Judge: Melissa R. Mccormick, Case: "Quik Capital, LLC v. Sunland Investment, LLC", Date: 2022-11-10 Tentative Ruling

Plaintiff Quik Capital, LLC’s Motion for Assignment Order

Plaintiff Quik Capital, LLC moves for an order assigning “any and all amounts owed, as a result of real estate sales and transactions, wherein the Defendant Christopher Myong, an individual, receives [a] commission, in amount sufficient to satisfy” the judgment entered in this case.  Myong did not file an opposition.  For the following reasons, plaintiff’s motion is denied.

On June 3, 2020 the court entered judgment in the amount of $88,526.27 against Myong and Sun Hospitality, Inc.  Plaintiff states the judgment remains unpaid.  Plaintiff’s counsel states plaintiff “through investigation . . . is informed and believes” Myong is a licensed California real estate salesperson, and thus that “it appears” Myong “is entitled to receive commissions as a result of real estate sales and transactions.”  Brodkin Decl. ¶¶ 5-6.  Plaintiff seeks an order assigning any amounts Myong receives in commissions as a result of real estate sales and transactions to plaintiff to satisfy the outstanding judgment.

Civil Procedure Code section 708.510(a) provides that “[u]pon application of the judgment creditor on noticed motion, the court may order the judgment debtor to assign to the judgment creditor . . . all or part of a right to payment due or to become due, whether or not the right is conditioned on future developments, including but not limited to the following types of payments: . . . (3) Commissions.”  Section 708.510(b) states:  “The notice of the motion shall be served on the judgment debtor.  Service shall be made personally or by mail.”  Pursuant to section 684.020(a), the notice of motion “shall be served on the judgment debtor instead of the attorney for the judgment debtor.”  Civ. Proc. Code § 684.020(a).

Plaintiff served Myong’s counsel with the motion by mail.  No evidence has been submitted plaintiff served Myong with the motion personally or by mail.  See Civ. Proc. Code § 684.020(a).

Plaintiff also has not submitted sufficient information from which the court can determine whether Myong is an employee, whose earnings (including under some circumstances commissions) may not be subject to an assignment order, or an independent contractor, whose commissions may under some circumstances be subject to an assignment order.  See, e.g., Civ. Proc. Code §§ 706.011, 706.020.  The only evidence submitted regarding Myong’s employment status is plaintiff’s counsel’s declaration, in which plaintiff’s counsel states, on information and belief, that Myong is “employed” by Real Estate Ebroker Inc.  Brodkin Decl. ¶ 5.

Plaintiff to give notice.