Judge: Robert B. Broadbelt, Case: 20STCV25965, Date: 2025-01-07 Tentative Ruling

Tentative rulings are sometimes, but not always, posted. The purpose of posting a tentative ruling is to to help focus the argument. The posting of a tentative ruling is not an invitation for the filing of additional papers shortly before the hearing.

Case Number: 20STCV25965    Hearing Date: January 7, 2025    Dept: 53

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles – Central District

Department 53

MOVING PARTY:                 Judgment Debtor Seth Sundberg

RESPONDING PARTY:       Judgment Creditor The National Collection Agency, Inc.

Claim of Exemption

The court considered the Claim of Exemption, the supporting declaration of Seth Sundberg, and the Opposition to Claim of Exemption.  

DISCUSSION

On March 3, 2022, judgment was entered in this action in favor of plaintiff The National Collection Agency, Inc. (“Judgment Creditor”) and against defendants Seth Sundberg (“Sundberg”) and Prison Bars, Inc. in the total amount of $54,870.55, consisting of $44,421.36 in damages, $8,515.29 in interest, and $1,933.90 in costs.  Thereafter, on August 11, 2022, the court ordered that Judgment Creditor shall also recover from Sundberg attorney’s fees in the amount of $10,912.50.

On January 24, 2023, the court issued an order on Sundberg’s Claim of Exemption filed on December 6, 2022, in which the court (1) granted in part Sundberg’s Claim of Exemption, and (2) ordered that Judgment Creditor may withhold $100 per pay period ($200 per month) of Sundberg’s net income.  (Jan. 24, 2023 Order, p. 3:14-17.)

On November 14, 2024, Sundberg filed (1) the pending “Claim of Exemption [¶] (Wage Garnishment)” on Judicial Council form WG-006, and (2) the “Declaration of Seth Sundberg in Support of Claim of Exemption.”  Judgment Creditor filed, on December 4, 2024, the “Notice of Hearing on Claim of Exemption [¶] (Wage Garnishment—Enforcement of Judgment)” and an opposition to the claim.   

“[P]roperty that has been levied upon may be claimed to be exempt as provided in this article.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 703.510, subd. (a).)  Within 15 days after service of a notice of claim of exemption, a judgment creditor opposing the exemption “shall file with the court a notice of opposition to the claim of exemption and a notice of motion for order determining the claim of exemption and shall file with the levying officer a copy of the notice of opposition and a copy of the notice of motion.”  (Code Civ. Proc., §¿703.550, subd. (a).)  Once a judgment creditor files those documents, “the levying officer shall promptly file the claim of exemption with the court.”  (Ibid.)  “The claim of exemption is deemed controverted by the notice of opposition to the claim of exemption and both shall be received in evidence.  If no other evidence is offered, the court, if satisfied that sufficient facts are shown by the claim of exemption (including the financial statement if one is required) and the notice of opposition, may make its determination thereon.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 703.580, subd. (c).)  “At the conclusion of the hearing, the court shall determine by order whether or not the property is exempt in whole or in part.”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 703.580, subd. (d).)

The pending Claim of Exemption states that Sundberg needs “All earnings” to support himself or his family, and he does not consent to the withholding of any amount of his earnings per pay period.  (Nov. 14, 2024 Claim of Exemption, ¶¶ 2, 4.)  The financial statement provides that (1) Sundberg’s gross monthly pay is $10,000.35; (2) after deductions, Sundberg’s total monthly income is $7,383.92; (3) Sundberg holds $3,860 in checking, savings, and credit unions accounts; and (4) his monthly expenses amount to a total of $7,787.96 (including $200 per month for entertainment).  (Nov. 14, 2024 Claim of Exemption, ¶¶ 2-5.)  The financial statement also provides that Sundberg has incurred debts from other creditors with varying monthly payments.  (Nov. 14, 2024 Claim of Exemption, ¶ 5.)

After considering the Claim of Exemption, Sundberg’s financial statement and supporting declaration, and Judgment Creditor’s notice of opposition to the Claim of Exemption, the court grants in part Sundberg’s Claim of Exemption.  The court finds that $100 per pay period ($200 total per month) is a reasonable amount for Sundberg to pay to Judgment Creditor after considering his monthly income, monthly expenses, and assets.  The court therefore finds that Sundberg’s property is exempt in part.

ORDER

            The court grants in part judgment debtor Seth Sundberg’s Claim of Exemption.

            The court orders that judgment creditor The National Collection Agency, Inc., may withhold $100 per pay period ($200 per month) of judgment debtor Seth Sundberg’s net income.  (Code Civ. Proc., § 703.580, subd. (d).)

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedures section 703.580, subdivision (e), the court directs the court clerk to promptly transmit a certified copy of this order to the levying officer.  The levying officer shall, in compliance with this order, release the property to the satisfaction of the money judgment. 

            The court orders judgment creditor The National Collection Agency, Inc. to give notice of this ruling.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED:  January 7, 2025

_____________________________

Robert B. Broadbelt III

Judge of the Superior Court