This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 10/15/2020 at 06:28:46 (UTC).

ALLY BANK, A CORPORATION VS WESLEY LLOYD BRINSON

Case Summary

On 12/05/2019 ALLY BANK, A CORPORATION filed a Contract - Debt Collection lawsuit against WESLEY LLOYD BRINSON. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is SERENA R. MURILLO. The case status is Disposed - Judgment Entered.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******1130

  • Filing Date:

    12/05/2019

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Judgment Entered

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Debt Collection

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Spring Street Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

SERENA R. MURILLO

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

ALLY BANK A CORPORATION

Defendant

BRINSON WESLEY LLOYD AKA WESLEY L. BRINSON AKA WESLEY BRINSON AN INDIVIDUAL

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorneys

VANLOCHEM MICHAEL D

KRUGLIAK BENTZION D

 

Court Documents

Judgment - Judgment Judgment

9/2/2020: Judgment - Judgment Judgment

Memorandum (name extension) - Memorandum Deficiency Memo

8/14/2020: Memorandum (name extension) - Memorandum Deficiency Memo

Request for Entry of Default / Judgment - Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

8/14/2020: Request for Entry of Default / Judgment - Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

Request for Entry of Default / Judgment - Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

8/14/2020: Request for Entry of Default / Judgment - Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

Request for Dismissal - Request for Dismissal

8/14/2020: Request for Dismissal - Request for Dismissal

Order for Writ of Possession (Claim and Delivery) - Order for Writ of Possession (Claim and Delivery)

8/7/2020: Order for Writ of Possession (Claim and Delivery) - Order for Writ of Possession (Claim and Delivery)

Minute Order - Minute Order (APPLICATION OF PLAINTIFF, ALLY BANK, INC., FOR WRIT OF POSSES...)

8/4/2020: Minute Order - Minute Order (APPLICATION OF PLAINTIFF, ALLY BANK, INC., FOR WRIT OF POSSES...)

Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (COURT ORDER) of 04/15/2020

4/15/2020: Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for (COURT ORDER) of 04/15/2020

Minute Order - Minute Order (COURT ORDER)

4/15/2020: Minute Order - Minute Order (COURT ORDER)

Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

4/6/2020: Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

3/27/2020: Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

Notice of Application and Hearing for Claim and Delivery (CCP 512.030) - Notice of Application and Hearing for Claim and Delivery (CCP 512.030)

1/3/2020: Notice of Application and Hearing for Claim and Delivery (CCP 512.030) - Notice of Application and Hearing for Claim and Delivery (CCP 512.030)

Memorandum of Points & Authorities - Memorandum of Points & Authorities

1/3/2020: Memorandum of Points & Authorities - Memorandum of Points & Authorities

Application for Writ of Possession (Claim and Delivery) - Application for Writ of Possession (Claim and Delivery)

1/3/2020: Application for Writ of Possession (Claim and Delivery) - Application for Writ of Possession (Claim and Delivery)

Complaint - Complaint

12/5/2019: Complaint - Complaint

Summons - Summons on Complaint

12/5/2019: Summons - Summons on Complaint

Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

12/5/2019: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

12/5/2019: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

10 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 09/09/2020
  • DocketUpdated -- Judgment: Name Extension: blank; As To Parties changed from Wesley Lloyd Brinson (Defendant) to Wesley Lloyd Brinson (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/09/2020
  • DocketAbstract of Judgment - Civil and Small Claims; Issued by: Ally Bank, a corporation (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/02/2020
  • DocketUpdated -- Judgment: Result Date changed from 08/25/2020 to 09/02/2020; As To Parties changed from Wesley Lloyd Brinson (Defendant) to Wesley Lloyd Brinson (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/02/2020
  • DocketCourt orders judgment entered for Plaintiff Ally Bank, a corporation against Defendant Wesley Lloyd Brinson AKA Wesley Brinson, an individual, AKA Wesley L. Brinson on the Complaint filed by Ally Bank, a corporation on 12/05/2019 for damages of $20,446.79, attorney fees of $1,003.40, and costs of $539.50 for a total of $21,989.69.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/02/2020
  • DocketJudgment Judgment; Filed by: Ally Bank, a corporation (Plaintiff); As to: Wesley Lloyd Brinson (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/02/2020
  • DocketUpdated -- Judgment Judgment: Status changed from Filed to Signed and Filed

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/02/2020
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 06/03/2021 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26 Not Held - Vacated by Court on 09/02/2020

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/02/2020
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 12/08/2022 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26 Not Held - Vacated by Court on 09/02/2020

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/25/2020
  • DocketUpdated -- Judgment: Filed By: Ally Bank, a corporation (Plaintiff); Result changed from Entered to Granted; Result Date: 08/25/2020

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/14/2020
  • DocketRequest for Dismissal; Filed by: Ally Bank, a corporation (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
21 More Docket Entries
  • 01/03/2020
  • DocketMemorandum of Points & Authorities; Filed by: Ally Bank, a corporation (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/03/2020
  • DocketNotice of Application and Hearing for Claim and Delivery (CCP 512.030); Filed by: Ally Bank, a corporation (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/03/2020
  • DocketApplication for Writ of Possession (Claim and Delivery); Filed by: Ally Bank, a corporation (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/05/2019
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/05/2019
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Ally Bank, a corporation (Plaintiff); As to: Wesley Lloyd Brinson (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/05/2019
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Ally Bank, a corporation (Plaintiff); As to: Wesley Lloyd Brinson (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/05/2019
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: Ally Bank, a corporation (Plaintiff); As to: Wesley Lloyd Brinson (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/05/2019
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 12/08/2022 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/05/2019
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 06/03/2021 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/05/2019
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. Serena R. Murillo in Department 94 Stanley Mosk Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 19STLC11130    Hearing Date: August 04, 2020    Dept: 82

Ally Bank,

v.

Wesley Lloyd Brinson,

Judge Mary Strobel

Hearing: August 4, 2020

19STLC11130

Tentative Decision on Application for Writ of Possession

Plaintiff Ally Bank (“Plaintiff”) seeks a writ of possession against Defendant Wesley Lloyd Brinson (“Defendant”) over the following property: 2016 Toyota Camry, motor vehicle, Vehicle Identification Number 4T4BF1FK5GR517420 (“Vehicle”).

Statement of the Case

According to Blong Vang, a replevin specialist and authorized representative for Plaintiff, Defendant entered into an Agreement regarding purchase of the Vehicle on or about February 10, 2018. Defendant failed to make payments required by the Agreement starting June 27, 2019. Defendant is in default under the Agreement, and Plaintiff seeks possession of the Vehicle after making demand for Defendant to surrender the Vehicle. (Vang Decl. ¶¶ 5-6, Exh. A-D.)

Procedural History

Plaintiff filed its complaint on December 5, 2019. Plaintiff filed its application for writ of possession on January 3, 2020.

On February 9, 2020, Plaintiff served Defendant with the summons, complaint, and application for writ of possession by substitute service.

On April 15, 2020, based on conditions and orders related to the spread of Covid-19, the court continued the hearing on the application for writ of possession to August 4, 2020

On April 22, 2020, Plaintiff mail-served notice of the continuance on Defendant.

No opposition has been received.

Summary of Applicable Law

“Upon the filing of the complaint or at any time thereafter, the plaintiff may apply pursuant to this chapter for a writ of possession by filing a written application for the writ with the court in which the action is brought.” (CCP, § 512.010, subd. (a).)

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 512.010, subdivision (b), the application must be submitted 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. If the basis of the plaintiff's claim is a written instrument, a copy of the instrument shall be attached.

(2) A showing that the property is wrongfully detained by the defendant, of the manner in which the defendant came into possession of the property, and, according to the best knowledge, information, and belief of the plaintiff, of the reason for the detention.

(3) A particular description of the property and a statement of its value.

(4) A statement, according to the best knowledge, information, and belief of the plaintiff, of the location of the property and, if the property, or some part of it, is within a private place which may have to be entered to take possession, a showing that there is probable cause to believe that such property is located there.

(5) A statement that the property has not been taken for a tax, assessment, or fine, pursuant to a statute; or seized under an execution against the property of the plaintiff; or, if so seized, that it is by statute exempt from such seizure.

Before the hearing on the Writ of Possession, the defendant must be served 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. (Id., § 512.030.)

“The writ will be issued if the court finds that the plaintiff's claim is probably valid and the other requirements for issuing the writ are established.” (Id., § 512.040, subd. (b).) “A claim has ‘probable validity’ where it is more likely than not that the plaintiff will obtain a judgment against the defendant on that claim.” (Id., § 511.090.)

Prior to the issuance of a writ of possession, the Plaintiff must file an undertaking “in an amount not less than twice the value of the defendant's interest in the property or in a greater amount.” (Id., § 515.010, subd. (a).)

Analysis

1. Notice

Notice is adequate as stated above.

2. Basis of Plaintiff’s Claim

Plaintiff seeks a writ of possession based on its claim for claim and delivery. Vang represents that the seller of the Vehicle assigned its interest to Plaintiff in the sales contract. (Vang Decl. ¶ 5, Exh A.) The Agreement appears to show an assignment to “Ally Bank” from the seller on or about February 10, 2018, when the Agreement was executed. (Ibid.) Vang authenticates a copy of Defendant’s payment history, which shows payments made on the Agreement from March 2018 through April 2019. (Id. Exh. D.) Considering the Agreement with other evidence in the record, including the Certificate of Title and evidence of payment to Plaintiff, there is sufficient evidence of a valid assignment. (See Id. ¶¶ 5-6, Exh. B, C, D.) However, the Certificate of Title shows “Ally Fncl” as the lienholder not “Ally Bank.” Given this evidence, however, Plaintiff must explain at the hearing why the action is taken under the name of Ally Bank, and not Ally Financial.

Vang declares that Defendant failed to make monthly payments required by the Agreement starting June 27, 2019, and that Defendant presently owes a principal sum of $20,446.79. (Id. ¶ 6, Exh. C-D.) No opposition has been received to dispute this evidence. Based on the foregoing, and assuming an adequate explanation as to the authority of Plaintiff to proceed under the name Ally Bank, Plaintiff shows a probable validity of its claim.

3. Wrongful Detention

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 512.010, subdivision (b)(2), the application must include “a showing that the property is wrongfully detained by the defendant, of the manner in which the defendant came into possession of the property, and, according to the best knowledge, information, and belief of the plaintiff, of the reason for the detention.”

Under the Agreement, Plaintiff has the right to repossess the Vehicle in the event of default. (Vang Decl. Exh. A.) Plaintiff has made a showing that Defendant wrongfully detained the Vehicle after defaulting on the Agreement.

4. Description and Value of Property

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 512.010, subdivision (b)(3), the application must include a particular description of the property and a statement of its value.

Plaintiff has provided a particular description of the property, by make, model, and VIN number. Plaintiff has also given a statement as to value. (Appl. ¶ 4; Vang Decl. ¶ 7.) Plaintiff therefore satisfies section 512.010, subdivision (b)(3).

5. Statutory Statements

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 512.010, subdivision (b)(4)-(5), the application must include:

(4) A statement, according to the best knowledge, information, and belief of the plaintiff, of the location of the property and, if the property, or some part of it, is within a private place which may have to be entered to take possession, a showing that there is probable cause to believe that such property is located there.

(5) A statement that the property has not been taken for a tax, assessment, or fine, pursuant to a statute; or seized under an execution against the property of the plaintiff; or, if so seized, that it is by statute exempt from such seizure.

Plaintiff has provided a statement that the property has not been taken for a tax, assessment, or fine, pursuant to statute and has not been seized under an execution against the Plaintiff’s property.

Concerning location of the vehicle, Vang declares that Plaintiff’s file reflects that Defendant resides at 20316 E Lancaster Blvd., Lancaster, CA 93535 and/or at 45714 240th St. E., Lancaster, CA, 93535. (Vang Decl. ¶ 10.) In reliance on that information, Vang states on information and belief that the Vehicle is located at those locations. (Ibid.)

Because the application asks for an order permitting a levying officer to enter the Property and take possession of the Vehicle, Plaintiff must establish “probable cause” to believe that the Vehicle is located at the Property. (See CCP §§ 512.010, subd. (b)(4), 512.080.) Plaintiff has not submitted a declaration of any agents or repossessors that spotted the Vehicle at the stated locations. The purchase agreement (executed in February 2018) and Certificate of Title do not refer to 20316 E Lancaster Blvd., Lancaster, CA 93535 and/or at 45714 240th St. E., Lancaster, CA, 93535 as addresses for Defendant. However, on February 9, 2020, Plaintiff served Defendant with the summons, complaint, and application for writ of possession by substitute service at 45714 240th St. E., Lancaster, CA, 93535. The proof of service, which is executed under penalty of perjury, states that the papers were left with “Kerry Brinson – Co-occupant (brother)” and that this person indicated that Defendant was “not home.”

Considering all the evidence, the court finds sufficient probable cause to believe that the Vehicle is located at 45714 240th St. E., Lancaster, CA, 93535. The court does not find sufficient probable cause to believe that the Vehicle is located at 20316 E Lancaster Blvd., Lancaster, CA 93535.[1]

6. Undertaking

Code of Civil Procedure section 515.010 requires an undertaking to be filed before the writ issues in the amount of “not less than twice the value of the defendant’s interest in the property.” Plaintiff provides evidence that the amount owing on the Vehicle exceeds its market value. Thus, no undertaking is required.

Request to Take Evidence at Hearing

Plaintiff contends that there is good cause for oral testimony or other evidence at the hearing to show probable cause for the Vehicle’s location. (Points and Authorities 3, citing CCP § 512.050.) Specifically, Plaintiff argues that an examination of Defendant would update the information of the Vehicle’s location. The court denies this request. Plaintiff does not show good cause to take oral testimony.

Conclusion

The application is GRANTED IN PART to the extent it seeks a writ of possession for the Vehicle at 45714 240th St. E., Lancaster, CA, 93535. The application is DENIED to the extent it seeks a writ of possession for the Vehicle at 20316 E Lancaster Blvd., Lancaster, CA 93535.


[1] Paragraph 6 of the application, on form CD-100, only states the address as 20316 E Lancaster Blvd., Lancaster, CA 93535. However, paragraph 6 also refers to information in the attached declaration, which requests a writ of possession at 45714 240th St. E., Lancaster, CA, 93535. (Vang Decl. ¶ 10.)