This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 01/07/2021 at 22:29:18 (UTC).

JULIE K. ANDERSON VS MARK E. ANDERSON

Case Summary

On 06/16/2020 JULIE K ANDERSON filed an Other - Sister State Judgment lawsuit against MARK E ANDERSON. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is SAMANTHA JESSNER. The case status is Disposed - Judgment Entered.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******1925

  • Filing Date:

    06/16/2020

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Judgment Entered

  • Case Type:

    Other - Sister State Judgment

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

SAMANTHA JESSNER

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

ANDERSON JULIE K.

Defendant

ANDERSON MARK E.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

LANGBERG MARLYSSA

 

Court Documents

Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt - Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt

9/8/2020: Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt - Notice and Acknowledgment of Receipt

Application for Entry of Judgment on Sister-State Judgment - Application for Entry of Judgment on Sister-State Judgment

6/16/2020: Application for Entry of Judgment on Sister-State Judgment - Application for Entry of Judgment on Sister-State Judgment

Notice (name extension) - Notice NOTICE OF ENTRY OF JUDGMENT ON SISTER-STATE JUDGMENT

6/16/2020: Notice (name extension) - Notice NOTICE OF ENTRY OF JUDGMENT ON SISTER-STATE JUDGMENT

Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

6/16/2020: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

6/16/2020: First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

Notice (name extension) - Notice OF ERRATA

6/17/2020: Notice (name extension) - Notice OF ERRATA

 

Docket Entries

  • 09/08/2020
  • DocketNotice and Acknowledgment of Receipt; Filed by: Julie K. Anderson (Plaintiff); As to: Mark E. Anderson (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/29/2020
  • DocketUpdated -- Application for Entry of Judgment on Sister-State Judgment: As To Parties changed from Mark E. Anderson (Defendant) to Mark E. Anderson (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/29/2020
  • DocketUpdated -- Notice NOTICE OF ENTRY OF JUDGMENT ON SISTER-STATE JUDGMENT: As To Parties changed from Mark E. Anderson (Defendant) to Mark E. Anderson (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/17/2020
  • DocketNotice OF ERRATA; Filed by: Julie K. Anderson (Plaintiff); As to: Mark E. Anderson (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/16/2020
  • DocketApplication for Entry of Judgment on Sister-State Judgment; Filed by: Julie K. Anderson (Plaintiff); As to: Mark E. Anderson (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/16/2020
  • DocketNotice NOTICE OF ENTRY OF JUDGMENT ON SISTER-STATE JUDGMENT; Issued and Filed by: Julie K. Anderson (Plaintiff); As to: Mark E. Anderson (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/16/2020
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Julie K. Anderson (Plaintiff); As to: Mark E. Anderson (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/16/2020
  • DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/16/2020
  • DocketCourt orders judgment entered for Plaintiff Julie K. Anderson against Defendant Mark E. Anderson on the Petition filed by Julie K. Anderson on 06/16/2020 for the principal amount of $7,316.33, interest of $951.45, and costs of $225.00 for a total of $8,492.78.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/16/2020
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. Samantha Jessner in Department 1 Stanley Mosk Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

b"

Case Number: 20STCP01925 Hearing Date: August 16, 2021 Dept: 17

Superior Court of California

\r\n\r\n

County\r\nof Los Angeles

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

DEPARTMENT 72

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

TENTATIVE RULING

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n\r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n
\r\n

Genius\r\n Receivables, LLC

\r\n

\r\n

Petitioner,

\r\n

\r\n

In\r\n Re: J.O.

\r\n

\r\n
\r\n

Case No.: \r\n 21STCP01925

\r\n

\r\n

\r\n

\r\n

Hearing\r\n Date: August 16, 2021

\r\n
\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Petitioner’s petition to approve the transfer of\r\nstructured settlement payments is CONTINUED.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

A petition for transfer of structured settlement payment\r\nrights must comply with Insurance Code §§10136, 10137, 10138, 10139, 10139.3,\r\nand 10139.5.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Legal\r\nStandard

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

This\r\nPetition is governed by Insurance Code sections 10134–10139.5. (See\r\nalso 321 Henderson Receivables Origination LLC v. Sioteco (2009)\r\n173 Cal.App.4th 1059, 1066.) Under Insurance Code section 10137,\r\na transfer of structured settlement payment rights is void unless a court\r\nreviews and approves the transfer and finds the following conditions are met:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

a. \r\nThe transfer of the structured settlement\r\npayment rights is fair and reasonable and in the best interest of the payee,\r\ntaking into account the welfare and support of his or her dependents.

\r\n\r\n

b. \r\nThe transfer complies with the requirements\r\nof this article and will not contravene other applicable law, and the\r\ncourt has reviewed and approved the transfer as provided in Section 10139.5.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Pursuant\r\nto Insurance Code section 10139.5(a), the Court must make the following express\r\nfindings as to a transfer of structured settlement payment rights:

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

1. \r\nThe transfer is in the best interest of the\r\npayee, taking into account the welfare and support of the payee's dependents.

\r\n\r\n

2. \r\nThe payee has been advised in writing by the\r\ntransferee to seek independent professional advice regarding the transfer and\r\nhas either received that advice or knowingly waived receipt of that\r\nadvice in writing.

\r\n\r\n

3. \r\nThe transferee has provided the payee with a\r\ndisclosure form that complies with Section 10136 and the transfer agreement\r\ncomplies with Sections 10136 and 10138.

\r\n\r\n

4. \r\nThe transfer does not contravene any\r\napplicable statute or the order of any court or other government authority.

\r\n\r\n

5. \r\nThe payee reasonably understands the terms of\r\nthe transfer agreement, including the terms set forth in the disclosure\r\nstatement required by Section 10136.

\r\n\r\n

6. \r\nThe payee understands and does not wish to\r\nexercise the payee's right to cancel the transfer agreement.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

The\r\ntransfer agreement is effective only upon approval in a final court order.\r\n(Ins. Code, § 10139.5, subd. (a).)

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Discussion\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

In exchange for $86,509.23, J.O. has\r\nagreed to transfer and assign the right for one lump sum payment of $40,000.00\r\ndue and payable May 27, 2030, and 192 monthly payments of $1,421.51 commencing\r\nMay 27, 2040 continuing through and including April 27, 2056.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

In order to approve a transfer of\r\nstructured settlement payments, the Court must determine that the transfer of\r\nthe structured settlement payments is fair and reasonable. (Henderson, supra,\r\n173 Cal.App.4th at p. 1066.) Here, Petitioner has not provided sufficient\r\ninformation to allow the Court to make this determination. First, Petitioner\r\ndoes provide sufficient information about J.O. While the petition indicates\r\nthat he has never married and has no dependents, it is unclear how old he is or\r\nwhy he has decided to sell his right to structured settlement payments (e.g.,\r\nto help afford school, to buy a house, etc.) Second, the petition does not\r\nprovide any background information about the incident that led to J.O’s\r\nsettlement. It is clear from the transfer agreement that J.O settled a personal\r\ninjury lawsuit, but no additional details are provided. Third, it is unclear\r\nthe extent of his injuries from the accident, and whether or not he still\r\nreceives or requires medical treatment for those injuries. Whether or not J.O would\r\nhave sufficient financial means to pay for future medical treatment is highly\r\nrelevant to whether or not this transfer agreement is fair and reasonable.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Petitioner must submit supplemental\r\nmaterials to provide the missing information identified above.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Based on the foregoing, Petitioner’s\r\npetition to approve the transfer of structured settlement payments is\r\ncontinued.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

It is so ordered.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Dated: August \r\n, 2021

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Hon. Jon R.\r\nTakasugi\r\n Judge of the\r\nSuperior Court

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must\r\nsend an email to the court at smcdept17@lacourt.org\r\nby 4 p.m. the day prior as directed by the instructions provided on the court\r\nwebsite at www.lacourt.org. If a party submits\r\non the tentative, the party’s email must include the case number and must\r\nidentify the party submitting on the tentative. \r\nIf all parties to a motion submit, the court will adopt this\r\ntentative as the final order. If the department\r\ndoes not receive an email indicating the parties are submitting on the\r\ntentative and there are no appearances at the hearing, the motion may be placed\r\noff calendar.

\r\n\r\n

\r\n\r\n

Due to Covid-19, the court is\r\nstrongly discouraging in-person appearances. Parties, counsel, and court reporters present\r\nare subject to temperature checks and health inquiries, and will be denied\r\nentry if admission could create a public health risk. The court encourages the parties wishing to\r\nargue to appear via L.A. Court Connect. \r\nFor more information, please contact the court clerk at (213)\r\n633-0517. Your understanding during\r\nthese difficult times is appreciated.

\r\n\r\n

"
related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases represented by Lawyer LANGBERG MARLYSSA A