TENTATIVE RULING

Calendar:    7

Date:          3/3/2023 

Case No: 22 GDCV00600 Trial Date: None Set 

Case Name: JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. Williams

MOTION TO SET ASIDE NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT

 

Moving Party:            Plaintiff JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.      

Responding Party: Defendant Willie L. Williams III      

RELIEF REQUESTED:

Order setting aside Notice of Settlement and reinstating this case to active litigation.

SUMMARY OF FACTS:

Plaintiff JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A. brings this action for common counts seeking to recover sums allegedly due from defendant Willie L. Williams III on a credit card account issued by plaintiff to defendant.  

The file shows that on November 14, 2022, plaintiff filed a Notice of Settlement of Entire Case, representing that the entire case had been settled, and that the settlement was “Conditional.”  The Notice states: 

“The settlement agreement conditions dismissal of this matter on the satisfactory completion of specified terms that are not to be performed within 45 days of the date of the settlement.  A request for dismissal will be filed no later than 11/07/2025.”   

ANALYSIS:

Plaintiff JPMorgan Chase N.A. brings this motion for an order setting aside the Notice of Settlement and reinstating this case to active civil litigation.  

Plaintiff indicates that the parties reached a conditional settlement agreement in October of 2022, which required monthly payments by defendant, but defendant has not complied with the terms of the conditional settlement agreement but has failed to timely make the agreed upon payments.   [Keim Decl., paras. 3-7].   Plaintiff accordingly requests that the court set aside the Notice of Settlement and schedule further proceedings.  

Plaintiff relies on CCP section 128, under which the court has power to “amend and control its process and orders so as to make them conform to law and justice.”  CCP section 128 (a)(8). 

Plaintiff also relies on CRC Rule 3.1385, which provides, in pertinent part:

“on the filing of the notice of conditional settlement, the court must vacate all hearings and other proceedings requiring the appearance of a party and may not set any hearing or other proceeding requiring the appearance of a party earlier than 45 days after the 

dismissal date specified in the notice, unless requested by a party.”  

CRC Rule 3.1385(c)(3)(A).  

The Notice of Settlement specifies a dismissal date of 11/07/2025.  [Notice, para. 1b].   

Plaintiff argues that pursuant to these authorities, the court has authority to schedule further hearings or proceedings as requested by plaintiff, a party to the action.  

It appears that the court has authority under the circumstances to grant the relief requested and set aside the notice of dismissal and set a future date in this matter. 

There is no opposition to the motion, so no reason asserted why the court should not grant the relief as requested.  The motion accordingly is granted.     

RULING:

[No Opposition] 

Plaintiff JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.’s Motion to Set Aside Notice of Settlement is GRANTED. 

The Notice of Settlement of Entire Case filed on November 14, 2022 is set aside, and this case is restored to active civil litigation.   The Court will proceed to conduct the Case Management Conference noticed for this date, and set a future date in this matter. 

 GIVEN THE CORONAVIRUS CRISIS, AND TO ADHERE TO HEALTH GUIDANCE THAT DICTATES SAFETY MEASURES, DEPARTMENT D IS ENCOURAGING AUDIO OR VIDEO APPEARANCES

Please make arrangement in advance if you wish to appear via LACourtConnect/Microsoft Teams by visiting www.lacourt.org to schedule a remote appearance.  Please note that LACourtConnect/Microsoft Teams offers free audio and video appearance. Counsel and parties (including self-represented litigants) are encouraged not to personally appear.  With respect to the wearing of face masks, Department D recognizes that currently, the Los Angeles Department of Public Health strongly recommends masks indoors, especially when interacting with individuals whose vaccination status is unknown; for individuals who have a health condition that puts them at higher risk for severe illness; individuals who live with someone who is at higher risk; and for individuals who are around children who are not yet eligible for vaccines.  In accordance with this guidance, it is strongly recommended that anyone personally appearing in Department D wear a face mask.  The Department D Judge and court staff will continue to wear face masks.  If no appearance is set up through LACourtConnect/Microsoft Teams, or otherwise, then the Court will assume the parties are submitting on the tentative.