Judge: Mark A. Young, Case: 19SMCV00640, Date: 2024-09-11 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 19SMCV00640 Hearing Date: September 11, 2024 Dept: M
CASE NAME: The Ridge
Condominium v. Ridge Property LLC, et al.
CASE NO.: 19SMCV00640
MOTION: Motion
to Enter Judgment (CCP § 664.6)
HEARING DATE: 9/11/2024
Legal
Standard
Code of Civil Procedure section¿664.6
provides:
“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.”
“Section
664.6 empowers a court to enforce a settlement agreement by way of a summary
procedure if certain requirements are satisfied. In order to take advantage of
the statute’s expedited procedure, a party must first establish the agreement
at issue was set forth ‘in a writing signed by the parties’ or was made orally
before the court.” (Harris v. Rudin, Richman & Appel (1999) 74
Cal.App.4th 299, 304, citations omitted.) “Because of its summary nature, strict compliance with the
requirements of section 664.6 is prerequisite to invoking the power of the
court to impose a settlement agreement.” (Sully-Miller Contracting Co. v.
Gledson/Cashman Construction, Inc. (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 30, 37.) In
ruling on a motion under section 664.6, the trial judge may receive oral
testimony, or may determine the motion upon declarations alone. (Corkland v.
Boscoe (1984) 156 Cal.App.3d 989, 994.) Where the agreement was reached at
a court hearing, the court can resolve the dispute on the basis of its own
notes or recollection of what was agreed to (as well as any transcripts of the
proceedings). (Richardson v. Richardson (1986) 180 Cal.App.3d 91, 97.)
“‘[V]oluntary dismissal of an
action or special proceeding terminates the court’s jurisdiction over the
matter.’” (Mesa RHF Partners, L.P. v.
City of Los Angeles (2019) 33 Cal.App.5th 913, 917.) “‘If requested by the parties,’
however, ‘the [trial] court may retain jurisdiction over the parties to enforce
[a] settlement until performance in full of the terms of the settlement… A
request for the trial court to retain jurisdiction under section 664.6 ‘must
conform to the same three requirements which the Legislature and the courts
have deemed necessary for section 664.6 enforcement of the settlement itself… The
‘request must be express, not implied from other language, and it must be clear
and unambiguous.’” (Id.; see Hagan Engineering, Inc. v. Mills
(2003) 115 Cal.App.4th 1004, 1008 [“The settlement language purporting to vest
the trial court with retained jurisdiction after the dismissal was a nullity:
Subject matter jurisdiction cannot be conferred by consent, waiver or estoppel”].)
Analysis
Plaintiff
The Ridge Condominium (“HOA”) moves for an order enforcing the settlement
agreement reached between the HOA and Defendant Ridge
Property LLC.
There is no reasonable dispute that
the parties entered into a settlement agreement regarding this action during
the pendency of the action. The court issued a judgment of dismissal, and an
express retention of jurisdiction that “that such settlement includes
compliance obligations that will be ongoing and pursuant to the settlement, the
Parties agree that Section 664.6 [] shall apply to this Settlement Agreement,
and that the Court shall retain jurisdiction over the Parties to enforce this
Settlement Agreement.” (Stip. Jud. ¶ A.) The settlement and retention of
jurisdiction both comply with the requirements of section 664.6. (Brachman
Decl., Exs. A-B.) Therefore, the Court has jurisdiction to enforce the terms of
the settlement agreement.
Plaintiff demonstrates that
Defendant breached several terms of the Settlement Agreement and has not paid
the full amount. As to the default terms, the Settlement Agreement states in
relevant part:
1.
Payment. Ridge agrees to pay the HOA the sum of one hundred
thousand dollars ($ 100,000.00), in five (5) equal instalments of twenty
thousand dollars ($20,000.00). The first instalment payment of twenty thousand
dollars ($20,000.00) shall be due simultaneous with the full execution of this Agreement
and delivery of a W-9 by the HOA, with each of the four subsequent instalment
payments of twenty thousand dollars ($20,000.00) to be paid thirty days after
the first payment is made, with each subsequent payment to be made thirty (30)
days thereafter.
2.
Guaranty by Nissani; Stipulation for Judgment. In the
event that Ridge fails to make any installment payment when due, the HOA may
issue a written notice letter to Nissani at [address]. Nissani shall then remit
the missed payment on behalf of Ridge within five (5) business days of receipt
of the written notice (the "Cure Period"). In the event the amounts
due have not been remitted upon expiration of the Cure Period, then the HOA
may, without any further notice to Nissani or Ridge, file the Stipulation for
Entry of Judgment against Nissani and Ridge ("Stipulation"), the form
of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, and seek to enforce the Judgment
entered upon the Stipulation. Counsel for the HOA shall hold the Stipulation in
escrow until all installment payments have been made and upon the final
installment payment and completion of all modifications in paragraph 3 below,
counsel for the HOA shall destroy all copies of the Stipulation. The HOA shall
enter a partial satisfaction of judgment for any installment amounts paid by
Nissani or Ridge prior to entry of the Stipulation, and in no event shall HOA
seek to recover more than the amounts set forth in this Agreement.
(Ex. A [Settlement Agreement §§ 1-2].)
Defendant delivered one installment
payment of twenty thousand dollars without sufficient funds and failed to reissue
a check with sufficient funds. (Brachman Decl., ¶ 7.) According to the default
terms of the Settlement Agreement, the Court may only enter the stipulated
judgment “upon default of any of the payment
obligations in the Settlement Agreement by Ridge Property, LLC”. (Stip. Jud. §
2.) The HOA therefore had the option to issue a written notice letter to
Nissani at the specified address. The HOA does not explain whether they
provided written notice to cure in compliance with the Settlement Agreement. There
is no evidence that Nissani failed to remit any missed payment within five
business days of receipt of the written notice. As this cure period has not
expired, the Court cannot enter the proffered judgment pursuant to the
settlement agreement’s terms. To the
extent written notice was provided, the Court would continue the matter so that
Plaintiff may file a declaration with the notice.
Plaintiff observes other violations
of the settlement agreement, citing to sections 3-5. Section 3(b) states:
"b. Replacement and
installation of new moulding along the Pont exterior of the Property. Along the
front exterior portion of the Property that is visible from the street, Ridge
shall remove the existing moulding features and install the previously approved
moulding identified as Architectural Elements MLD054127. The portions of the
Property to include moulding modifications are depicted in the photos attached
hereto as Exhibit B, Ridge shall have the new moulding features inspected by a
licensed and certified inspector of its choosing, in order to confirm that the
moulding features do not pose any safety concerns. The cost of the foregoing
inspection is to be borne by Ridge. Ridge will sign a mutually acceptable
agreement indemnifying the HOA from liability resulting from the improvement
and to add the HOA as a loss payee on its insurance, pursuant to section 4.3 of
the CC&Rs and as set forth in Section 5 below."
Sections 4-5 of the Agreement state:
[4a.] CC&Rs. Ridge hereby acknowledges
and submits to the requirements of the Restated Declaration of Covenants,
Conditions, and Restrictions, dated March 24, 2007 (the "CC&Rs").
Future modifications shall follow the requirements of the CC&Rs, and the
HOA shall exercise good faith and act reasonably regarding any requests or
applications presented by Ridge.
5. Indemnification; Recording of
Indemnification; Insurance. With respect to the moulding (identified in Section
3(b), above), the balusters on the balconies (identified in Section 3(c),
above), the balconies (identified in Section 3(d), above), and the glass back
wall (identified in Section 3(e), above), Ridge shall indemnify and hold the
HOA and its board members harmless from any liabilities resulting from the
modifications identified in Sections 3(b)-(e) above, pursuant to Section 4.3 of
the CC&Rs. Within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date, Ridge shall add
the HOA as an additional insured on its homeowners' policy pursuant. HOA shall
record the indemnification agreement(s) identified in this Section 5, together
with those referenced in Section 3 b, c, d and e above (to the extent they are
different), on title to inform any future owner of the Property of the
obligation to indemnify the HOA with respect to the modifications identified
herein.
Plaintiff evidences Defendant’s
failure to abide by these terms. Defendant installed molding, but not in the
correct location or using the identified molding. (Brachman Decl., ¶ 8.) Defendant
has installed new lighting fixtures around the Subject Unit without
architectural approval from the Board, and planted two apple trees in the
common area landscape without prior approval from the Board, also in violation
of the CC&Rs. (¶ 9.) Plaintiff prepared and delivered an indemnity agreement
to Defendant on multiple occasions but he refuses to sign, notarize or return
the indemnity agreement. (¶¶ 10-18.) The Court concurs that Defendant has these
obligations under the Settlement Agreement. Defendant presents no substantive
opposition to justify its failures to comply with the terms of the settlement
agreement to these ends. However, the terms of the Settlement Agreement and Stipulated
Judgment provide that only “default of any of the payment obligations in
the Settlement Agreement by Ridge Property, LLC” would result in the proposed
stipulated judgment being entered. (Stip. Jud. § 2, emphasis added.) The terms
are silent as to defaults on the non-monetary portions of the settlement. As
stated, Plaintiff has not shown the prerequisite notice for cure required by
the Stipulated Judgment. Thus, there is no default justifying the entry of the
proposed judgment under the terms of the settlement agreement.
Accordingly, the motion is DENIED
without prejudice.