Judge: Gary I. Micon, Case: 24CHCV00762, Date: 2025-05-12 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 24CHCV00762 Hearing Date: May 12, 2025 Dept: F43
Dept. F43
Date: 05-12-25
Case # 24CHCV00762, American Express
National Bank v. Jae Lee aka Jae Y. Lee
Trial Date: 08-17-26
MOTION TO ENFORCE
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff American Express National
Bank
RESPONDING PARTY: No response has been filed.
RELIEF REQUESTED
Order granting judgment pursuant to defendant
Jae Lee aka Jae Y. Lee’s default under the terms of a written Settlement
Agreement.
RULING: Motion
is granted.
SUMMARY OF ACTION
On March 11, 2024, American Express National
Bank filed this action against Jae Lee aka Jae Y. Lee to collection a
$36,127.22 debt. The complaint alleges
two common count claims.
On the parties executed a written settlement
agreement on May 28, 2024 (Jae Lee) and June 19, 2024 (American Express). On June 20, 2024, American Express filed an
application for the court to retain jurisdiction under Code Civ. Proc., § 664.6
and to dismiss this case.
Lee breached the agreement by failing to make
timely payments.
American Express now moves to enforce the
written settlement agreement. No
opposition has been filed.
REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE
American Express asks the court to take
judicial notice of the following:
·
Exhibit 1 - Settlement Agreement
·
Exhibit 2 - Default letter sent from American Express to Defendant
about defaulting under the Settlement Agreement
The court grants judicial notice of Exhibit 1
pursuant to Evid. Code, § 452(d) and Exhibit 2 pursuant to Evid. Code, § 453.
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.) “To do so it
may receive oral testimony in addition to declarations. If the same judge presides over both the
settlement and the section 664.6 hearing, he may avail himself of the benefit
of his own recollection.” (Kohn v.
Jaymar-Ruby, Inc. (1994) 23 Cal.App.4th 1530, 1533.)
Here, American Express presents its attorney’s
declaration, a copy of the stipulated agreement, and a copy of a December 6,
2024 default letter sent to Lee.
(Declaration of Spencer Penuela, Exhs. 1, 2.)
On May 28, 2024 and June 19, 2024, Lee and American
Express, respectively, signed the settlement agreement. (Penuela Dec., Exh. 1, at p. 5.) Under this agreement, Lee agreed to pay
American Express the settlement amount of $27,100.00 in $1,129.00 monthly
installments beginning May 24, 2024. (Exh.
1, at pp. 2-3.) Lee was required to make
all subsequent payments no later than the 24th of each month until the final
payment of $1,133.00 on April 24, 2026.
(Exh. 1, at p. 3.) The parties
also agreed to release each other from all claims, and American Express agreed
not to pursue the full account balance of $36,127.22. (Exh. 1, at p. 3.)
Lee defaulted under the agreement. (Penuela Dec., ¶ 5.)
Lee made one $1,129.00 payment. (Penuela Dec., ¶ 5.) According to the agreement, Lee should have
already paid $10,161.00. (Penuela Dec.,
¶ 5.) Counsel has made attempts to
contact Lee’s counsel (Exh. 2.), but Lee’s counsel has not responded. (Penuela Dec., ¶ 6.) Counsel cannot contact Lee directly because
Lee is a represented party and because Civil Code section 1788.14(c) prohibits
communication with the defendant when a debt collector has been notified in
writing that the defendant is represented by an attorney with respect to
consumer debt. (Penuela Dec., ¶¶ 7-8.)
The agreement states that if Lee defaults, American
Express may move for entry of judgment on the full account balance ($36,127.22),
less credit for payments received under the settlement agreement, plus any
court costs associated with filing and serving this action or any motion to
obtain judgment under the settlement agreement.
(Exh. 1, at pp. 3-4 [“[I]f either Party initiates a new action to
enforce the terms of this Settlement Agreement, the prevailing party in that
action shall be awarded reasonable attorney’s fees and court costs.”].)
American Express has shown that Lee is in default and
seeks judgment in the principal amount of $34,998.22 [$36,127.22 (account
balance) - $1,129.00 (payment made)], plus court costs of $ 597.84 [$458.77
(complaint filing fee) + $79.07 (service of process fee) + $60.00 (filing fee
for this motion)]: $35,596.06 total judgment.
(Penuela Dec., ¶ 9.)
The court finds that American Express is entitled to a
$35,596.06 judgment: $34,998.22 principal plus $597.84 in filing and service
fees, less a $1,129.00 payment.
Accordingly, the court orders enforcement of the
settlement agreement and awards American Express $35,596.06.
CONCLUSION and ORDER
The court enters judgment against defendant Jae Lee aka
Jae Y. Lee in the amount of $35,596.06 and orders the following:
Plaintiff American Express National Bank to give notice.