Judge: Andrew E. Cooper, Case: 22CHCV00356, Date: 2025-06-12 Tentative Ruling

Counsel wishing to submit on a tentative ruling may inform the clerk or courtroom assisant in North Valley Department F51, 9425 Penfield Ave., Chatsworth, CA 91311, at (818) 407-2251.  Please be aware that unless all parties submit, the matter will still be called for hearing and may be argued by any appearing/non-submitting parties. If the matter is submitted on the court's tentative ruling by all parties, counsel for moving party shall give notice of ruling. This may be done by incorporating verbatim the court's tentative ruling. The tentative ruling may be extracted verbatim by copying and specially pasting, as unformatted text, from the Los Angeles Superior Court’s website, http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org. All hearings on law and motion and other calendar matters are generally NOT transcribed by a court reporter unless one is provided by the party(ies).

Case Number: 22CHCV00356    Hearing Date: June 12, 2025    Dept: F51

LOS ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT

NORTH VALLEY DISTRICT

DEPARTMENT F-51

MOTION TO ENFORCE SETTLEMENT

Motion Filed: 5/7/25

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Bank of America N.A. (“Plaintiff”)

RESPONDING PARTY: Defendant Deepak Kwatra (“Defendant”)

NOTICE: OK

RELIEF REQUESTED: Judgment against Defendant in the principal amount of $15,915.08, plus costs in the amount of $795.00.

TENTATIVE RULING: The unopposed motion is granted. Plaintiff is entitled to a judgment against Defendant in the amount of $16,710.08.

BACKGROUND

This is a collections action. On 5/23/22, Plaintiff filed its complaint, alleging against Defendant a sole cause of action for Common Counts. On 9/9/22, the parties entered into a stipulated settlement agreement wherein, inter alia, Plaintiff agreed to settlement this matter for the total sum of $30,225.08, to be paid via monthly installment of $600.00. (Ex. 1 to Decl. of Flint C. Zide.)

Under the explicit terms of the agreement, “in the event of a default in payments and at the request of Plaintiff, the court shall reopen the case without notice to Defendant, vacate any dismissal, and enter judgment for the Judgment Amount plus any motion and/or order fee(s) required by the court, less credit for payments made.” (Id. at ¶ 7.)

On 10/2/24, Plaintiff filed a Notice of Conditional Settlement. On 5/7/25, Plaintiff filed the instant motion enforce the settlement agreement. No opposition has been filed to date

ANALYSIS

“If parties to pending litigation stipulate, in a writing signed by the parties outside of the presence of the court or orally before the court, for settlement of the case, or part thereof, the court, upon motion, may enter judgment pursuant to the terms of the settlement. If requested by the parties, the court may retain jurisdiction over the parties to enforce the settlement until performance in full of the terms of the settlement.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 664.6, subd. (a).)

In determining a motion to enforce a settlement under Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6, the court seeks to determine whether the parties entered into a valid and binding settlement of all or part of the case. (In re Marriage of Assemi (1994) 7 Cal.4th 896, 905.) A party moving for entry of judgment under Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6 need not establish a breach of the settlement agreement; the court is authorized to enter judgment pursuant to the settlement regardless of whether the settlement's obligations were performed, breached or excused. (Hines v. Lukes (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 1174, 1184–1185.)

Here, Plaintiff has attached to the instant motion a copy of the 9/9/22 stipulated settlement agreement entered into between the parties. (Ex. 1 to Zide Decl.) As the motion is unopposed, the Court finds no dispute as to the validity and enforceability of the agreement. Moreover, the agreement explicitly provides that the Court may enforce its terms pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6. (Id. at ¶ 7.)

Plaintiff asserts that “Defendant did not make payments as agreed.” (Zide Decl. ¶ 6.) “There is still due, owing and unpaid on the Stipulation for Judgment the sum of $15,915.08 and $510.00 costs. Plaintiff has also incurred additional costs of $225.00 for Defendant's First Appearance Fee, and $60.00 for the filing of the Motion.” (Id. at ¶ 7.)

Based on the foregoing, the Court grants Plaintiff’s unopposed motion to enforce the terms of the 9/9/22 settlement agreement entered into between the parties.

CONCLUSION

The unopposed motion is granted. Plaintiff is entitled to a judgment against Defendant in the amount of $16,710.08.