Judge: Frank M. Tavelman, Case: 22BBCV00086, Date: 2022-07-26 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22BBCV00086 Hearing Date: July 26, 2022 Dept: A
|
MP: |
Plaintiff Financial Pacific Leasing, Inc. |
|
RP: |
Defendants Myth Factory Films; Douglas Rath; Mary
Ann Maybaum (no opposition) |
ALLEGATIONS:
Financial
Pacific Leasing, Inc. ("Plaintiff") filed suit against Myth Factory
Films, a California Corporation ("D/Myth"); Douglas Rath ("D/Rath");
and Mary Ann Maybaum ("D/Maybaum", and together, “Defendants”),
alleging that Myth entered into an agreement ("Finance Agreement")
with Plaintiff to finance certain equipment with Plaintiff, including (1) one 75mm
Elite S7 Anamorphic Lens, SN: A17175P511; (2) one APEXX X3,02-0-CM; and (3) one
27-inch iMac Pro with Retina 5K Display, plus parts and accessories
("Equipment"). Plaintiff alleges that D/Rath and D/Maybaum each
executed a Personal Guaranty for Myth's obligations under the Finance
Agreement. Plaintiff further alleges that Myth has defaulted under the Finance
Agreement.
Plaintiff filed a Complaint on February 9, 2022,
alleging four causes of action: (1) Breach of Equipment Finance Agreement; (2) Breach
of Guaranty; (3) Account Stated; and (4) Claim and Delivery.
PRESENTATION:
The Court received the Plaintiff’s Application
for Writs of Attachment as to D/Rath, D/Myth; D/Maybaum; and Application for
Writ of Possession as to D/Myth, each filed on February 14, 2022. The Court has
not received any opposition or reply.
On April 20, 2022, the Court continued
the instant matters to June 10, 2022.
On July 10, 2022, the Court continued
the instant matters to July 26, 2022.
RELIEF REQUESTED:
Plaintiff applies for a writ of attachment as
to D/Rath, D/Myth, and D/Maybaum as to the sum of $30,839.10.
Plaintiff applies for a writ of possession as
to Myth as to the Equipment.
ANALYSIS:
Proof of Service – On April 20, 2022, and
June 10, 2022, these matters came on for hearing, and Plaintiff represented to
the Court that the proof of service was not yet filed. The Court continued the
matters each time. Plaintiff has still not submitted a proof of service as to the
instant motions. On this basis, the Court denies the instant motions.
---
RECOMMENDED RULING:
In the event the parties submit on this
tentative ruling, or a party requests a signed order or the court in its
discretion elects to sign a formal order, the following form will be either
electronically signed or signed in hard copy and entered into the court’s
records.
ORDER
Plaintiff
Financial Pacific Leasing, Inc.'s Application for Writs of Attachment as
to D/Rath, D/Myth, D/Maybaum; and Application for Writ of Possession as to Myth
came on regularly for hearing on June 26, 2022, with appearances/submissions as
noted in the minute order for said hearing, and the court, being fully advised
in the premises, did then and there rule as follows:
THE APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF ATTACHMENT AS TO
RATH IS DENIED.
THE APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF ATTACHMENT AS TO
MYTH IS DENIED.
THE APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF ATTACHMENT AS TO
MAYBAUM IS DENIED.
THE
APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF POSSESSION AS TO MYTH IS DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATE: July
26, 2022 _______________________________
F.M. TAVELMAN, Judge
Superior
Court of California
County
of Los Angeles