Judge: Ralph C. Hofer, Case: 23GDCP00173, Date: 2023-10-20 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 23GDCP00173 Hearing Date: October 20, 2023 Dept: D
TENTATIVE RULING
Calendar: 1
Date: 10/20/2023
Case No: 23 GDCP00173 Trial Date: None Set
Case Name: National Commercial Recovery, Inc. dba Blair Smith and Associates v.
John Alejo, as Trustee
PETITION TO CHARGE JUDGMENT DEBTOR’S BENEFICIAL INTEREST IN TRUST
Moving Party: Plaintiff/Judgment Creditor National Commercial Recovery, Inc.
Responding Party: Defendant/Judgment Debtor John Alejo as Trustee of the America B. Alejo Revocable Trust
RELIEF REQUESTED:
Order charging the Judgment Debtors’ beneficial interests in the America B. Alejo Revocable Trust established May 2, 2012, by way of liquidation and sale of all trust property to which their beneficial interests attach
Costs of suit
SUMMARY OF FACTS:
Plaintiff National Commercial Recovery, Inc. alleges that in September 12, 2013, plaintiff obtained a joint and several court judgment for $881,599.33 in Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC 490348 against “John Alejo, an individual” and “Enrique M. Alejo a/k/a Rick Alejo” (collectively referred to as the “Judgment Debtors). An Abstract of Judgment was recorded in Los Angeles County on October 3, 2013, and on July 20, 2023, plaintiff renewed the judgment which renewal was recorded in Los Angeles County on August 3, 2023. As of the date of renewal, the balance due on the judgment was $1,750,463.91.
Plaintiff alleges that it has confirmed that the “America B. Alejo Revocable Trust established May 2, 2012” is the current owner of record of real property located in Los Angeles County at 1909 Sussex Court, Glendale CA, and has also confirmed that the trustor of the Trust, America B. Alejo, has been deceased since 2016. Plaintiff alleges that as such the ownership of all property held in the Trust, including the Glendale real property, has vested in the beneficiaries of the Trust. Plaintiff alleges that the Judgment Debtors are the beneficiaries of the Trust, because judgment debtor and defendant John Alejo is the appointed trustee of the Trust, and judgment debtor Enrique M. Alejo resides in the real property.
Plaintiff seeks an order charging the Judgment Debtors’ beneficial interests in the Trust to the enforcement of the money judgment held by plaintiff.
ANALYSIS:
Procedural
No Proof of Jurisdiction, Proof of Service
The motion seeks relief under CCP section 709.010, which provides in pertinent part:
“(b) The judgment debtor’s interest as a beneficiary of a trust is subject to enforcement of a money judgment only upon petition under this section by a judgment creditor to a court having jurisdiction over administration of the trust as prescribed in Part 5 (commencing with Section 17000) of Division 9 of the Probate Code. The judgment debtor’s interest in the trust may be applied to the satisfaction of the money judgment by such means as the court, in its discretion, determines are proper, including but not limited to imposition of a lien on or sale of the judgment debtor’s interest, collection of trust income, and liquidation and transfer of trust property by the trustee.
(c) Nothing in this section affects the limitations on the enforcement of a money judgment against the judgment debtor’s interest in a trust under Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 15300) of Part 2 of Division 9 of the Probate Code, and the provisions of this section are subject to the limitations of that chapter.”
Plaintiff also seeks relief under CCP section 695.030, which provides, in pertinent part:
“(b) The following property is subject to enforcement of a money judgment:
(1) An interest in a trust, to the extent provided by law.”
Under Probate Code section 17000:
“(a) The superior court having jurisdiction over the trust pursuant to this part has exclusive jurisdiction of proceedings concerning the internal affairs of trusts.
(b) The superior court having jurisdiction over the trust pursuant to this part has concurrent jurisdiction of the following:
(1) Actions and proceedings to determine the existence of trusts.
(2) Actions and proceedings by or against creditors or debtors of trusts.
(3) Other actions and proceedings involving trustees and third persons.”
Under Probate Code section 17003:
“Subject to Section 17004:
(a) By accepting the trusteeship of a trust having its principal place of administration in this state the trustee submits personally to the jurisdiction of the court under this division.
(b) To the extent of their interests in the trust, all beneficiaries of a trust having its principal place of administration in this state are subject to the jurisdiction of the court under this division.”
Section 17004 provides:
“The court may exercise jurisdiction in proceedings under this division on any basis permitted by Section 410.10 of the Code of Civil Procedure.”
CCP section 410.10 provides:
“A court of this state may exercise jurisdiction on any basis not inconsistent with the Constitution of this state or of the United States.”
When relief is sought under these sections, the judgment creditor ordinarily submits admissible evidence, including the trust instrument, to establish that the court to which application is made is a court having jurisdiction over administration of the trust.
There is no submission of the trust instrument to confirm that this court has jurisdiction over this matter.
The trust instrument is also necessary to establish that the parties against whom relief is sought have submitted to the personal jurisdiction of the court under Probate Code section 17003, by either accepting the trusteeship of a trust or being a beneficiary of a trust having its principal place of administration in this state.
The complaint in this matter is not verified and attaches unauthenticated copies of documents consisting of an Abstract of Judgment, an Application for Renewal of Judgment, and a Grant Deed purportedly conveying the subject property to John Alejo, “Trustee of the America B. Alejo Revocable Trust established May 2, 2021.” The Grant Deed is dated May 2, 2012. [Judgment Creditor’s Complaint, Exs. A-C]. The Grant Deed does not specify the terms of the trust or how it was created or whether it is administered in a court of this state.
There is no trust instrument submitted for this court to review and determine whether jurisdiction is appropriate for the relief requested. The petition will accordingly be denied without prejudice to plaintiff bringing an appropriate petition under CCP section 709.010, accompanied by the appropriate showing by admissible evidence.
In addition, there is no proof of service showing that defendant, designated in the caption as John Alejo as Trustee, has been served with the complaint or summons in this matter. The proof of service in the file shows that the Notice of Hearing on Petition was served by mail on John Alejo at an address in Miami, Florida. [Proof of Service, filed 09/06/2023].
The matter also confusingly appears to seek relief against the “Judgment Debtors’ beneficial interests” in the Trust, when judgment debtor Enrique M. Alejo has not been formally named as a defendant in this matter, has not been served with the summons and complaint, and also has not been served with notice of the hearing.
The petition accordingly is denied without prejudice to clarification on these points, and a proper petition being brought and properly served.
RULING:
Petition, to the extent based on Judgment Creditor’s Complaint to Charge Judgment Debtors’ Beneficial Interest in Trust, is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
Plaintiff has failed to establish by admissible evidence the jurisdictional facts required by statute for the court to consider granting the relief requested. Plaintiff has also failed to show that it has served the named defendant with the summons and complaint and appropriately served notice of hearing, which notice was served only by mail. To the extent relief is sought against judgment debtor Enrique M. Alejo, that person is not named as a defendant in this matter, and there is also no showing that Enrique M. Alejo has been appropriately served or notified of the hearing.
Substantively, without the trust instrument, the Court is unable to determine whether relief is appropriately granted, to what extent, and under what conditions.
The Court also has some question whether plaintiff should be pursuing the enforcement of the judgment in the case in which the judgment was entered, which plaintiff indicates is Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC490348, or whether, at the very least, plaintiff must file a Notice of Related Cases and obtain a related case determination in the other case.
DEPARTMENT D IS CONTINUING TO CONDUCT AND ENCOURAGE
AUDIO OR VIDEO APPEARANCES
Please make arrangement in advance if you wish to appear via LACourtConnect by visiting www.lacourt.org to schedule a remote appearance. Please note that LACourtConnect offers free audio and video appearances. However, ADVANCE REGISTRATION IS REQUIRED.
If no appearance is set up through LACourtConnect, or no appearance is otherwise made, then the Court will assume the parties are submitting on the tentative.
