Judge: Mark E. Windham, Case: LAM14K02507, Date: 2024-01-16 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: LAM14K02507 Hearing Date: January 16, 2024 Dept: 26
ACIC v. Tran, et al.
MOTION FOR
ASSIGNMENT ORDER
(CCP § 708.510)
TENTATIVE RULING:
Upon a showing that the bankruptcy stay may be lifted,
ANALYSIS:
Judgment Creditor American Contractor Indemnity Company
(“Judgment Creditor”) obtained default judgment against Judgment Debtor Bich
Hoang Tran (“Judgment Debtor”) on August 14, 2015. On March 28, 2023, Judgment
Creditor filed the instant Motion for Assignment Order, Restraining Order, and
Accounting. The Motion initially came for hearing on June 26, 2023 at which
time Plaintiff informed the Court that Defendant had filed for bankruptcy.
(Minute Order, 06/26/23.) The Court stayed the action and continued the hearing
on the instant Motion. (Ibid.) To date, no opposition has been filed.
Discussion
Under Code of Civil Procedure, section 708.510, subdivision
(a), the moving statute, the Court may order the judgment debtor to assign to
the judgment creditor or to an appointed receiver all or part of a right to
payment due or to become due. The types of payments that can be assigned
include wages due from the federal government if not subject to a withholding
order, rents, commissions, royalties, patent or copyright payments, and
insurance policy loan value. (Code Civ. Proc., § 708.510, subd. (a).)
Relevant factors the Court may take into consideration when
making an assignment order include the judgment debtor’s reasonable
requirements if they are a natural person, payments the judgment debtor is
required to make to satisfy other judgments and wage assignments, the amount
remaining due on the judgment, and the amount to be received in satisfaction of
the right to payment that may be assigned.
(Code Civ. Proc., § 708.510, subd. (c).) Construing all the
applicable statutes together, the “assignment order” contemplated by Code of
Civil Procedure, section 708.510, et seq.
must include a court order that assigns a right to payment outright (not simply
an order directing the judgment debtor to do so).
Judgment Creditor seeks an assignment order for payments to
be made to Judgment Debtor by their customers PH Construction, Inc.; NHA
Construction, Inc.; Cygma, LLC; 975 N Main, LLC; Sherwood Gardens SPE, LLC;
LIU’S Construction, Inc.; 408 Real Estate; 40th Street Development, LLC; Top
Mission Realty & Investment, Inc.; Future Homes Realty, LLC; Mathew Street
Property, LLC; Diamond Construction and Building Maintenance, Inc.; The Phuong
Dao; and Tom Jackson and Anita E. Jackson, Property Management (“the Customers”).
Currently, the judgment remains unsatisfied in the amount of $28,152.86, with
only $2,261.77 recovered from a bank levy. (Motion, Murray Decl., ¶¶2-5, 10 and
Exhs. 1-3.) Following production of documents in response to a deposition
subpoena, Judgment Creditor has reason to believe Judgment Debtor is receiving
payment from the Customers. (Id. at ¶7 and Exh. 6.) This evidence
demonstrates that an assignment order with respect to the Customers’ payments
to Judgment Debtor is appropriate.
The Court further grants Judgment Creditor’s request for an
order restraining the judgment debtor from assigning or otherwise disposing of
the right to payment, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 708.520,
subdivision (a). Finally, to the extent Judgment Creditor requests that
Judgment Debtor provide an accounting every other month to ensure that payments
are being made from the Customers as ordered, the request is granted pursuant
to the Court’s inherent power under Code of Civil Procedure section 187.
Conclusion
Upon a showing that the bankruptcy stay may be lifted,
Moving party to give notice.