Judge: Colin Leis, Case: 19STCV00405, Date: 2023-04-10 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV00405    Hearing Date: April 10, 2023    Dept: 74

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES – CENTRAL DISTRICT 

DEPARTMENT 74 

MOVING PARTY:                   Plaintiff Bank of America NA

RESPONDING PARTY:       Defendant Martin Lima Peery.

Motion to Enforce Settlement.

The court considered the moving papers. Defendant has not filed an opposition.

BACKGROUND 

            This action arises from the unpaid debt of Defendant Martin Lima Peery (Defendant).

            On March 13, 2019, Defendant entered into a settlement agreement (Settlement) with Plaintiff Bank of America, NA (Plaintiff). The settlement provides for judgment in the sum of $26,440.46, but the judgment amount will not be entered against Defendant so long as he makes timely monthly payments until said amount is paid off. (Mettias Decl., ¶ 2; Ex. 1.) The settlement further provides that if Defendant fails to make timely payment of any installment, then the full remaining balance will be due and Plaintiff will be entitled to enter judgment for the full judgment amount, plus costs, less credit for past payments. (Mettias Decl., ¶ 2; Ex. 1.) Lastly, the settlement does not require further notice to the Defendant in the event of default. (Mettias Decl., ¶ 3; Ex. 1.)

            On December 19, 2020, Defendant failed to make a timely payment and thereby defaulted under the terms of the settlement. (Mettias Decl., ¶ 4; Ex. 2.)

            On February 22, 2023, Plaintiff filed this motion to enforce the settlement (Motion).

LEGAL STANDARD

            Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6 authorizes the Court to enforce settlement agreements.  The section provides in relevant part that: If parties to pending litigation stipulate, in a writing signed by the parties outside the presence of the court…, for settlement of the case…, the court, upon motion, may enter judgment pursuant to the terms of the settlement.  Code Civ. Proc., § 664.6 (a).  In enacting section 664.6, the Legislature, “created a summary, expedited procedure to enforce settlement agreements where certain requirements that decrease the likelihood of misunderstanding are met.” (Levy v. Superior Court (1995) 10 Cal.4th 578, 585.)

            There is a strong public policy favoring settlement of litigation, and section 664.6 provides, “an expedited procedure for enforcing a settlement once it has been agreed upon.”  (Osumi v. Sutton (2007)151 Cal.App.4th 1355, 1359–1360.)

DISCUSSION 

            Here, Defendant failed make payment on December 19, 2020. (Mettias Decl., ¶ 4; Ex. 2.) The settlement, to which both parties stipulated, states that, “Time is of the essence with respect to all payments. If Defendant fails to make full and timely payment of any installment . . . then the full remaining balance will be due, and Plaintiff shall be entitled to enter judgment for the Judgment Amount, plus any motion and/order fees required by the court, less credit payments made.” (Ex. 1.) Given the terms of the settlement and Defendant’s default, Defendant now owes Plaintiff the full judgment amount, plus additional costs of $131.17, less $4,400 for payments Defendant has already made. (Mettias Decl., ¶ 7; Ex. 1; Ex. 2.) Defendant therefore owes Plaintiff $22,171.63. Defendant, for his part, has not opposed the motion at issue.

CONCLUSION 

Based on the foregoing, the court grants Plaintiff’s motion to enforce settlement and enters judgment pursuant to stipulation of the parties. Accordingly, Defendant is ordered to pay Plaintiff $22,171.63.

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 DATED:  ¿April 10, 2023 

_____________________________ 

Colin Leis 

Judge of the Superior Court