Judge: Peter A. Hernandez, Case: 23PSCV02201, Date: 2024-01-10 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 23PSCV02201 Hearing Date: January 10, 2024 Dept: K
Plaintiff
Amur Equipment Finance, Inc.’s Application for Default Judgment is DENIED without
prejudice.
Background
Plaintiff Amur Equipment Finance, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) alleges as follows:
On or about September 12, 2019,
Plaintiff entered into a written “Equipment Finance Agreement” (“Agreement #1”)
with Little Fat Trucking (“LFT”), wherein Plaintiff agreed to finance certain personal
property (i.e., two 2018 Utility Model AH Trailers, VINs #
1UYVS253XJ3292028 and 1UYVS2535J3292034 [“Utilities”]) in exchange for
LFT’s agreement to make 72 monthly payments of $1,393.08 commencing October 10,
2019 and to grant Plaintiff a security interest in the Utilities. On or about
September 10, 2022, LFT failed to make the payment then due and owing. LFT
failed to make any further payments thereafter.
On or about October 1, 2021,
Plaintiff entered into a second written “Equipment Finance Agreement”
(“Agreement #2”) with LFT, wherein Plaintiff agreed to finance certain personal
property as described in Schedule A to Agreement #2, including all related
attachments and accessories thereto (the “Vehicles”), in exchange for LFT’s
agreement to make 60 monthly payments of $9,141.37 commencing October 1, 2021
and to grant Plaintiff a security interest in the Vehicles. On or about
September 1, 2022, LFT failed to make the payment then due and owing. LFT
failed to make any further payments thereafter.
On or about January 15, 2021,
Plaintiff entered into a third written “Equipment Finance Agreement”
(“Agreement #3”) with LFT, wherein Plaintiff agreed to finance certain personal
property (i.e., two 2021 Vanguard Model VXP 53' trailers, VINs #
5V8VC5320MT109910 and 5V8VC5324MT109909, including all related attachments and
accessories thereto [the “Vanguards”]) in exchange for LFT’s agreement to
make 60 monthly payments of $1,476.91 commencing February 15, 2021 and to grant
Plaintiff a security interest in the Vanguards. On or about August 15, 2022,
LFT failed to make the payment then due and owing. LFT failed to make any
further payments thereafter.
Xing Wang (“Wang”) executed a
guaranty as to all of LFT’s obligations to Plaintiff, including Agreements
#1-#3.
On July 21, 2023, Plaintiff filed a complaint, asserting causes of action against LFT and Wang for:
1.
Breach of Equipment Finance Agreement #1
2.
Possession of Personal Property
3.
Breach of Equipment Finance Agreement #2
4.
Possession of Personal Property
5.
Breach of Equipment Finance Agreement #3
6.
Possession of Personal Property
7.
Breach of Written Guaranty Agreement
On October 16, 2023, LFT’s and Wang’s defaults were entered.
A Case Management Conference and an Order to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service are set for January 10, 2024.
Discussion
Plaintiff’s Application for Default Judgment is denied without prejudice. The following defects are noted:
1.
Agreement #1 is dated September 12, 2019, Agreement #2
is dated October 1, 2021 and Agreement #3 is dated January 15, 2021. The
guaranty is dated October 1, 2021 and references Contract No. 1045134 at the
top right corner (i.e., which is the contract number for Agreement #2). It
appears to the court, then, that the guaranty is applicable to Agreement #2
only. Plaintiff, however, contends that “[u]nder the terms of the Guaranty,
Defendant Wang guarantied [sic] the prompt performance of all of the
obligations of Defendant LFT under the terms of Agreements #1, #2, and #3.”
(Summary of Case. 6:9-11; see also Beran Decl., ¶ 24). Plaintiff is
requested to provide the court with the specific language which supports the
foregoing statement and to explain why the guaranty appears to reference
Contract No. 1045134 only.
2.
Plaintiff is requested to provide an amended proposed
judgment setting forth the specific collateral in an attachment to Paragraph 7.