Judge Mark E. Windham, Case 22STCP03778 2023-03-13 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Mark E. Windham, Case: 22STCP03778, Date: 2023-03-13 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCP03778 Hearing Date: March 13, 2023 Dept: 26

MOTION TO VACATE SISTER STATE JUDGMENT

(CCP §§ 1710.30, et seq.)
TENTATIVE RULING:

Judgment Debtor Frederick Irvin’s Motion to Vacate Sister State Judgment is GRANTED. THE JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THIS COURT ON OCTOBER 14, 2022 IS VACATED.

ANALYSIS:

On October 14, 2022, Judgment Creditor Nationwide Judgment Recovery, Inc. (“Judgment Creditor”) filed an Application for Entry of Judgment on Sister State Judgment based on a judgment from the Western District of North Carolina. (App., filed 10/14/22, ¶3b.) The Court entered judgment the same day against Judgment Debtor Frederick Irvin (“Judgment Debtor”). The Notice of Entry of Judgment was personally served on Judgment Debtor on November 6, 2022. (Proof of Service, filed 11/06/22.) On December 1, 2022, Judgment Debtor filed the instant Motion to Vacate Sister State Judgment. Judgment Creditor filed an opposition on March 1, 2023, contending that the Motion was not served until February 21, 2023.

Discussion

The Court agrees that there were problems with service of the Motion on Judgment Creditor. First, Judgment Creditor is represented by Chris Beyer of Wright Law Group, PLLC, located at 4470 W. Sunset Blvd., Suite 90003, Los Angeles, California. (App. for Entry of Sister-State Judgment, p. 1.) However, the Motion was served on Kraft Law, APC, 1500 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 500, Manhattan Beach, California. (Proof of Service, filed 02/21/23, ¶5.) It appears that Kraft Law, APC substituted in as counsel on March 1, 2023. Second, the Motion was not served until February 20, 2023, when the deadline to give notice by mail was February 11, 2023. (See Code Civ. Proc., §§ 1005, 1013.) Failure to give notice of a motion is not only a violation of the statutory requirements but of due process. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1005; Jones v. Otero (1984) 156 Cal.App.3d 754, 757.) However, Judgment Creditor has filed a substantive opposition and does not appear to have been prejudiced by the defects in service. Therefore, those defects are waived and the Court will consider the merits of the papers. (See Carlton v. Quint (2000) 77 Cal.App.4th 690, 697 [“It is well settled that the appearance of a party at the hearing of a motion and his or her opposition to the motion on its merits is a waiver of any defects or irregularities in the notice of motion.”].)

The Motion is brought pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1710.40, subdivision (a) of the Sister State Money-Judgments Act (“SSMJA”), which provides that a judgment entered based on a sister state judgment “may be vacated on any ground which would be a defense to an action in this state on the sister state judgment.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1710.40, subd. (a).) Code of Civil Procedure section 1710.40, subdivision (b) provides that “[n]ot later than 30 days after service of notice of entry of judgment . . . the judgment debtor, on written notice to the judgment creditor, may make a motion to vacate the judgment under this section.” “The party moving under section 1710.40 to set aside the sister state judgment has ‘the burden to show by a preponderance of the evidence why it was entitled to relief. [Citation.]’” (Conseco Marketing, LLC v. IFA & Ins. Services, Inc. (2013) 221 Cal. App. 4th 831, 841.) “As long as the sister state court had jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties, a sister state judgment is entitled to full faith and credit ‘even as to matters of law or fact erroneously decided.’” (Bank of America v. Jennett (1999) 77 Cal.App.4th 104, 118.)

A party moving to vacate a sister-state judgment must file and serve a motion “[n]ot later than 30 days after service of notice of entry of judgment pursuant to Section 1710.30.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1710.40, subd. (b).) Here, Judgment Creditor served the Notice of Entry of Sister-State Judgment by personal service on November 6, 2022. The instant Motion, therefore, had to be filed by December 6, 2022. The Motion was timely filed on December 1, 2022 but does not appear to have been served at that time. Furthermore, service was to the wrong address. Therefore, the Motion is not timely under the statute.

Substantively, however, the papers demonstrate that the judgment entered by this Court on October 14, 2022 must be vacated. The judgment for which Judgment Creditor applied for entry in this state does not meet the statutory definition of “sister state judgment” under the SSMJA. “ ‘Sister state judgment’ means that part of any judgment, decree, or order of a court of a state of the United States, other than California, which requires the payment of money, but does not include a support order as defined in Section 155 of the Family Code.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1710.10, subd. (c).) The judgment for which Judgment Creditor applied for entry in this action was from the Western District of North Carolina, a federal district court, not a state court. (App., filed 1014/22, Exh. 1.) Judgment Creditor even specifically admits in opposition that the SSMJA does not apply to the judgment from the Western District of North Carolina! (Opp., p. 6:12-22.) Except, it seems to think that the argument selectively applies to the provision regarding vacating the sister state judgment and not also to the provision providing for entry of such a judgment. Clearly, the definition of “sister state judgment” in Code of Civil Procedure section 1710.10 applies to the entirety of the SSMJA, including the provision that allows for application for entry of judgment at section 1710.15.)

Based on the foregoing, the Court never had authority to entry judgment of the judgment from the Western District of North Carolina and the judgment entered by this Court on October 14, 2022 is vacated.

Conclusion

Judgment Debtor Frederick Irvin’s Motion to Vacate Sister State Judgment is GRANTED. THE JUDGMENT ENTERED IN THIS COURT ON OCTOBER 14, 2022 IS VACATED.

Court clerk to give notice.