Judge: Melvin D. Sandvig, Case: 22CHCV00376, Date: 2023-02-02 Tentative Ruling
Counsel wishing to submit on a tentative ruling may inform the clerk or courtroom assisant in North Valley Department F47, 9425 Penfield Ave., Chatsworth, CA 91311, at (818) 407-2247. Please be aware that unless all parties submit, the matter will still be called for hearing and may be argued by any appearing/non-submitting parties. If the matter is submitted on the court's tentative ruling by all parties, counsel for moving party shall give notice of ruling. This may be done by incorporating verbatim the court's tentative ruling. The tentative ruling may be extracted verbatim by copying and specially pasting, as unformatted text, from the Los Angeles Superior Court’s website, http://www.lasuperiorcourt.org. All hearings on law and motion and other calendar matters are generally NOT transcribed by a court reporter unless one is provided by the party(ies).
Case Number: 22CHCV00376 Hearing Date: February 2, 2023 Dept: F47
Dept. F47
Date: 2/2/23
Case #22CHCV00376
HEARING ON
CLAIM OF EXEMPTION
Notice of Hearing filed on 12/6/22.
JUDGMENT CREDITOR: Plaintiff TBF Financial I, LLC
JUDGMENT DEBTOR: Defendant Armen Mkrtchyan
RULING: The claim of exemption is granted, in part,
and denied, in part, as set forth below.
On 5/26/22, Plaintiff TBF Financial I, LLC (Plaintiff/Judgment
Creditor) filed this action against Defendants/Judgment Debtors Armen Trucking,
Inc., Armen Mkrtchyan and Laura Mkrtchyan for: (1) Breach of Written Agreement,
(2) Breach of Personal Guaranty, (3) Breach of Personal Guaranty, (4) Money
Lent, (5) Account Stated and (6) Claim and Delivery. On 8/12/22, default judgment was entered in
favor of Plaintiff and against the foregoing Defendants in the amount of
$48,001.23. On 8/25/22, an Abstract of
Judgment and Writ of Execution were issued.
On or about 10/24/22, Judgment Creditor submitted to the
Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department bank levy instructions for Judgment
Debtors’ account(s) at Bank of the West.
On 11/22/23, Bank of the West attached $42,395.84 from the Judgment
Debtors’ account(s). On or about 11/29/22,
Judgment Debtor Armen Mkrtchyan (Claimant)
forwarded to the Sheriff’s Office a Claim of Exemption, which was received by
Judgment Creditor on 12/2/22.
The Claim of Exemption cites “704.220, 704.225, 704.010, 704.030, 704.060” and
contends that the account being levied is used in the debtor’s business. (See Claim of Exemption filed
12/15/22, Nos.5, 6). Although not
specified in the Claim of Exemption, presumably the citations are to sections
of the California Code of Civil Procedure (CCP). (Id., No.5). On 12/6/22, Plaintiff filed an Opposition to
the Claim of Exemption.
The hearing on Claim of Exemption was originally
scheduled for 1/4/23. With regard to
that hearing date, the Court posted a tentative ruling indicating that Claimant
had failed meet his burden of proof. See
CCP 703.580(b). The Court further
indicated that if Claimant and/or his counsel represented at the hearing that
Claimant can provide evidence to support his claim of exemption, the hearing would
be continued pursuant to CCP 703.580(c).
At the 1/4/23 hearing, the parties stipulated to continue
the hearing to 2/2/23 so that additional documentation could be filed. (See 1/4/23 Minute Order). Neither party has filed any additional papers
in support of or in opposition to the Claim of Exemption.
As noted above, at the hearing on the Claim of Exemption,
the Claimant has the burden of proof.
CCP 703.580(b). Here, Claimant
has failed to provide any evidence to support his claim that the funds levied
are exempt under the cited code sections.
CCP 704.010 applies to "(1) The aggregate equity in
motor vehicles. (2) The proceeds of an execution sale of a motor vehicle. (3)
The proceeds of insurance or other indemnification for the loss, damage or
destruction of a motor vehicle."
Here, Judgment Creditor levied on a bank account without the involvement
of any motor vehicle. As such, it does
not appear that this code section applies.
CCP 704.030 provides that “[m]aterial that in good faith
is about to be applied to the repair or improvement of a residence is exempt if
the equity in the material does not exceed three thousand five hundred dollar
($3,500)... .” Again, here, Judgment Creditor
levied on a bank account at Bank of the West.
Therefore, it does not appear that this section applies to the facts of
this case.
CCP 704.060 (a) provides that “[t]ools, implements,
instruments, materials, uniforms, furnishings, books, equipment, one commercial
motor vehicle, one vessel, and other personal property are exempt to the extent
that the aggregate equity thereon does not exceed: (1) Eight thousand seven
hundred twenty-five dollars ($8,725.00)... ." Again,
Claimant has failed to provide any documentation as to how this section
would apply to the facts of this case.
CCP 704.220(a) provides that “[m]oney in the judgment
debtor’s deposit account in an amount equal to or less than the minimum basis
standard of adequate care for a family of four for Region 1, established by
Section 11452 of the Welfare and Institutions Code and as annually adjusted by
the State Department of Social Services pursuant to Section 11453 of the
Welfare and Institutions Code, is exempt without making a claim.” The exemption amount for 2022 is
$1,788.00. The
amount that was attached in the Judgment Debtors’ bank account was $42,395.84,
which is greater than the $1,788.00 exemption amount. Therefore, Judgment Debtor has failed to
establish that all of the funds in the account are exempt.
CCP 704.225 provides that “[m]oney in a judgment debtor’s
deposit account that is not otherwise exempt under this Chapter is exempt to
the extent necessary for the support of the judgment debtor and the spouse and
dependents of the judgment debtor.” Here, the Claimant has not provided any
admissible evidence to establish that the funds are necessary for support.