Judge Mark E. Windham, Case Number: 22STLC04872, Date: 2024-07-18 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.

MOTION FOR ORDER REQUIRING ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT AND FOR ATTORNEY FEES

Judgment Debtor Santa Monica Associates Hudson, Ltd.’s Motion For Order Requiring Acknowledgement Of Satisfaction Of Judgment And For Attorney Fees is DENIED. JUDGMENT DEBTOR SANTA MONICA ASSOCIATES HUDSON, LTD. IS TO PAY JUDGMENT CREDITOR ATTORNEY’S FEES OF $1,500.00.

On July 25, 2022, Plaintiff Elias Zepeda (“Judgment Creditor”) filed the Complaint in this action against Defendants Bungalow 40, LLC, Houman Arasteh, and Santa Monica Hudson Associates Limited Partnership (“Judgment Debtor SMHALP”). Default judgment was entered against Judgment Debtor SMHALP on October 10, 2022 in the amount of $4,000.00 principal, $800.00 attorney’s fees, and $427.90 costs. (Default Judgment, 10/10/22, ¶6.)

On April 18, 2023, Judgment Creditor filed a Memorandum of Costs After Judgment, Acknowledgment of Credit, and Declaration of Accrued Interest in the total amount of $1,184.40. (Memo of Costs, filed 04/18/23, ¶1.) Of these costs, $1,000.00 were for post-judgment attorney’s fees. (Ibid.) Judgment Creditor filed a second post-judgment Memorandum of Costs on September 28, 2023, seeking an additional $1,000.00 in attorney’s fees and $14.20 for e-filing. (Memo of Costs, filed 09/28/23, ¶1.) On October 16, 2023, Judgment Creditor filed a writ of execution.

Judgment Debtor SMHALP filed the instant Motion For Order Requiring Acknowledgement Of Satisfaction Of Judgment And For Attorney Fees on May 22, 2024. Judgment Creditor filed an opposition on June 12, 2024 and Judgment Debtor SMHALP replied on July 15, 2024.

Judgment Debtor SMHALP moves pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 724.050, which states in relevant part:

(a) If a money judgment has been satisfied, the judgment debtor, the owner of real or personal property subject to a judgment lien created under the judgment, or a person having a security interest in or a lien on personal property subject to a judgment lien created under the judgment may serve personally or by mail on the judgment creditor a demand in writing that the judgment creditor do one or both of the following:

(2) Execute, acknowledge, and deliver an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment to the person who made the demand.

(Code Civ. Proc., § 724.050, subd. (a).) “If the judgment has been satisfied, the judgment creditor shall comply with the demand not later than 15 days after actual receipt of the demand.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 724.050, subd. (c).) If the judgment creditor does not comply, the judgment debtor may move for an order from the Court, as follows: “If the court determines that the judgment has been satisfied and that the judgment creditor has not complied with the demand, the court shall either (1) order the judgment creditor to comply with the demand or (2) order the court clerk to enter satisfaction of the judgment.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 724.050, subd. (d).)

Although Judgment Debtor SMHALP argues that even a partial satisfaction of judgment obligated Judgment Creditor to deposit the checks and allow the Court to order Judgment Creditor to file an acknowledgement of satisfaction of judgment, there is a separate statute concerning acknowledgment of partial satisfaction of judgment. Specifically, Code of Civil Procedure section 724.110 has its own requirements concerning partial satisfaction. Therefore, Judgment Debtor SMHALP must demonstrate full satisfaction of the judgment for the relief sought under Code of Civil Procedure section 724.050.

The principal amount of the judgment entered on October 10, 2022 was $4,000.00, plus $800.00 in attorney’s fees and $427.90 in costs, for a total of $5,227.90. (Default Judgment, ¶6.) The judgment also indicates that waived fees of $229.50 must be paid directly to the Court. (Id. at ¶7.) The Court’s record shows that the $229.50 fee was paid on December 18, 2023, as declared by counsel for Judgment Debtor SMHALP. (Motion, Browne Decl., ¶7 and Exh. D.) When accounting for the judgment and the memoranda of costs, filed on April 18, 2023, an additional $1,000.00 was added for attorney’s fees, $184.20 in costs, and $272.14 interest. (Memo of Costs, 04/18/23.) The letter sent by Judgment Creditor’s counsel to Judgment Debtor SMHALP on September 20, 2023, however, included more than these additional fees and costs. The letter included an additional $1,000.00 in attorney’s fees, which had not been claimed in a memorandum of costs. (Motion, Browne Decl., Exh. A.) The total owed as of the September 20, 2023 communication from Judgment Creditor’s attorney to Judgment SMHALP, which included daily accruing interest, was $4,000.00 principal, $1,800.00 attorney’s fees, $612.10 costs, and $494.14 interest, for a total of $6,790.18.

Judgment Debtor SMHALP sent Judgment Creditor a cashier’s check in the amount of $5,956.74, which Judgment Creditor acknowledges receiving. (Motion, Browne Decl., ¶4; Opp., Mehrban Decl., ¶2.) Instead of crediting the money against the judgment, Judgment Creditor’s attorney sent the check back because it was not for the full amount of the judgment. (Opp., Mehrban Decl., ¶3.) To the extent that amount did not include the amounts claimed in the April 18, 2023 memorandum of costs and daily accruing interest, it was not full payment of the judgment. Nor has Judgment Debtor SMHALP shown that the remaining payment of $1,737.37 made on December 20, 2023 paid off the amount remaining after application of the initial payment to the judgment. As an example, Judgment Debtor SMHALP contends that interest is not calculated on attorney’s fees and costs, which is incorrect. (See Felczer v. Apple Inc. (2021) 63 Cal.App.5th 406, 415.) Therefore, the Motion for Requiring Acknowledgement Of Satisfaction Of Judgment And For Attorney Fees is denied.

Judgment Creditor seeks an award of attorney’s fees on this Motion pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 724.080 as the prevailing party. Judgment Creditor seeks $3,050.00 in fees based on 6.1 hours of time billed at $500.00 per hour. The Court finds this amount excessive for a three-page opposition memorandum. Attorney’s fees are awarded in the amount of $1,500.00.