Judge: Michael E. Whitaker, Case: 22SMCV01554, Date: 2024-02-22 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22SMCV01554    Hearing Date: February 22, 2024    Dept: 207

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff Shideh Rostami (“Plaintiff”) initiated an Unlawful Detainer action against Defendants John David Meints, Jr. and Samrah Meints on September 6, 2022.  Thereafter, on the date set for trial, the parties executed an Unlawful Detainer Stipulated Judgment in favor of Plaintiff for a total amount of $129,084.80 in damages in addition to possession of the subject property; the Stipulated Judgment was entered on April 18, 2023. 

To collect on the judgment, Plaintiff is seeking to garnish the earnings of Defendant Samrah Meints (“Defendant”).   But Defendant has filed a Claim of Exemption, seeking to exempt all of her earnings from any garnishments.  Plaintiff opposes the exemption claim.

ANALYSIS

            Code of Civil Procedure section 706.051 provides in relevant part:  “Except as provided in subdivision (c), the portion of the judgment debtor's earnings that the judgment debtor proves is necessary for the support of the judgment debtor or the judgment debtor's family supported in whole or in part by the judgment debtor is exempt from levy under this chapter.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 706.051, subd (b).)

            Here, Defendant has provided a claim of exemption, signed under penalty of perjury, indicating that Defendant’s gross monthly salary is $6,152 and net pay is $4,665.  Defendant financially supports a spouse, co-Defendant John Meints Jr., and a daughter, Mackenzie Meints, age 15, neither of whom is reported to earn any income.  (WG-007/EJ-165.)  Defendant further itemizes a total of $13,601 in monthly expenses, including $6,700 in monthly rent and maintenance expenses.  Defendant has also provided a list of household property and debts.  (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 703.110, 703.115.)  As such, Defendant has demonstrated that Defendant’s entire salary is necessary to support Defendant, Defendant’s spouse, and Defendant’s minor child.

            Plaintiff opposes the claim of exemption on the bases that (1) the financial statement does not trace the source of the funds to employment documents or wage earnings, or other exempt sources, and (2) “Defendant’s monthly expenses of $13,601 are questionable when it far exceeds her monthly income” and therefore raises questions about whether Defendant is concealing financial information.

            As for Plaintiff’s first argument, tracing the source of funds is only necessary to the extent Plaintiff seeks to recover from a financial account.  Then, Defendant would have to trace the funds in the account to an exempt source (such as exempt wages or other exempt payments).  But here, Defendant only seeks an exemption for purposes of wage garnishment.  To the extent Plaintiff seeks to garnish Defendant’s wages, those wages are obviously Defendant’s earnings.  Moreover, Plaintiff has not provided any authority that Defendant needs to provide source documents to substantiate the claim exemption, including wage or employment statements or related documents.  (See generally Code Civ. Proc., § 706.105.) 

With regard to Plaintiff’s second argument, although the Court agrees that Defendant’s stated expenses far exceed Defendant’s earnings, this is not, in itself evidence that Defendant’s income or expenses are not as Defendant has declared them to be under penalty of perjury.  Therefore, Defendant has demonstrated Defendant’s entire monthly take-home pay of $4,665 is exempt as necessary to support Defendant, Defendant’s spouse, and Defendant’s minor child, and Plaintiff has not provided any evidence in rebuttal.

CONCLUSION AND ORDER

For the reasons stated, the Court grants Defendant’s claim of exemption. Defendant has demonstrated Defendant’s entire salary is exempt as necessary to support Defendant, Defendant’s spouse, and Defendant’s minor child.  The claim of exemption packet cover sheet indicates the Sheriff’s Office was holding $0.00 as of February 1, 2024, but to the extent the Sheriff’s Office subsequently acquired and is holding any funds, they shall be released forthwith to Defendant.

The Clerk of the Court shall provide notice of the Court’s ruling. 

DATED:  February 22, 2024                                                  ___________________________

                                                                                          Michael E. Whitaker

                                                                                          Judge of the Superior Court