Judge Virginia Keeny, Case Number: 24STCV28309, Date: 2025-06-03 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Virginia Keeny, Case: 24STCV28309, Date: 2025-06-03 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV28309 Hearing Date: June 3, 2025 Dept: 45

WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION v. MARDOQUED A GOMEZ

PLAINTIFF’S motion for summary judgment or in the altnerative for summary adjudication

Date of Hearing: June 3, 2025 Trial Date: None set.

Department: 45 Case No.: 24STCV28309

Moving Party: Plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank, National Association

Responding Party: No opposition

BACKGROUND

On October 29, 2024, Plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank, National Association filed a complaint against Defendants Mardoqued A Gomez, an individual, aka Mardoqueo Antonio Gomez, aka Mardoqued Figueroa, aka Mardoqueo Antonio Figueroa, aka Mardoqueo Figueroa Gomez, aka Tony Gomez, aka Gomez Mardoqueo Af, Mardoqueo Antonio Figueroa Gomez and DBA Mardoqued Antonio Gomez Pool Service, dba Tony Gomez for breach of contract, account stated and money lent for a business line of credit ending in 2207 and 0025.

[TENTATIVE] RULING:

Plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank, National Association’s Motion for Summary Judgment or, in the alternative, is GRANTED as to the first, second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth causes of action.

DISCUSSION

Plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank, National Association moves the court for summary judgment or, in the alternative, summary adjudication in its favor against Defendant Mardoqued A Gomez, an individual, aka Mardoqueo Antonio Gomez, aka Mardoqued Figueroa, aka Mardoqueo Antonio Figueroa, aka Mardoqueo Figueroa Gomez, aka Tony Gomez, aka Gomez Mardoqueo Af, Mardoqueo Antonio Figueroa Gomez and dba Mardoqued Antonio Gomez Pool Service, dba Tony Gomez.

A party seeking summary judgment has the burden of producing evidentiary facts sufficient to entitle him/her to judgment as a matter of law. (CCP § 437c(c).) The moving party must make an affirmative showing that he/she is entitled to judgment irrespective of whether or not the opposing party files an opposition. (Villa v. McFerren (1995) 35 Cal.App.4th 733, 742- 743.) Thus, “the initial burden is always on the moving party to make prima facie showing that there are no triable issues of material fact.” (Scalf v. D. B. Log Homes, Inc. (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 1510, 1519 (citing Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 850.). When a plaintiff seeks summary judgment, he/she must produce admissible evidence on each element of each cause of action on which judgment is sought. (CCP § 437c(p)(1).) The moving party’s “affidavits must cite evidentiary facts, not legal conclusions or ‘ultimate’ facts” and the courts must construe the evidence in support of the opposing party, resolving any doubts in favor of the opposing party. (Hayman v. Block (1986) 176 Cal.App.3d 629, 639; Scalf, 128 Cal.App.4th at 1519; Dore v. Arnold Worldwide, Inc. (2006) 39 Cal.4th 384, 389.)

The opposing party on a motion for summary judgment is under no evidentiary burden to produce rebuttal evidence until the moving party meets his or her initial movant’s burden. (Binder v. Aetna Life Insurance Company (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 832, 840.) Once the initial movant’s burden is met, then the burden shifts to the opposing party to show, with admissible evidence, that there is a triable issue requiring the weighing procedures of trial. (CCP § 437c(p).) The opposing party may not simply rely on his/her allegations to show a triable issue but must present evidentiary facts that are substantial in nature and rise beyond mere speculation. (Sangster v. Paetkau (1998) 68 Cal.App.4th 151, 162.) Summary judgment must be granted “if all the evidence submitted, and ‘all inferences reasonably deducible from the evidence’ and uncontradicted by other inferences or evidence, show that there is no triable issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” (Adler v. Manor Healthcare Corp. (1992) 7 Cal.App.4th 1110, 1119.)

Breach of Contract

“A cause of action for breach of contract requires proof of the following elements: (1) existence of the contract; (2) plaintiff's performance or excuse for nonperformance; (3) defendant’s breach; and (4) damages to plaintiff as a result of the breach.” (CDF Firefighters v. Maldonado¿(2008) 158 Cal.App.4th 1226, 1239.)¿

Here, Plaintiff has presented evidence of (1) Plaintiff’s acceptance of Gomez’s applications for a Business Line of Credit for accounts ending in 2207 and 0025; (2) its own performance in extending the credit and lending the money to Defendants; (3) Defendants’ failure to repay the loans; and (4) Plaintiff’s damages because of Defendants’ failure to repay the loan.¿ (UMF 1-7; 20-26.) Plaintiff has provided the declaration of Amanda Layton, a Lead Loan Workout Specialist, to authenticate the agreements between the parties and Defendants failure to pay on the accounts.

Based on the foregoing, Plaintiff has met its burden to show that there are no triable issues of material fact as to the elements of a breach of contract claim. Therefore, the burden shifts to Defendants to show that a triable issue of one or more material facts exists as to this cause of action. As the motion is unopposed, Defendants have not met their burden as to the first cause of action or fourth causes of action.

Account Stated

“An account stated is an agreement, based on the prior transactions between the parties, that the items of the account are true and that the balance struck is due and owing from one party to another.” (Gleason v. Klamer (1980) 103 Cal.App.3d 782, 786.) This is viewed as a “new contract.” (Ibid.) “‘The essential elements of an account stated are: (1) previous transactions between the parties establishing the relationship of debtor and creditor; (2) an agreement between the parties, express or implied, on the amount due from the debtor to the creditor; (3) a promise by the debtor, express or implied, to pay the amount due.’” (Leighton v. Forster (2017) 8 Cal.App.5th 467, 491.)

Here, Plaintiff has presented evidence that (1) it issued two Business Line of Credits to Defendants, with an account numbers ending in 2207 and 0025; (2) Wells Fargo regularly delivered to Borrower written account statements describing monthly charges, credits, debits and payments on both accounts; and (3) Defendants implied agreed to pay the amount due. (UMF 8 – 13; 27 – 32.)

As the motion is unopposed, Defendants have not met their burden as to the second cause of action or fifth causes of action.

Money Lent

A cause of action for money had and received lies wherever one person has received money which belongs to another and which in equity and good conscience should be paid over to the latter. (Gutierrez v. Girardi (2011) 194 Cal. App. 4th 925.)

Here, Plaintiff has presented evidence within the last four years, Wells Fargo extended credit to Defendants and Defendants are indebted to Wells Fargo in the aggregate sum of $58,926.16. (UMF 14 – 19; 33 – 38.)

As the motion is unopposed, Defendants have not met their burden as to the third cause of action or sixth causes of action.

Attorney Fees

Plaintiff argues an award of attorney fees may be made as part of the summary judgment in any case where such fees are recoverable by law, as where authorized by contracts. (Hoover Community Hotel Corp. v. Thompson (1985) 167 Cal.App.3d 1130, 1143.)

Plaintiff has presented evidence they have incurred attorney fees and costs. (Ramirez-Browning Decl.) Such fee are supported by the evidence submitted and recoverable here. The court grants the request for attorney fees and costs in the amount of $2068.52 in fees and $571.85 in costs.

Website by Triangulus