This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 10/21/2021 at 01:52:17 (UTC).

FINANCIAL PARTNERS CREDIT UNION, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION VS JAMIE BROWN

Case Summary

On 09/14/2020 FINANCIAL PARTNERS CREDIT UNION, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against JAMIE BROWN. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is JAMES E. BLANCARTE. The case status is Pending - Other Pending.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******7765

  • Filing Date:

    09/14/2020

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

JAMES E. BLANCARTE

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

FINANCIAL PARTNERS CREDIT UNION A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

Defendant

BROWN JAMIE

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

ELDER WILLIAM NORMAN

 

Court Documents

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

9/14/2020: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

9/14/2020: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

Complaint - Complaint

9/14/2020: Complaint - Complaint

Summons - Summons on Complaint

9/14/2020: Summons - Summons on Complaint

First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

9/14/2020: First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court) - Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)

10/14/2020: Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court) - Order on Court Fee Waiver (Superior Court)

Proof of Service by Mail - Proof of Service by Mail

10/14/2020: Proof of Service by Mail - Proof of Service by Mail

General Denial - General Denial

10/14/2020: General Denial - General Denial

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

1/6/2021: Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

Motion to Deem RFA's Admitted - Motion to Deem RFA's Admitted

2/10/2021: Motion to Deem RFA's Admitted - Motion to Deem RFA's Admitted

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Deem Request for Admissions Admitted)

3/30/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion to Deem Request for Admissions Admitted)

Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

4/1/2021: Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings - Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings

4/7/2021: Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings - Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings)

8/25/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings)

Request (name extension) - Request to Take Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Off Calendar

9/3/2021: Request (name extension) - Request to Take Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Off Calendar

3 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 09/18/2023
  • Hearing09/18/2023 at 08:30 AM in Department 25 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Order to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/14/2022
  • Hearing03/14/2022 at 08:30 AM in Department 25 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Non-Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/23/2021
  • DocketHearing on Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings scheduled for 09/27/2021 at 10:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 Not Held - Vacated by Court on 09/23/2021

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/03/2021
  • DocketRequest to Take Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Off Calendar; Filed by: Financial Partners Credit Union, A California Corporation (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/25/2021
  • DocketHearing on Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings scheduled for 09/27/2021 at 10:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/25/2021
  • DocketMinute Order (Hearing on Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/25/2021
  • DocketOn the Court's own motion, Hearing on Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings scheduled for 08/25/2021 at 10:00 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 Held - Continued was rescheduled to 09/27/2021 10:30 AM

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/08/2021
  • DocketHearing on Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings scheduled for 08/25/2021 at 10:00 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/07/2021
  • DocketMotion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Filed by: Financial Partners Credit Union, A California Corporation (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/01/2021
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by: Financial Partners Credit Union, A California Corporation (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
7 More Docket Entries
  • 10/14/2020
  • DocketProof of Service by Mail; Filed by: Jamie Brown (Defendant); As to: Financial Partners Credit Union, A California Corporation (Plaintiff); After Substituted Service of Summons & Complaint ?: No

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/14/2020
  • DocketGeneral Denial; Filed by: Jamie Brown (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/14/2020
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 09/18/2023 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/14/2020
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 03/14/2022 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/14/2020
  • DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/14/2020
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/14/2020
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Financial Partners Credit Union, A California Corporation (Plaintiff); As to: Jamie Brown (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/14/2020
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Financial Partners Credit Union, A California Corporation (Plaintiff); As to: Jamie Brown (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/14/2020
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: Financial Partners Credit Union, A California Corporation (Plaintiff); As to: Jamie Brown (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/14/2020
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. James E. Blancarte in Department 25 Spring Street Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

b"

Case Number: 20STLC07765 Hearing Date: August 25, 2021 Dept: 25

PROCEEDINGS: MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Financial Partners Credit Union

RESP. PARTY: None

MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS

(CCP § 438, et seq.)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Financial Partners Credit Union’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is CONTINUED TO SEPTEMBER 27, 2021 at 10:30 a.m. in Department 25 at the SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE. At least 16 court days before the next scheduled hearing, Plaintiff must file and serve supplemental papers addressing the deficiencies identified herein. Failure to do so may result in the Motion being placed off calendar or denied.

SERVICE:

[X] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) OK

[X] Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) OK

[X] 16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) OK

OPPOSITION: None filed as of August 20, 2021 [ ] Late [X] None

REPLY: None filed as of August 20, 2021 [ ] Late [X] None

ANALYSIS:

I. Background

On September 14, 2020, Plaintiff Financial Partners Credit Union (“Plaintiff”) filed the instant action against Defendant Jaime Brown (“Defendant”). Plaintiff alleges eight (8) causes of action based on two written agreements between the parties. Defendant filed an Answer on October 14, 2020, in pro per.

Plaintiff filed a motion to deem Requests for Admission admitted on February 10, 2021, which was granted on March 30. (3/30/21 Minute Order.)

On April 7, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (the “Motion”). No opposition was filed.

II. Legal Standard

The standard for ruling on a motion for judgment on the pleadings is essentially the same as that applicable to a general demurrer, that is, under the state of the pleadings, together with matters that may be judicially noticed, it appears that a party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. (Bezirdjian v. O'Reilly (2010) 183 Cal.App.4th 316, 321-322, citing Schabarum v. California Legislature (1998) 60 Cal.App.4th 1205, 1216.) Matters which are subject to mandatory judicial notice may be treated as part of the complaint and may be considered without notice to the parties. Matters which are subject to permissive judicial notice must be specified in the notice of motion, the supporting points and authorities, or as the court otherwise permits. (Id.) The motion may not be supported by extrinsic evidence. (Barker v. Hull (1987) 191 Cal.App.3d 221, 236.)

When the moving party is a plaintiff, the motion may be made on the grounds that the complaint states sufficient facts to constitute a cause or causes of action against the defendant and the answer does not state facts sufficient to constitute a defense to the complaint. (Code Civ. Proc., § 438, subd. (c)(1)(A).)

Additionally, a motion for judgment on the pleadings must be accompanied by a meet and confer declaration demonstrating an attempt to meet and confer in person or by telephone, at least five days before the date a motion for judgment on the pleadings is filed. (Code Civ. Proc., § 439.)

III. Discussion

Plaintiff moves for a judgment on the pleadings largely based on the Requests for Admission that were deemed admitted on March 30, 202. (Mot., pp. 3-4.) However, Plaintiff did not request judicial notice of these discovery requests or the related order, properly or otherwise. Nor is the Motion accompanied by a meet and confer declaration.

Further, Plaintiff did not discuss the elements of each of the 8 causes of action alleged against Defendant, or how the elements of each of those causes of action are satisfied by the deemed admissions. Instead, Plaintiff simply concludes there are no material controverted facts. (Mot., p. 5.)

Rather than deny the Motion in its entirety, Court will CONTINUE this hearing and allow Plaintiff an opportunity to correct these errors.

IV. Conclusion & Order

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff Financial Partners Credit Union’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is CONTINUED TO SEPTEMBER 27, 2021 at 10:30 a.m. in Department 25 at the SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE. At least 16 court days before the next scheduled hearing, Plaintiff must file and serve supplemental papers addressing the deficiencies identified herein. Failure to do so may result in the Motion being placed off calendar or denied

Moving party is ordered to give notice.

"

Case Number: 20STLC07765    Hearing Date: March 30, 2021    Dept: 25

HEARING DATE: Tue., March 30, 2021 JUDGE /DEPT: Blancarte/25

CASE NAME: Financial Partners Credit Union v. Brown COMPL. FILED: 09-14-20

CASE NUMBER: 20STLC07765 DISC C/O: 02-12-22

NOTICE: OK DISC. MOT. C/O: 02-27-22

TRIAL DATE: 03-14-22

PROCEEDINGS: MOTION TO DEEM REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION ADMITTED

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Financial Partners Credit Union

RESP. PARTY: None

MOTION TO DEEM REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION ADMITTED

(CCP § 2033.280)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Financial Partners Credit Union’s Motion to Deem Requests for Admission Admitted is GRANTED.

SERVICE:

[X] Proof of Service Timely Filed (CRC, rule 3.1300) OK

[X] Correct Address (CCP §§ 1013, 1013a) OK

[X] 16/21 Court Days Lapsed (CCP §§ 12c, 1005(b)) OK

OPPOSITION: None filed as of March 26, 2021 [ ] Late [X] None

REPLY: None filed as of March 26, 2021 [ ] Late [X] None

ANALYSIS:

  1. Background

On September 14, 2020, Plaintiff Financial Partners Credit Union (“Plaintiff”) filed an action against Jaime Brown (“Defendant”). Defendant filed a general denial on October 14, 2020, in pro per.

Plaintiff filed the instant Motion to Deem Matters Admitted (the “Motion”) on February 10, 2021. No opposition has been filed.

  1. Legal Standard & Discussion

A. Requests for Admission

A party must respond to requests for admissions within 30 days after service of such requests. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.250, subd. (a).) “If a party to whom requests for admission are directed fails to serve a timely response…(a) [that party] waives any objection to the requests, including one based on privilege or on the protection for work product…” (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280, subd. (a).) “The requesting party may move for an order that the genuineness of any documents and the truth of any matters specified in the requests be deemed admitted, as well as for a monetary sanction under Chapter 7.” (Id. at subd. (b).) A motion dealing with the failure to respond, rather than with inadequate responses, does not require the requesting party to meet and confer with the responding party. (Deymer v. Costa Mesa Mobile Home Estates (1995) 36 Cal.App.4th 393, 395, fn. 4 [disapproved on other grounds in Wilcox v. Birtwhistle (1999) 21 Cal.4th 973]. There is no time limit within which a motion to have matters deemed admitted must be made. (Brigante v. Huang (1993) 20 Cal.App.4th 1569, 1585.)

Plaintiff’s counsel served Defendant with Requests for Admission, Set One, on November 10, 2020 via regular mail. (Mot., Elder Decl., ¶ 4, Exh. A.) Although not statutorily required, Plaintiff’s counsel sent Defendant a letter regarding the missing responses on January 6, 2021. (Id. at ¶ 6, Exh. B.) As of the date this Motion was filed, Defendant had not served any responses to Plaintiff’s discovery. Thus, Plaintiff is entitled to an order deeming the Requests for Admission, Set One, admitted against Defendant. (Code Civ. Proc., § 2033.280.)

  1. Conclusion & Order

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff Financial Partners Credit Union’s Motion to Deem Requests for Admission Admitted is GRANTED.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where FINANCIAL PARTNERS CREDIT UNION A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer ELDER WILLIAM NORMAN