Judge Holly J. Fujie, Case Number: BC701900, Date: 2023-05-10 Tentative Ruling

MOVING PARTY: Defendants Marco Khorasani, Nicole Khorasani, and LAX Cafe & Convenience Store, Inc. (collectively, “Moving Defendants”)

On April 3, 2023, the Court entered a Final Judgment in Condemnation (the “Judgment”). On June 28, 2023, the Court granted Moving Defendants’ motion for withdrawal of compensation after judgment to satisfy outstanding liens but required that an undertaking be posted. On August 28, 2023, the Court granted Moving Defendants’ motion for partial withdrawal of deposit in order to satisfy five liens.

On November 21, 2023, Moving Defendants filed a motion for withdrawal of remaining deposit of compensation (the “Motion”). The Motion seeks an order permitting the withdrawal of the remainder of the deposit, to be used first to satisfy the final judgment creditor, and then deposited for the benefit of Moving Defendants. The Motion further requests that the Court not require Moving Defendants to post an undertaking in light of the satisfaction of all outstanding judgment liens.

Under California Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) section 1268.140, subdivision (a), after entry of judgment, any defendant who has an interest in the property for which a deposit has been made may apply for and obtain a court order that he be paid from the deposit the amount to which he is entitled upon his filing either of the following: (1) a satisfaction of the judgment; or (2) a receipt for the money which shall constitute a waiver by operation of law of all claims and defenses except a claim for greater compensation. (CCP § 1268.140, subd. (a).) CCP section 1268.140 is the only code section that governs withdrawal of funds in an eminent domain case after judgment. (Medical Acquisition Co., Inc. v. Superior Court (2018) 19 Cal.App.5th 313, 326.)

Under CCP section 708.410, a judgment creditor who has a money judgment against a judgment debtor who is a party to a pending action or special proceeding may obtain a lien under this article, to the extent required to satisfy the judgment creditor's money judgment, on both of the following: (1) any cause of action of such judgment debtor for money or property that is the subject of the action or proceeding; and (2) the rights of such judgment debtor to money or property under any judgment subsequently procured in the action or proceeding. (CCP § 708.410, subd. (a).) Under CCP section 708.470, if the judgment debtor is entitled to money or property under the judgment in the action or special proceeding and a lien created under this article exists, upon application of any party to the action or special proceeding, the court may order that the judgment debtor's rights to money or property under the judgment be applied to the satisfaction of the lien created under this article as ordered by the court. (CCP § 708.470, subd. (a).)

In his opposition (the “Opposition”), Luparello argues that Moving Defendants should be required to post an undertaking in light of a potential adverse judgment in a pending employment matter.[1] Luparello, however, is not currently a creditor entitled to a lien on the Judgment or a party to the action. The Opposition does not set forth a basis for placing conditions on the withdrawal of the Judgment in an otherwise uncontested matter where all creditors’ claims have been satisfied based on the possibility that a non-party without an existing lien may obtain a money judgment in an unrelated case against some Defendants at some point in the future.

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SMC_DEPT56@lacourt.org as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org. If the department does not receive an email and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion will be placed off calendar.

[1] Luparello’s judgment lien against Marco Khorasani in his individual capacity was satisfied after the Court permitted a partial withdrawal on August 28, 2023.