Langer v. Chula Vista Rentals, LLC et al

Filing 20

ORDER Denying Application for Appearance and Debtor Examination [ECF No. 17 ]. Signed by Magistrate Judge Jill L. Burkhardt on 7/10/2019. (lrf)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 CHRIS LANGER, Case No.: 18-cv-00192-L-JLB Plaintiff, 12 13 v. 14 ORDER DENYING APPLICATION FOR APPEARANCE AND DEBTOR EXAMINATION CHULA VISTA RENTALS, LLC, Defendant. 15 [ECF No. 17] 16 17 On July 2, 2019, Plaintiff and Judgment Creditor Chris Langer filed an Application 18 for Appearance and Debtor Examination for Defendant and Judgment Debtor Chula Vista 19 Rentals, LLC (Manager Jason Kasid). (ECF No. 17.) For the reasons set forth below, the 20 Court DENIES Judgment Creditor’s application without prejudice. 21 I. BACKGROUND 22 In his application, counsel for Judgment Creditor declares under penalty of perjury 23 that a judgment was issued on April 29, 2019, for $8,972.50 and that the judgment has not 24 been paid. (Id. at 1.) 25 26 II. A. DISCUSSION Applicable Law 27 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 69 authorizes federal courts to enforce a money 28 judgment by writ of execution. Fed. R. Civ. P. 69(a)(1). “The procedure on execution— 1 18-cv-00192-L-JLB 1 and in proceedings supplementary to and in aid of judgment or execution—must accord 2 with the procedure of the state where the court is located, but a federal statute governs to 3 the extent it applies.” Id. Accordingly, in ruling on Judgment Creditor’s motion, the Court 4 follows California’s statutory provisions for the enforcement of judgments, known 5 collectively as the Enforcement of Judgments Law, as set forth in California Code of Civil 6 Procedure §§ 680.010 through 724.260. 7 Judgment debtor proceedings under California law “permit the judgment creditor to 8 examine the judgment debtor, or third persons who have property of or are indebted to the 9 judgment debtor, in order to discover property and apply it toward the satisfaction of the 10 money judgment.” Imperial Bank v. Pim Elec., Inc., 39 Cal. Rptr. 2d 432, 437 (Ct. App. 11 1995). Debtor examinations are intended “to allow the judgment creditor a wide scope of 12 inquiry concerning property and business affairs of the judgment debtor,” Hooser v. 13 Superior Court, 101 Cal. Rptr. 2d 341, 345 (Ct. App. 2000), disapproved on other grounds 14 by Williams v. Superior Court, 3 Cal. 5th 531 (2017), and “to leave no stone unturned in 15 the search for assets which might be used to satisfy the judgment,” Troy v. Superior Court, 16 231 Cal. Rptr. 108, 112 (Ct. App. 1986). 17 California Code of Civil Procedure § 708.110 provides: 18 (a) The judgment creditor may apply to the proper court for an order requiring the judgment debtor to appear before the court, or before a referee appointed by the court, at a time and place specified in the order, to furnish information to aid in enforcement of the money judgment. 19 20 21 (b) If the judgment creditor has not caused the judgment debtor to be examined under this section during the preceding 120 days, the court shall make the order upon ex parte application of the judgment creditor. 22 23 (c) If the judgment creditor has caused the judgment debtor to be examined under this section during the preceding 120 days, the court shall make the order if the judgment creditor by affidavit of otherwise shows good cause for the order. The application shall be made on noticed motion if the court so directs or a court rule so requires. Otherwise, it may be made ex parte. 24 25 26 27 28 /// 2 18-cv-00192-L-JLB 1 (d) The judgment creditor shall personally serve a copy of the order on the judgment debtor not less than 10 days before the date set for examination. Service shall be made in the manner specified in Section 145.10. Service of the order creates a lien on the personal property of the judgment debtor for a period of one year from the date of the order unless extended or sooner terminated by the court. 2 3 4 5 9 (e) The order shall contain the following statement in 14-point boldface type if printed or in capital letters if typed: “NOTICE TO JUDGMENT DEBTOR. If you fail to appear at the time and place specified in this order, you may be subject to arrest and punishment for contempt of court and the court may make an order requiring you to pay the reasonable attorney’s fees incurred by the judgment creditor in this proceeding.” 10 Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 708.110(a)–(e). Additionally, California Code of Civil Procedure 11 § 491.150(b) provides: 6 7 8 12 (b) A person sought to be examined may not be required to attend an examination before a court located outside the county in which the person resides or has a place of business unless the distance from the person’s place of residence or place of business to the place of examination is less than 150 miles. 13 14 15 16 Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 491.150(b). 17 B. Analysis 18 Judgment Creditor applies for an order requiring Judgment Debtor Chula Vista 19 Rentals, LLC to appear and furnish information to aid in enforcement of the money 20 judgment. (ECF No. 17 at 1.) 21 Judgment Creditor has failed to meet the requirements of California Code of Civil 22 Procedure § 708.110(b) and (c) in that he has failed to assert either that Judgment Creditor 23 has not examined Judgment Debtor within the last 120 days or that there is good cause to 24 allow an examination within 120 days of the previous examinations. Judgment Creditor 25 has failed to meet the requirements of California Code of Civil Procedure § 409.150(b) in 26 that Judgment Creditor has not asserted that Judgment Debtor resides in the county where 27 the court is located or within 150 miles of the location of the court. 28 /// 3 18-cv-00192-L-JLB 1 2 3 4 5 III. CONCLUSION Based on the foregoing, Judgment Creditor’s Application for Appearance and Debtor Examination (ECF No. 17) is DENIED without prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: July 10, 2019 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4 18-cv-00192-L-JLB

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?