $30,200.00, leaving a total balance due of $24,729.70.

According to applicable law, settling parties must properly request the court to retain jurisdiction, before dismissal, and the court then may retain jurisdiction to enforce a settlement by judgment, pursuant to CCP Section 664.6.  Sayta v. Chu (2017) 17 Cal. App. 5th 960, 967;  Hines v. Lukes (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 1174, 1182;  Hagan Engineering, Inc. v. Mills (2003) 115 Cal. App. 4th 1004, 1010-11;  Wackeen v. Malis (2002) 97 Cal. App. 4th 429, 440, 441.  In deciding a motion pursuant to Section 664.6, judges may receive evidence, determine disputed facts including the terms the parties previously agreed upon, and enter the terms of a settlement agreement as a judgment.  Osumi v. Sutton (2007) 151 Cal.App.4th 1355, 1360.

In this case, the parties have done the correct procedure by requesting the Court to retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement under CCP Section 664.6 and have shown the terms of a settlement agreement and payments supporting filing a judgment as prayed.