Judge Mark E. Windham, Case Number: 05A01698, Date: 2024-01-23 Tentative Ruling

If you desire to submit on the tentative ruling, you may do so by e-mailing Dept. 26 at the Spring Street Courthouse until the morning of the motion hearing.

The e-mail address is SSCdept26@lacourt.org

The heading on your e-mail should contain the case name, number, hearing date, and that you submit. The message should indicate your name, contact information, and the party you represent. Please note, the above e-mail address is to inform the court of your submission on the tentative ruling. All other inquiries will not receive a response.

If there are no appearances by either side and no submission on the Court's tentative ruling, the matter will be placed OFF CALENDAR.

Due to overcrowding concerns of COVID-19, all parties shall make every effort to schedule a remote appearance via LACourtConnect (https://my.lacourt.org/laccwelcome) for their next hearing. The parties shall register with LACourtConnect at least 2 hours prior to their scheduled hearing time.

Judgment Creditor Bag Fund, Inc.’s Motion to Amend Renewal of Judgment is DENIED.

This collections action was filed on May 3, 2005 by Plaintiff L&J Assets, LLC (“Plaintiff’) against Defendant Helen L. Alexander (“Defendant”). Default judgment was entered against Defendant on January 9, 2006. Notice of Assignment of Judgment from Plaintiff to Bag Fund, LLC was filed on September 21, 2009; the judgment was then assigned from Bag Fund, LLC to Bag Fund, Inc. (“Judgment Creditor”), on December 21, 2011.

On December 18, 2012, the Court granted Judgment Creditor’s Application for an Order for Sale of Real Property with respect to 8943 Telfair Avenue, Sun Valley, California (“the Property”) in order to satisfy the judgment. On March 21, 2014, an Assignment of Judgment and Acknowledgment of Assignment of Judgment was filed assigning the judgment to Jason Lynn (“Lynn”). The judgment was then renewed on October 14, 2014, pursuant to an application filed by only by Judgment Creditor.

On July 20, 2020, the case was reassigned to the Limited Jurisdiction Court, Department 26 of the Spring Street Courthouse. On April 30, 2021, the Court denied the motion of non-party Narek Aroutynyan (“Aroutynyan”) for leave to intervene. (Minute Order, 04/30/21.)

Notices of Related Case were also filed with respect to this case in In Re Alexander James, LASC Case No. 17STPB08246 and Aroutynyan v. Bag Fund, Inc., LASC Case No. 21STCV22192. (Notices of Related Case, filed 08/23/21 and 10/04/21.) Both Notices of Related Cases were subsequently denied. (Minute Orders, 11/22/21 and 12/08/21.) On August 18, 2023, the Court denied Judgment Creditor’s ex parte application for an order transferring the case to the Chatsworth Collections Hub. (Minute Order, 08/18/23.)

Judgment Creditor filed the instant Motion to Amended Renewal of Judgment to Correct Clerical Error on August 22, 2023. Non-parties Amwest Funding Corporation (“Amwest”) filed an opposition on October 25, 2023; Aroutynyan filed an opposition October 30, 2023. On November 1, 2023, Judgment Creditor filed a Declaration of Recission; Judgment Creditor also filed an Application for and Renewal of Judgment on January 11, 2024.

Judgment Creditor moves to amend the renewal of judgment entered on October 14, 2014, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (d) or section 187. An amendment to the renewal of judgment under Code of Civil Procedure section 187 is typically done to bring in an alter ego of the judgment debtor, as in the cases cited by Judgment Creditor: Highland Springs Conference & Training Center v. City of Banning (2016) 244 Cal.App.4th 267, 273 and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Weinberg (2014) 227 Cal.App.4th 1, 3. It does not appear that Code of Civil Procedure section 187 is an appropriate vehicle by which to correct a clerical error in a renewal of judgment. However, Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (d) provides that the court may “correct clerical mistakes in its judgments or orders as entered, so as to conform to the judgment or order directed . . . .” (Code Civ. Proc., § 473, subd. (d).)

Judgment Creditor moves to amend the renewal of judgment to correct the applicant’s name from “Bag Fund, Inc.” to “Bag Fund, Inc. and Jason Lynn.” (Motion, p. 7:18.) The request is brought on the grounds that an assignment of judgment was filed with the Court on March 21, 2014 indicating that Judgment Creditor assigned its “right, title and interest” in the judgment in favor of Jason Lynn, with Judgment Creditor to maintain responsibility for collection and servicing of the judgment. (Assignment of Judgment, filed 03/21/14.) The application for renewal of judgment, however, omitted “Jason Lynn” from the applicant’s name, in error. (Application for Renewal, filed 10/14/14, ¶1.)

Non-parties Artounynyan and Amwest filed oppositions to the instant Motion on the grounds that they are parties “in the related case Aroutynyan v. Bag Fund, Inc., et al., LASC Case No. 21STCV22192 (the “Aroutynyan case”). (Artounynyan Opp., p. 2:1-4; Amwest Opp., p. 1:25-26.) Although Artounynyan and Amwest characterize the Aroutynyan case as “related” to this action, it is not. The notice of related case was denied on December 8, 2021. Nor have Artounynyan and Amwest otherwise shown they have standing to file oppositions to the instant Motion. Therefore, the Court will not consider the oppositions.

Despite filing the instant Motion to amend, on multiple dates, Judgment Creditor also filed “Notice and Declaration of Rescission and/or Withdrawal of Assignment of Judgment Acknowledged on March 10, 2014.” (Notice and Declaration of Recission, filed 07/26/23, 08/15/23, 11/01/23.) The declaration of rescission was signed by Lynn on August 31, 2017 and states that Lynn “hereby relinquishes and returns any and all equitable rights and interest he may have in said judgment to Bag Fund, Inc.” (Ibid. at pp. 1-2.) The Motion does not address the significance of the declaration of rescission. Yet it seems to the Court that amending the renewal of judgment to add Lynn as an applicant at this date, years after it was filed and years after Lynn had rescinded his interest in the judgment, serves no purpose. Although Judgment Creditor was erroneously stated to be the applicant, it now holds all interest in the judgment, as it did up until March 21, 2014. Indeed, in the Application for and Renewal of Judgment filed by Judgment Creditor on January 11, 2024, the application is again listed only as “Bag Fund, Inc.” (App. For Renewal, filed 01/11/24, ¶1.)

Therefore, the Court declines to exercise its discretion to amend the renewal of judgment at this time.

Judgment Creditor Bag Fund, Inc.’s Motion to Amend Renewal of Judgment is DENIED.