Judge: Michelle Williams Court, Case: 20STCV17554, Date: 2022-08-15 Tentative Ruling

Counsel may submit on the tentative ruling by emailing Dept. 74 before 8:30 the morning of the hearing. The email address is smcdept74@lacourt.org. Please do not call the court to submit on the tentative.

IF THE DEPARTMENT DOES NOT RECEIVE AN EMAIL INDICATING THE PARTIES ARE SUBMITTING ON THE TENTATIVE RULING AND THERE ARE NO APPEARANCES AT THE HEARING, THE MOTION WILL BE PLACED OFF CALENDAR.

If you decide not to submit on the tentative ruling, REMOTE APPEARANCES ARE AUTHORIZED AND STRONGLY ENCOURAGED.  Please visit the court’s Here for You | Safe for You News Center for the latest orders governing court business.  http://www.lacourt.org/newsmedia/ui/HfySfy.aspx
    
In deciding whether to submit on the tentative ruling or attend the hearing and present oral argument, please keep the following in mind: The tentative rulings authored by this court reflect that the court has read and considered all pleadings and evidence timely submitted to the court in connection with the motion, opposition, and reply (if any). Because the pleadings were filed, they are part of the public record. Oral argument is not an opportunity to simply repeat that which a party set forth in its pleadings. Nor, is oral argument an opportunity to "make a record" when there is no court reporter present and the statements and arguments of counsel are already part of the record because they were set forth in the pleadings. Finally, simply because a party or attorney disagrees with the court's analysis and ruling or is not satisfied with it does not necessarily warrant oral argument when no new arguments will be articulated. If you submit on the tentative, you must immediately notify all other parties email that you will not appear at the hearing. If you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the motions. If all parties to the motion submit, this tentative ruling will become the final ruling after the hearing date and it will be memorialized in a minute order. This tentative ruling is not an invitation, nor an opportunity, to file further documents relative to the hearing in question. No such document will be considered by the Court.


 


 

Case Number: 20STCV17554    Hearing Date: August 15, 2022    Dept: 74

20STCV17554           PETER MARCO vs DIMITRI ROGER

Plaintiff’s Motion for Assignment Order, and for Order Restraining Judgment Debtor

TENTATIVE RULING:  The motion is GRANTED.  Counsel for Plaintiff shall provide a proposed order for the court’s signature listing the entities identified in counsel’s declaration with the appropriate limitation that the assignments are “only to the extent necessary to satisfy the money judgment.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 708.510(d).)

Background

On May 8, 2020, Plaintiff Peter Marco dba Peter Marco, LLC., filed a complaint against Defendant Dimitri Roger aka Rich the Kid asserting causes of action for breach of contract and common counts. The parties settled and on January 14, 2021, the court entered the parties’ stipulated judgment in the amount of $220,236.75.

On March 16, 2021, Plaintiff filed a memorandum of costs after judgment, acknowledgment of credit, and declaration of accrued interest which acknowledged a $30,000.00 credit against the judgment.

On October 4, 2021, the Court granted Defendant’s counsel’s motion to be relieved as counsel.

Motion

On May 9, 2022, Plaintiff filed the instant motion seeking an order “to assign the Judgment Debtor's interest in commissions, royalties, residuals, payouts, appearance fee/payments, licensing fee/payments, copyright payments and/or disbursements, and all rights to payment thereunder, due or to become due to the Judgment Debtor from Rich Forever Music, LLC, Rich Forever Touring, LLC, Rostrum Records, LLC, Wilhelmina West, Inc., Apple Inc., Spotify USA, Inc., Google Inc., Paypay, Inc., Adidas America Inc., Adidas, Vimeo, LLC, Amazon.com Inc., Facebook, Inc., Instagram, Twitter, Inc., Pandora Media, Inc. (hereinafter ‘Judgment Debtor's Vendors’), to the Judgment Creditor, to the extent necessary to pay the Judgment in full, including accrued interest through the date of payment” as well as an order “restraining the Judgment Debtor and any servant, agent, employee or attorney for the Judgment Debtor and any person(s) in active concert and participating with the Judgment Debtor from encumbering, assigning, disposing or spending his interest in Commissions, royalties, residuals, payouts, appearance fee/payments, licensing fee/payments, copyright payments and/or disbursements, and all rights to payment thereunder.”

The motion is unopposed. (Code Civ. Proc. § 1005(c).)

Motion

Standard

Code of Civil Procedure section 708.510(a) provides: “[e]xcept as otherwise provided by law, upon 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: (1) Wages due from the federal government that are not subject to withholding under an earnings withholding order. (2) Rents. (3) Commissions. (4) Royalties. (5) Payments due from a patent or copyright. (6) Insurance policy loan value.” “A right to payment may be assigned pursuant to this article only to the extent necessary to satisfy the money judgment.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 708.510(d).)

“[I]n determining whether to order an assignment or the amount of an assignment pursuant to subdivision (a), the court may take into consideration all relevant factors, including the following: (1) The reasonable requirements of a judgment debtor who is a natural person and of persons supported in whole or in part by the judgment debtor. (2) Payments the judgment debtor is required to make or that are deducted in satisfaction of other judgments and wage assignments, including earnings assignment orders for support. (3) The amount remaining due on the money judgment. (4) The amount being or to be received in satisfaction of the right to payment that may be assigned.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 708.510 (Code Civ. Proc., § 708.510(c).)

Additionally, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 708.520(a), “[w]hen an application is made pursuant to Section 708.510 or thereafter, the judgment creditor may apply to the court for an order restraining the judgment debtor from assigning or otherwise disposing of the right to payment that is sought to be assigned.” “The court may issue an order pursuant to this section upon a showing of need for the order. The court, in its discretion, may require the judgment creditor to provide an undertaking.” (Code Civ. Proc. § 708.520(b).) An order restraining assignment “shall be personally served upon the judgment debtor and shall contain a notice to the judgment debtor that failure to comply with the order may subject the judgment debtor to being held in contempt of court.”

Discussion

Plaintiff properly served the noticed motion upon Defendant and has demonstrated an outstanding balance on the judgment in the amount of $213,654.11, which includes accrued interest. (Cohen Decl. ¶ 7.)

Plaintiff’s counsel states that he is “informed and believe[s] that the following right to payment(s) is/are due or will become due to the Judgment Debtor: commissions, royalties, residuals, payouts, appearance fee/payments, licensing fee/payments, copyright payments, disbursements, and/or payments from endorsements, are due or to will become due to the Judgment Debtor from Rich Forever Music, LLC, Rich Forever Touring, LLC, Rostrum Records, LLC, Wilhelmina West, Inc., Apple Inc., Spotify USA, Inc., Google Inc., Paypay, Inc., Adidas America Inc., Adidas, Vimeo, LLC, Amazon.com Inc., Facebook, Inc., Instagram, Twitter, Inc., Pandora Media, Inc.. (hereinafter ‘Judgment Debtor's Vendors’).” (Id. ¶ 9.)

Plaintiff’s counsel also states “[t]here is a need to restrain the Judgment Debtor from encumbering, assigning, disposing of or spending his interest in commissions, royalties, residuals, payouts, appearance fee/payments, licensing fee/payments, copyright payments and/or disbursements, payments from endorsements, and all rights to payment thereunder because the Judgment Debtor may dispose and/or assign of rights to commissions, royalties, residuals, payouts, appearance fee/payments, licensing fee/payments, copyright payments, payments from endorsements and/or disbursements and/or spend the payments received.” (Id. ¶ 10.)

Plaintiff has demonstrated a proper basis for the relief sought. (See e.g. UMG Recordings, Inc. v. BCD Music Group, Inc. (C.D. Cal., July 9, 2009, No. CV07-05808 SJO FFMX) 2009 WL 2213678, at *3 (“the legal standard imposed by § 708.510 does not obligate [plaintiff] to provide detailed evidentiary support for its request. . . . [Defendant’s] conduct in defaulting on the payment program under the settlement agreement, and refusing to voluntarily satisfy the judgment against it, demonstrates a need to protect the assigned rights to payment from transfer or disposition by [Defendant].”).)

The motion is GRANTED.