Judge: Matthew C. Braner, Case: 37-2020-00013446-CL-CL-CTL, Date: 2024-06-07 Tentative Ruling

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,

DEPT.:

EVENT DATE:

EVENT TIME:

HALL OF JUSTICE

TENTATIVE RULINGS - June 06, 2024

06/07/2024  09:00:00 AM  C-60 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

JUDICIAL OFFICER:Matthew C. Braner

CASE NO.:

CASE CATEGORY:

EVENT TYPE:

CASE TITLE: CASE TYPE:

Civil - Limited  Rule 3.740 Collections Motion Hearing (Civil) 37-2020-00013446-CL-CL-CTL TD BANK USA NA VS COLLINS [IMAGED] CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED:

Plaintiff TD Bank USA, N.A.'s unopposed motion to vacate dismissal and enter judgment against Defendant Veronica Collins is GRANTED.

'Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6 provides a summary procedure to enforce a settlement agreement by entering judgment pursuant to the terms of the settlement. . . . The court retains jurisdiction to enforce a settlement under the statute even after a dismissal, but only if the parties requested such a retention of jurisdiction before the dismissal. Such a request must be made either in a writing signed by the parties or orally before the court. . . . If the court determines that the parties entered into an enforceable settlement, it should grant the motion and enter a formal judgment pursuant to the terms of the settlement.' (Hines v. Lukes (2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 1174, 1182; Code Civ. Proc., § 664.6, subd. (a).) Here, the parties settled this case by stipulation and asked the court to retain jurisdiction pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6 to enforce the agreement. (ROA #36, Aguirre Dec., Ex. 1, ¶ 4.) The court ordered the case dismissed without prejudice on April 6, 2022. (ROA #26.) Following dismissal, Defendant materially breached the agreement by failing to continue making monthly payments on her debt after September 20, 2022. (ROA #36, Aguirre Dec., ¶¶ 7, 9) The parties agreed and stipulated that after such breach and upon noticed motion and declaration of Plaintiff or Plaintiff's counsel regarding such default, the court would set aside the dismissal, resume jurisdiction over the matter, and enter a judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant in the amount of $5,970.39 (the principal owed), plus costs of $310, and less the amount paid by Defendant towards the balance owed.

(ROA #36, Aguirre Dec., Ex. 1, ¶¶ 1, 10.) Defendant paid $1,914 towards the settlement amount before defaulting. (ROA #36, Aguirre Dec., ¶ 9.) Although Plaintiff requests $509.50 in costs, the settlement agreement limits costs to $310; consequently, the total amount Plaintiff may seek is $4,366.39.

The parties entered into an enforceable settlement and stipulated for the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce it. Based on Defendant's default, the motion is granted, the April 6, 2022 dismissal is vacated, and judgment shall be entered in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant in the amount of $4,366.39.

Plaintiff is instructed to provide a revised proposed order and revised proposed judgment that reflects the limitation on costs referenced above and the revised judgment amount.

Calendar No.: Event ID:  TENTATIVE RULINGS

3111499  8