Judge: Mark C. Kim, Case: 20LBCP00248, Date: 2023-05-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 20LBCP00248    Hearing Date: May 11, 2023    Dept: S27

1.     Background Facts

On 10/16/20, the Labor Commissioner commenced this action by filing a petition to have the Clerk enter judgment based on the final order of the Labor Commissioner.  The same day, the Clerk entered judgment.  On 11/06/21, Donald P. Brigham filed a notice of limited representation, indicating he would be representing the judgment creditor (Singh) in connection with collections efforts.  On 7/02/21, Brigham filed a substitution of attorney, pursuant to which Singh commenced representing himself. 

2.     Ex Parte Application

On 4/28/23, Bansal filed an ex parte application to remove all liens and levy and stay further collections of judgment, contending the judgment has been satisfied in full and all such liens and levies are inappropriate, but remain attached to his property.  The Court, Honorable Michael P. Vicencia presiding, denied the ex parte application without prejudice on the ground that the papers had not been served.  The Court set the matter for hearing on shortened time on 5/11/23, with any opposition to be filed by 5/09/23.  Singh filed opposition papers timely on 5/09/23.

3.     Motion to Remove Encumbrances

a.     Parties’ Positions

Bansal, in the moving papers, contends the parties agreed, on 8/21/19, to settle the case for $118,000.08, which payments have been fully made.  Bansal contends he has paid Singh for all amounts due by check, and that Singh has confirmed all amounts due have been paid via an email.  He contends he recently discovered there were liens against his property, which must be removed.

Singh, in opposition to the motion, contends Bansal breached the original settlement agreement, which resulted in entry of judgment in the full amount due per the Labor Commissioner’s decision.  He contends payments were made late and were returned due to insufficient funds.  He contends the email referenced in the moving papers is not conclusive evidence on the issue. 

b.     Issues Presented by the Parties

The parties present two issues in connection with this motion.  First, what does the settlement agreement require?  Second, what is the evidence concerning compliance with the terms of the settlement agreement?  The second issue requires the Court to consider both physical evidence of checks sent and cashed and also the email the parties reference in the moving and opposition papers. 

c.     Settlement Agreement

The parties’ settlement agreement is attached to the moving papers as Exhibit A.  It requires Bansal to pay Singh the total amount of $118,000.08 by making 18 consecutive monthly installment payments of $6555.56 each commencing 9/30/19.  It provides, “In the event any one of the payments called for in the payment plan is not made when the payment is due, the parties hereby authorize the Labor Commissioner to issue an Order, Decision or Award by Settlement which directs the Defendant(s) to pay the Plaintiff the sum of $454,065.89…”

d.     Compliance with Settlement Agreement

As Exhibit B, Bansal provides copies of all checks sent to Singh.  He declares that all checks cleared.  Singh, in opposition to the motion, contends several payments were made after the 30^th of the month, and the 12/30/20 payment check was returned due to insufficient funds on 1/04/21. 

The parties reference a 5/14/21 email, which is from Yashdeep Singh, Esq., and states:

Donald:

Here is the email chain with the Labor Commissioner and Gus Alfaro.  Significantly, in an email on October 28, 2020 – after the judgment was entered – Mr. Alfaro stated, “as of today’s date of October 28, 2020 my client (Sarbjeet Singh) has received all monthly payments including November 1, 2020 payment.  I would agree to withdraw judgment filed.  G. Alfaro rep. for Sarbjeet Singh.”

With the opposition, Singh has provided an email from Alfaro who explains that, while he may have said the payments were made, he did not say they were made timely. 

The parties’ evidence is in conflict concerning whether payments were timely made, but it appears at least one payment was returned for insufficient funds, such that the provision in the settlement agreement permitting the Labor Commissioner to have judgment entered would be triggered.

e.     Additional Issues

The Court has two additional issues with the motion.  First, it seems the Labor Commissioner should be given notice of the hearing on the motion.  The Labor Commissioner is the party who initiated the case, and is an interested party to the litigation.

Second, Bansal did not provide authority permitting the Court to remove liens or levies by way of ex parte application or noticed motion.  Bansal cites the Court’s inherent authority, and then cites a 1945 case that does not appear to have any application to the facts of this case.  Without authority permitting the Court to remove the liens and levies, the Court will not grant the motion.

f.      Conclusion

The motion is denied.  The ruling is without prejudice.  If Bansal wishes to have the motion granted, he must (a) provide notice to the Labor Commissioner, (b) provide authority for the relief requested, and (c) provide evidence that payments were not just made, but were timely made, such that the provision in the agreement permitting entry of judgment was not triggered. 

Bansal is ordered to give notice. 

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the court at gdcdepts27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  If the department does not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the tentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed off calendar.  If a party submits on the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must identify the party submitting on the tentative. If any party does not submit on the tentative, the party should make arrangements to appear remotely at the hearing on this matter.