Judge: Salvatore Sirna, Case: 23PSCV02889, Date: 2024-06-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23PSCV02889    Hearing Date: June 11, 2024    Dept: G

Plaintiff Daimler Truck Financial Services USA LLC’s Application for a Writ of Possession against Defendant Little Fat Trucking

Respondent: NO OPPOSITION

Plaintiff Daimler Truck Financial Services USA LLC’s Application for a Writ of Possession against Defendant Xing Wang

Respondent: NO OPPOSITION

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff Daimler Truck Financial Services USA LLC’s Application for a Writ of Possession against Defendant Little Fat Trucking is GRANTED.

Plaintiff Daimler Truck Financial Services USA LLC’s Application for a Writ of Possession against Defendant Xing Wang is GRANTED.

BACKGROUND

This is a breach of contract action arising from an equipment financing agreement. In September 2021, Mercedes-Benz Financial Services USA LLC (Mercedes-Benz) entered into a written equipment financing agreement with Defendant Little Fat Trucking in which Mercedez-Benz agreed to provide financing for the purchase of two 2022 Freightliners from Los Angeles Truck Centers, LLC. In support of the agreement, Defendant Xing Wang executed a personal guaranty. In November 2021, Mercedes-Benz sold its interest in the financing agreement to Plaintiff Daimler Truck Financial Services USA LLC (Daimler). While Little Fat Trucking paid off the full balance for one of the Freightliners in March 2022, Little Fat Trucking allegedly defaulted on payments for the other Freightliner in October 2022.

On September 19, 2023, Daimler filed a complaint against Little Fat Trucking, Wang, and Does 1-20, alleging the following causes of action: (1) breach of contract, (2) breach of guaranty, (3) common counts, (4) claim and delivery, and (5) conversion.

On February 9, 2024, Daimler filed the present applications. On March 4, 2024, Daimler’s process server served Little Fat Trucking and Wang with notice of these applications through substitute service in Diamond Bar.

A hearing on Daimler’s applications is set for June 11, 2024, along with a case management conference and OSC Re: Failure to File Proof of Service.

ANALYSIS

Daimler moves for writs of possession against Little Fat Trucking and Wang with regards to a 2022 Freightliner. For the following reasons, the Court GRANTS Daimler’s applications.

Legal Standard

“California’s claim and delivery law (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 511.010-516.050) authorizes the issuance of a prejudgment writ of possession for specific personal property.” (Sea Rail Truckloads, Inc. v. Pullman, Inc. (1982) 131 Cal.App.3d 511, 514.) “Except as otherwise provided this section, no writ shall be issued under this chapter except after a hearing on a noticed motion.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 512.020, subd. (a).) Prior to the hearing, Plaintiff must serve Defendants serve with (1) a copy of the summons and complaint, (2) a notice of application and hearing, and (3) a copy of the application and any affidavit in support thereof. (Code Civ. Proc., § 512.030, subd. (a).)

The application for writ of possession must be executed under oath and include (1) a “showing of the basis of the plaintiff’s claim and that the plaintiff is entitled to possession of the property claimed” as well as a copy of the written instrument if the basis of the claim is a written instrument, (2) a “showing that the property is wrongfully detained by the defendant,” (3) a showing of “the manner in which the defendant came into possession of the property,” (4) a showing of “the reason for the detention,” (5) a particular description of the property and its value, (6) a statement of the location of the property, including a showing that there is probable cause to believe the property is located there if alleged to be within a private place, and (7) a “statement that the property has not been taken for a tax, assessment, or fine” or “seized under an execution against the property of the plaintiff[.]” (Code Civ. Proc., § 512.010, subd. (b).)

Furthermore, Code of Civil Procedure section 512.060 provides that a writ of possession shall issue if the plaintiff meets the undertaking requirements of Code of Civil Procedure section 515.010 and establishes the probable validity of their claim to possession of the property. Code of Civil Procedure section 515.010 requires the plaintiff to file an undertaking of at least “twice the value of the defendant’s interest in the property” with the court before the court issues any writ of possession, unless the court finds defendants have “no interest in the property.” “No writ directing the levying officer to enter a private place to take possession of any property shall be issued unless the plaintiff has established that there is probable cause to believe that the property is located there.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 512.060, subd. (b).)

Discussion

In this case, Daimler moves for writs of possession for a 2022 Freightliner described as follows:

2022 Freightliner PT126SLP, Tractor Serial No. 3AKJHHDR5NSNB9600.”

The Court finds Daimler has followed the statutory requirements of Code of Civil Procedure sections 512.030 and 512.010. Pursuant to the retail installment sales agreement at issue in this action, Daimler may repossess the Freightliner at issue if Little Fat Trucking or Wang defaults on payments. (Guerrero Decl., Ex. 1, ¶ 8.) Little Fat Trucking and Wang have failed to oppose these applications or timely appear in this action. Because Daimler has shown a right to immediate possession of the Freightliner at issue and because subject vehicle remains in the possession of Little Fat Trucking and/or Wang, Daimler’s undertaking requirement is waived.  The¿undertaking required by Little Fat Trucking and Wang for redelivery or to stay execution of the writs shall be $112,700.00. (Daimler’s valuation of the property - Guerrero Decl., ¶ 26.) (See Code Civ. Proc., § 515.020.)

Accordingly, Daimler’s applications for writs of possession are GRANTED.

CONCLUSION

Based on the foregoing, Daimler’s applications for writs of possession against Little Fat Trucking and Wang are GRANTED.