This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 11/22/2020 at 07:05:26 (UTC).

FOREMAN FINANCIAL, INC. VS MIRANDA AUTO SALES, INC., ET AL.

Case Summary

On 11/14/2018 FOREMAN FINANCIAL, INC filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against MIRANDA AUTO SALES, INC . This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Spring Street Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is WENDY CHANG. The case status is Disposed - Judgment Entered.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******3901

  • Filing Date:

    11/14/2018

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Judgment Entered

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Spring Street Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

WENDY CHANG

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

FOREMAN FINANCIAL INC.

Defendants

MIRANDA RAYMUNDO

MIRANDA AUTO SALES INC.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorneys

LEVENTHAL JONATHAN

SIFERS JAMES S.

 

Court Documents

Memorandum of Costs After Judgment, Acknowledgment of Credit, and Declaration of Accrued Interest - Memorandum of Costs After Judgment, Acknowledgment of Credit, and Declaration of Accrued Interest

9/3/2020: Memorandum of Costs After Judgment, Acknowledgment of Credit, and Declaration of Accrued Interest - Memorandum of Costs After Judgment, Acknowledgment of Credit, and Declaration of Accrued Interest

Notice (name extension) - Notice of Entry of Order

8/10/2020: Notice (name extension) - Notice of Entry of Order

Notice (name extension) - Notice of Non-Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment

7/2/2020: Notice (name extension) - Notice of Non-Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment

Notice (name extension) - Notice of Motion for Summary Judgment

1/21/2020: Notice (name extension) - Notice of Motion for Summary Judgment

Declaration (name extension) - Declaration Declaration of D. Foreman in Support of its Motion for Summary Judgment

1/21/2020: Declaration (name extension) - Declaration Declaration of D. Foreman in Support of its Motion for Summary Judgment

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Ex Parte Application to Specially set the Hearing ...)

1/23/2020: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Ex Parte Application to Specially set the Hearing ...)

Ex Parte Application (name extension) - Ex Parte Application to Specially set the Hearing date for Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment

1/23/2020: Ex Parte Application (name extension) - Ex Parte Application to Specially set the Hearing date for Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment

Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

1/24/2020: Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

Notice of Motion - Notice of Motion

1/27/2020: Notice of Motion - Notice of Motion

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

11/18/2019: Request for Entry of Default / Judgment - Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for Minute Order (Hearing on Ex Parte Application To Set Aside Default Judgment...) of 05/06/2019

5/6/2019: Certificate of Mailing for - Certificate of Mailing for Minute Order (Hearing on Ex Parte Application To Set Aside Default Judgment...) of 05/06/2019

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

5/14/2019: Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

Opposition (name extension) - Opposition to Ex Parte Application

5/6/2019: Opposition (name extension) - Opposition to Ex Parte Application

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

3/18/2019: Request for Entry of Default / Judgment - Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

11/20/2018: Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

Summons - Summons on Complaint

11/14/2018: Summons - Summons on Complaint

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

11/14/2018: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

11/14/2018: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

36 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 09/25/2020
  • DocketWrit of Execution (Orange); Issued by: Foreman Financial, Inc. (Plaintiff); As to: Raymundo Miranda (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/24/2020
  • DocketNotice of Rejection - Post Judgment; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/24/2020
  • DocketAbstract of Judgment - Civil and Small Claims; Issued by: Foreman Financial, Inc. (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/03/2020
  • DocketMemorandum of Costs After Judgment, Acknowledgment of Credit, and Declaration of Accrued Interest; Filed by: Foreman Financial, Inc. (Plaintiff); As to: Raymundo Miranda (Defendant); Costs: 170.60; Interest: 196.92; Service Date: 09/03/2020

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/10/2020
  • DocketNotice of Entry of Order; Filed by: Foreman Financial, Inc. (Plaintiff); As to: Raymundo Miranda (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/08/2020
  • DocketUpdated -- Order on Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment: As To Parties changed from Miranda Auto Sales, Inc. (Defendant) to Miranda Auto Sales, Inc. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/08/2020
  • DocketUpdated -- Order on Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment: As To Parties changed from Miranda Auto Sales, Inc. (Defendant) to Miranda Auto Sales, Inc. (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/08/2020
  • DocketHearing on Motion - Other Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Defendant's Amended Answer to Plaintiff's Complaint scheduled for 07/07/2020 at 10:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26 Not Held - Taken Off Calendar by Court on 07/07/2020

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/08/2020
  • DocketNon-Appearance Case Review Re: Bankruptcy scheduled for 08/24/2020 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26 Not Held - Vacated by Court on 07/08/2020

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/08/2020
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 10/27/2020 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 26 Not Held - Vacated by Court on 07/08/2020

    Read MoreRead Less
80 More Docket Entries
  • 11/20/2018
  • DocketProof of Service by Substituted Service; Filed by: Foreman Financial, Inc. (Plaintiff); As to: Raymundo Miranda (Defendant); Proof of Mailing Date: 11/17/2018; Service Cost: 89.00; Service Cost Waived: No

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/20/2018
  • DocketProof of Personal Service; Filed by: Foreman Financial, Inc. (Plaintiff); As to: Miranda Auto Sales, Inc. (Defendant); Service Date: 11/17/18; Service Cost: 89.00; Service Cost Waived: No

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/15/2018
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 05/13/2020 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/15/2018
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 11/17/2021 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/15/2018
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. Wendy Chang in Department 94 Stanley Mosk Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/14/2018
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: Foreman Financial, Inc. (Plaintiff); As to: Miranda Auto Sales, Inc. (Defendant); Raymundo Miranda (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/14/2018
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: Foreman Financial, Inc. (Plaintiff); As to: Miranda Auto Sales, Inc. (Defendant); Raymundo Miranda (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/14/2018
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Foreman Financial, Inc. (Plaintiff); As to: Miranda Auto Sales, Inc. (Defendant); Raymundo Miranda (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/14/2018
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/14/2018
  • DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 18STLC13901    Hearing Date: July 07, 2020    Dept: 26

Foreman Financial, Inc. v. Miranda Auto Sales, Inc., et al.

MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

(CCP § 437c)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff Foreman Financial, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.

ANALYSIS:

On November 14, 2018, Plaintiff Foreman Financial, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) filed the instant action for breach of contract against Defendants Miranda Auto Sales, Inc. (“Defendant MAS”) and Raymundo Miranda (“Defendant Miranda”). On January 21, 2020, Plaintiff filed the instant Motion for Summary Judgment against Defendants. On February 25, 2020, Defendant MAS filed a Notice of Stay of Proceedings due to its bankruptcy filing. The next day, Plaintiff dismissed Defendant MAS from the action.

Discussion

The Court, therefore, will consider the Motion for Summary Judgment only as to Defendant Miranda. The Complaint alleges that on September 9, 2013, Plaintiff and Defendant MAS entered into a Used Car Dealer Agreement (“the Agreement”), which was personally guaranteed by Defendant Miranda. (Compl., ¶BC-1 and Exhs. A-B.) Plaintiff allegedly assigned Defendant MAS a Retail Installment Sales Contract (“RISC”) on June 10, 2016 with respect to a 2013 Nissan Altima. (Id. at ¶BC-2.) Defendant MAS allegedly refused to repurchase the RISC when requested on July 24, 2018 following the customer’s default. (Ibid.) As a result, Plaintiff suffered damages from the customer’s default, which the parties’ agreement was intended to protect against. (Id. at ¶BC-4.)

In order to prevail on a claim for breach of guaranty, Plaintiff must demonstrate (1) Defendant guaranteed payment of the indebtedness of the primary obligor to the plaintiff; (2) default on the indebtedness; (3) plaintiff notified the guarantor of the default; and (4) the guarantor did not remit funds to the plaintiff under the guaranty agreement. (Torrey Pines Bank v. Sup. Ct. (1989) 216 Cal.App.3d 813, 819; Civ. Code, § 2787.) Plaintiff moves for summary judgment on the grounds that it is undisputed Defendant Miranda failed to make payment as required by the guaranty after Defendant MAS, the primary obligor, breached the Agreement. In support of the Motion, Plaintiff presents the following evidence.

Plaintiff is in the business of providing financing to qualified individuals for the purchase of motor vehicles. (Motion, Separate Statement of Facts No. 1; Foreman Decl., ¶2.) Plaintiff routinely purchases financing agreements from automobile dealers. (Motion, Separate Statement of Facts No. 2; Foreman Decl., ¶2.) On September 11, 2013, Plaintiff entered into a Master Dealer Agreement with Defendant MAS. (Motion, Separate Statement of Facts No. 3; Foreman Decl., ¶3 and Exh. 1.) The Agreement was personally guaranteed by Defendant Miranda pursuant to a written “Continuing Guaranty” executed on September 9, 2013. (Motion, Separate Statement of Facts No. 4; Foreman Decl., ¶4 and Exh. 2.)

The Agreement provides that Defendant MAS is obligated to make “payment equal to the amount of the check which was issued from Plaintiff to Defendant [MAS]” 30 days after the customer that purchased a motor vehicle under the RISC defaults. (Motion, Separate Statement of Facts No. 5; Foreman Decl., ¶5 and Exh. 1 at ¶4.) On June 10, 2016, Defendant MAS assigned Plaintiff its rights under a RISC for purchase of a 2013 Nissan Altima. (Motion, Separate Statement of Facts No. 7; Foreman Decl., ¶6 and Exh. 1.) Plaintiff accepted the RISC under a six-payment default basis. (Motion, Separate Statement of Facts No. 8; Foreman Decl., ¶6 and Exhs. 1, 4.) This meant that if the customer defaulted on the RISC within six payment periods (six months), Defendant MAS was obligated to repurchase the RISC. (Motion, Separate Statement of Facts No. 9; Foreman Decl., ¶7 and Exhs. 1, 4.) Plaintiff made payment to Defendant MAS under the terms of the Agreement. (Motion, Separate Statement of Facts No. 10; Foreman Decl., ¶8.) Following two defaults by the customer and two reinstatements of the RISC, the parties entered into an amended guaranty where the recourse period was four payments. (Motion, Separate Statement of Facts Nos. 11-14; Foreman Decl., ¶¶9-12 and Exh. 5.)

Based on the evidence presented, Plaintiff has carried its initial burden of proof to demonstrate Defendant MAS’ breach of the parties’ Agreement, and Defendant Miranda’s subsequent breach of the Continuing Guaranty. The burden now shifts to Defendant Miranda to create a triable issue of material fact regarding Plaintiff’s inability to prove the elements of its cause of action or the viability of an affirmative defense. As no opposition has been filed, however, Defendant Miranda has not met his burden. Therefore, Plaintiff Foreman Financial, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED.

Moving party to give notice.