Judge: Mel Red Recana, Case: BS138371, Date: 2024-04-04 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: BS138371 Hearing Date: April 4, 2024 Dept: 45
|
KNIGHTS
FRANCHISE SYSTEMS, INC., Plaintiff, vs. NRV
HOLDINGS, INC. ET AL., Defendants. |
Case No.: BS138371
DEPARTMENT
45 [TENTATIVE] RULING Action
Filed: July 18, 2012 Trial
Date: Not Applicable |
Hearing
date: April
4, 2024
Moving
Party: Plaintiff
Knights Franchise Systems, Inc.
Responding
Party: None
as of March 29, 2024
MOTION
TO AMEND JUDGMENT
The Court
considered the moving papers. No
opposition or reply has been filed.
The
motion is granted.
Background
Plaintiff
obtained entry of judgment on a Florida sister-state judgment against
Defendants NRV Holdings, LLC, Dinesh Thakkar and Praduman Naik on September 4,
2012 in the amount of $25,145.57, interest in the amount of $313.29 and costs
of $435.
On
September 6, 2022, Plaintiff applied for renewal of judgment and renewal of
judgment was entered on that date. Notice of the renewed judgment was issued on
that date. The renewed judgment was for $25,145,57, $313.29 and costs of $435.
Legal
Standard
“The
court may, upon motion of the injured party, or its own motion, correct
clerical mistakes in its judgment or orders as entered, so as to conform to the
judgment or order directed, and may, on motion of either party after notice to
the other party, set aside any void judgment or order.” (CCP §473(d).)
“It
is well settled that a court has the inherent power to correct a clerical error
in its judgment so that the judgment will reflect the true facts. The power of
a court to correct clerical mistakes in judgments is also a statutory power
pursuant to section 473.” (Estate of Douglas (2022) 83 Cal.App.5th 690,
695.)
Discussion
Plaintiff’s
counsel clearly committed a clerical error when preparing the Application for
Renewal of Judgment. The amount of
interest included in the Application is the exact same amount of interest
included in the original Application for Entry of Judgment on Sister-State
Judgment filed 10 years ago—$313.29. Counsel’s
inclusion of the interest amount from 10 years ago is a clerical error
correctable pursuant to the Court’s power under CCP §473(d). (In re Marriage of Kaufman (1980) 101
Cal.App.3d 147, 151 (counsel’s error in reducing judgment to writing was
clerical error correctible under CCP §473(d).)
Based
on the interest declaration submitted by counsel, the correct amount of
interest that counsel intended to include in the Application for Renewal of
Judgment is $28,469.44. The motion to
amend judgment is therefore granted. The
interest amount of $313.29 is stricken from Item 5(f) and the amount of $28,469.44
shall be interlineated. A new Notice of
Renewal will issue with the corrected Application for Renewal of Judgment
attached. Plaintiff is to comply with
CCP §683.160(a), which requires that Notice of the Renewal be served on the
Defendant.
It
is so ordered.
Dated: April 4, 2024
_______________________
Rolf W. Treu
Judge of the
Superior Court