Judge Mark E. Windham, Case Number: 17STCP01152, Date: 2023-05-25 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.

Alvarez v. Applied Concrete Construction, et al.

VACATE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT

(CCP §§ 473(d), 187)

Judgment Assignee California Labor Commissioner’s Motion to Vacate and/or Strike Erroneously Filed Acknowledgment of Partial Satisfaction of Judgment is GRANTED.

On October 17, 2017, Judgment Creditor Walter Alvarez (“Judgment Creditor”) filed an Application for Entry of Judgment on Final Order, Decision or Award of the Labor Commissioner. The Court entered judgment the same day against Judgment Debtor Applied Concrete Construction (“Judgment Debtor”). On January 12, 2018, an Assignment of Judgment was filed indicating that the judgment had been assigned to the California Labor Commissioner (“Judgment Assignee”).

Judgment Assignee filed an Acknowledgement of Satisfaction of Judgment on January 26, 2023. On April 17, 2023, Judgment Assignee filed the instant Motion to Vacate Erroneously Filed Acknowledgement of Satisfaction of Judgment. No opposition has been filed to date.

The Motion is brought, in part, pursuant the Court’s inherent powers to correct judgments by a nunc pro tunc order where there has been clerical error by clerk or by the judge himself, or where some provision of, or omission from, order or judgment was due to inadvertence, or mistake of court. (Lane v. Superior Court of Siskiyou County (1950) 98 Cal App 2d 165, 219; Code Civ. Proc., § 473, subdivision (d).) It may also be exercised by the courts “for the purpose of doing justice between the parties.” (Fox v. Hale & Norcross Silver Min. Co. (1895) 108 Cal. 478, 480.) Here, the Motion is supported by a declaration from Judgment Assignee’s counsel attesting that the Acknowledgment of Partial Satisfaction of Judgment was filed by Judgment Assignee without following the proper procedures for allocating the credits for a partial payment and included payment for fees not applicable to this judgment. (Motion, Diaz-Weaver Decl., ¶8.)

The declaration demonstrates that the Acknowledgment of Partial Satisfaction of Judgment was filed due to a clerical error, which was then adopted by the Court. Therefore, the request to vacate the Acknowledgment of Partial Satisfaction of Judgment is granted.

Judgment Assignee California Labor Commissioner’s Motion to Vacate and/or Strike Erroneously Filed Acknowledgment of Partial Satisfaction of Judgment is GRANTED.