TENTATIVE RULING

Defendant Edward C. Schewe’s Motion to Enforce Settlement and for Attorney’s Fees is DENIED.

Defendant Edward C. Schewe to give notice. 

REASONING

Defendant Edward C. Schewe (“Defendant”) moves the Court for an order enforcing the terms of the parties’ November 18, 2022 settlement agreement pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6 on the ground that Plaintiff Mayfield Regency Homeowners Association (“Plaintiff”) asserted a claim in a small claims action demanding payment for hiring a professional managing agent, a claim that is barred by the settlement agreement. Plaintiff seeks an order finding Plaintiff to be in breach of the agreement and stating that any judgment from the small claims matter is void and unenforceable, or granting judgment to Defendant in the amount of $10,000 plus costs awarded in Plaintiff’s small claims judgment.

“If parties to pending litigation stipulate, in a writing signed by the parties outside 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.) 

The 2022 settlement agreement states that the sum paid under the agreement was in “payment in full of all his/her/their/its claims, known and unknown, arising from the events described in the complaint and/or cross-complaint with the knowledge that they will be barred from proceeding against the opposing or other party in the future, regardless of what might happen.” (Mot., Ex. 1, p. 2, ¶ 2.) In this action, Plaintiff alleged that Defendant breached the applicable covenants, conditions, and restrictions by failing to pay regular monthly assessments, late fees, interest, and other charges starting December 1, 2019 and continuing to the present. (Compl. ¶ 7.) It is clear, then, that Plaintiff was seeking to recover unpaid amounts from December 1, 2019 through the date of resolution of the action, as there was no statement that it related to future assessments.

On May 2, 2024, Plaintiff filed a small claims action against Defendant seeking recovery for the first two specified quarterly special assessments that Defendant had not paid. (Opp’n, Chang Decl. ¶ 17.) Judgment was entered in Plaintiff’s favor on August 22, 2024, Defendant appealed, and on October 4, 2024, judgment was again entered in Plaintiff’s favor. (Opp’n, Chang Decl. ¶¶ 18-19, 22-23.) Defendant argues here that the settlement agreement prohibited Plaintiff from filing the small claims action and having judgment entered in its favor, but this argument is not well taken. The settlement agreement related to amounts due as of the date of entry of that agreement; it did not make any statement regarding future assessments or future sums that may come due. Put simply, there is no basis to conclude that the small claims action was barred in any way because the money sought in the small claims action did not accrue during the pendency of this action. Accordingly, Defendant Edward C. Schewe’s Motion to Enforce Settlement and for Attorney’s Fees is DENIED.