Judge: Mark E. Windham, Case: 24STLC02791, Date: 2024-10-22 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STLC02791    Hearing Date: October 22, 2024    Dept: 26


Kinecta Federal Credit Union v. Hudson, et al.

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

(CCP § 437c)

 

 

 

TENTATIVE RULING: 

 

Plaintiff Kinecta Federal Credit Union’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. PLAINTIFF IS TO FILE AND SERVE A PROPOSED JUDGMENT WITHIN 10 DAYS OF THIS ORDER.

 

 

ANALYSIS:

 

Plaintiff Kinecta Federal Credit Union (“Plaintiff”) brought this action for breach of contract against Defendant Derek J. Husdon (“Defendant”) on April 16, 2024. Defendant filed an answer in properia persona on May 15, 2024.

 

On June 27, 2024, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion for Summary Judgment. No opposition has been filed to date.

 

Discussion

 

The Complaint alleges a single cause of action for breach of contract. On February 8, 2022, Defendant executed a written Loan and Security Agreements and Disclosure Statement (the “Agreement”) in the principal sum of $20,000.00, which was payable in monthly installment payments of $434.74, beginning on March 10, 2022, with final payment due on February 10, 2027. (Compl., ¶5.) On April 11, 2023, Defendant defaulted on the payments by failing and refusing to make the monthly payment then due and owing. (Id. at ¶6.) As of September 28, 2023, the amount owing and unpaid from Defendant is $16,920.45. (Id. at ¶7.) Under the terms of the agreement, Defendant agreed to pay reasonable attorney’s fees incurred in a collection action. (Id. at ¶8.)

 

Plaintiff moves for summary judgment on the Complaint pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 437c. On a motion for summary judgment or adjudication of a particular cause of action, a moving plaintiff must show that there is no defense by proving each element of the cause of action entitling the party to judgment on that cause of action. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (p)(1).) Then the burden shifts to the defendant to show that a triable issue of one or more material facts exists as to that cause of action or a defense. (Code Civ. Proc., § 437c, subd. (p)(1).) Additionally, in ruling on the Motion, the Court must view the “evidence [citations] and such inferences [citations], in the light most favorable to the opposing party.” (Intrieri v. Superior Court (2004) 117 Cal.App.4th 72, 81 [citing Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 843].)

 

Cause of Action for Breach of Agreement

 

The elements of a cause of action for breach of contract are (1) the existence of contract; (2) plaintiff’s performance or excuse for nonperformance; (3) defendant’s breach (or anticipatory breach); and (4) resulting damage. (Wall Street Network, Ltd. v. N. Y. Times Co. (2008) 164 Cal.App.4th 1171, 1178.)

 

In support of its Motion for Summary Judgment for breach of the agreement, Plaintiff presents the following undisputed facts. On February 8, 2022, Defendant, for valuable consideration, made, executed and delivered to Plaintiff a written Loan and Security Agreements and Disclosure Statement. (Motion, Separate Statement, Fact No. 1.; Marquez Decl., ¶10 and Exh. 1.) Under the terms of the Agreement, Defendant was obligated to make consecutive monthly payments, until the debt was paid in full. (Motion, Separate Statement, Fact No. 3; Marquez Decl., ¶12.) Defendant defaulted under the terms of the Agreement on April 11, 2024.  (Motion, Separate Statement, Fact No. 4; Marquez Decl., ¶¶12-13.) Plaintiff performed all conditions it was required to performed under the Agreement. (Motion, Separate Statement, Fact No. 5; Marquez Decl., ¶15 and Exhs. 1 and 2.) After applying the payment proceeds made to the outstanding balance, there remains a balance due and owing from Defendant to Plaintiff in the amount of $16,920.45 and costs of $944.68. (Motion, Separate Statement, Fact No. 7; Marquez Decl., ¶¶14, 20-22 and Exhs. 2 and 3.) 

 

This evidence carries Plaintiff’s initial burden of proof as to its claim for breach of contract against Defendant. Plaintiff has demonstrated the existence of the loan Agreement between itself and Defendant, Defendant’s breach by defaulting on the payment obligation, and Plaintiff’s resulting damages. The burden now shifts to Defendant to demonstrate that a triable issue of material fact exists as to Plaintiff’s claims. As no opposition has been filed, however, Defendant has failed to demonstrate the existence of any triable issue of material fact.

 

Conclusion

 

Therefore, Plaintiff Kinecta Federal Credit Union’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED. PLAINTIFF IS TO FILE AND SERVE A PROPOSED JUDGMENT WITHIN 10 DAYS OF THIS ORDER.

 

 

Moving party to give notice.