This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 11/03/2019 at 08:08:33 (UTC).

OLD DOMINION FREIGHT LINE, INC. VS AMATZIA B.G.D. LLC

Case Summary

On 09/04/2019 a Other - Sister State Judgment case was filed by OLD DOMINION FREIGHT LINE, INC against AMATZIA B G D LLC in the jurisdiction of Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******3791

  • Filing Date:

    09/04/2019

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Judgment Entered

  • Case Type:

    Other - Sister State Judgment

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

OLD DOMINION FREIGHT LINE INC.

Defendant

AMATZIA B.G.D. LLC

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

GABA JR. RODOLFO

 

Court Documents

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

12/10/2019: Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

Notice of Motion - Notice of Motion

12/20/2019: Notice of Motion - Notice of Motion

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

9/4/2019: 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

9/4/2019: Notice (name extension) - Notice Notice of Entry of Judgment on Sister-State Judgment

Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

9/4/2019: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

Judgment - Judgment Judgment Based on Sister-State Judgment

9/4/2019: Judgment - Judgment Judgment Based on Sister-State Judgment

First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

9/4/2019: First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

 

Docket Entries

  • 12/20/2019
  • DocketNotice of Motion; Filed by: Amatzia B.G.D. LLC (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/10/2019
  • DocketProof of Service by Substituted Service; Filed by: Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc. (Plaintiff); As to: Amatzia B.G.D. LLC (Defendant); Proof of Mailing Date: 11/22/2019; Service Cost: 86.45; Service Cost Waived: No

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/04/2019
  • DocketApplication for Entry of Judgment on Sister-State Judgment; Filed by: Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc. (Plaintiff); As to: Amatzia B.G.D. LLC (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/04/2019
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc. (Plaintiff); As to: Amatzia B.G.D. LLC (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/04/2019
  • DocketJudgment Judgment Based on Sister-State Judgment; Filed by: Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc. (Plaintiff); As to: Amatzia B.G.D. LLC (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/04/2019
  • DocketNotice Notice of Entry of Judgment on Sister-State Judgment; Filed by: Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc. (Plaintiff); As to: Amatzia B.G.D. LLC (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/04/2019
  • DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/04/2019
  • DocketCourt orders judgment entered for Plaintiff Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc. against Defendant Amatzia B.G.D. LLC on the Petition filed by Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc. on 09/04/2019 for the principal amount of $20,074.13, interest of $1,166.55, and costs of $370.00 for a total of $21,610.68.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/04/2019
  • DocketCase assigned in ROOM 118 Stanley Mosk Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 19STCP03791    Hearing Date: February 24, 2020    Dept: 25

MOTION TO VACATE SISTER STATE JUDGMENT

(CCP § 1710.40)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Defendant Amatzia B.G.D., LLC’s Motion to Vacate Sister State Judgment is DENIED.

OPPOSITION: Filed on February 4, 2020 [ ] Late [ ] None

REPLY: Filed on February 14, 2020 [ ] Late [ ] None

ANALYSIS:

  1. Background

On November 2, 2018, Plaintiff Old Dominion Freight Line, Inc. (“Plaintiff”) obtained a default judgment against Defendant Amatzia B.G.D., LLC (“Defendant”) in the amount of $20,074.13 (the “Judgment”). On September 4, 2019, Plaintiff domesticated the Judgment in California. Defendant was served with the notice of entry of judgment on November 22, 2019 by substituted service. (12/10/19 Proof of Service.)

On December 20, 2019, Defendant filed the instant Motion to Vacate Sister-State Judgment (the “Motion”). On February 4, 2020 Plaintiff filed an Opposition and on February 14, 2020, Defendant filed a Reply.

  1. Request for Judicial Notice

Plaintiff requests that the Court take judicial notice of (1) Proof of Service for the Summons and Complaint filed in the Nevada action entitled Old Dominion Freight Line Inc. v. Amatzia BGD, LLC case No. A-18-779163-C, (2) Notice of Entry of Default Judgment in the Nevada action entitled Old Dominion Freight Line Inc. v. Amatzia BGD, LLC case No. A-18-779163-C, and (3) Register of Actions in the Nevada action entitled Old Dominion Freight Line Inc. v. Amatzia BGD, LLC case No. A-18-779163-C.

Plaintiff’s request is GRANTED. (Evid. Code, § 452, subd. (d).)

  1. Legal Standard

“Article IV, section 1 of the United States Constitution provides that [f]ull Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records and judicial Proceedings of every other State. It has long been the law that the judgment of a state court should have the same credit, validity, and effect in every other court in the United States, which it had in the state where it was pronounced. [Citations.] Therefore, under California law, the judgment of a sister state must be given full faith and credit if that sister state had jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter, and all interested parties were given reasonable notice and opportunity to be heard. [Citations.]” (Conseco Marketing, LLC v. IFA Services, Inc. (2013) 221 Cal.App.4th 831, 837.)

A judgment creditor can apply to domesticate a sister-state judgment pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1710.20. Once entered, a domesticated sister-state judgment “has the same effect as an original money judgment of the court and may be enforced or satisfied in like manner.” (Code Civ. Proc., §1710.35.) “A judgment entered pursuant to this chapter may be vacated on any ground which would be a defense to an action in this state on the sister state judgment, including the ground that the amount of interest accrued on the sister state judgment and included in the judgment entered pursuant to this chapter is incorrect.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 1710.40, subd. (a).)

A motion to vacate a sister state judgment must be made no later 30 days after service of notice of entry of judgment. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1710.40, subd. (b).) The moving party bears the burden of demonstrating it is entitled to relief. (Tsakos Shipping & Trading S.A. v. Juniper Garden Town Homes, LTD. (1993) 12 Cal.App.4th 74, 88.)

  1. Discussion

Defendant’s Motion is timely. On the merits, Defendant argues that it is entitled to relief from the Judgment because it has meritorious defenses to the underlying breach of contract action. (Mot., p. 4.) Specifically, Defendant argues its defenses of (1) no meeting of the minds/lack of mutual consent, (2) unilateral mistake, (3) bilateral mistake, and (4) fraud warrant relief pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1710.40, subd. (a). (Id. at p. 4-6.)

In opposition, Plaintiff argues that Defendant must show both a defense to the enforcement of a sister state judgment and a meritorious defense to the underlying action. (Oppo., p. 3.) It also argues that in the absence of a due process violation, the Nevada Judgment is valid and enforceable. (Id.) However, this is not necessarily the case.

The Law Revision Commission Comments to Section 1710.40 provide examples of what may constitute a defense to an action on the sister state judgment. These examples include that the judgment was not final, that the judgment was obtained by extrinsic fraud, that the judgment was rendered in excess of jurisdiction, that the judgment is not enforceable in the state of rendition, that the judgment has already been paid, and that the judgment is barred by the statute of limitations in California. (Conseco Marketing, LLC v. IFA Services, Inc., supra, 221 Cal.App.4th at p. 839.)

Although Defendant is correct that the Law Revision Commission Comments are not all-inclusive (Mot., p. 4), the examples provided demonstrate that the defenses contemplated by Section 1710.40, subdivision (a) are defenses to the enforcement of the judgment. In some instances, in addition to demonstrating a valid defense to the enforcement of a judgment, demonstrating a meritorious defense is also necessary. For example, where a party seeks to set aside a sister-state judgment on the basis of extrinsic fraud or mistake, a meritorious defense to the underlying action is required. (New York Higher Education Assistance Corp. v. Siegel (1979) 91 Cal.App.3d 684, 688; Tsakos Shipping & Trading S.A. v. Juniper Garden Town Homes, LTD., supra, 12 Cal.App.4th at 89-90.)

However, alleging meritorious defenses to the underlying action, alone, is not enough. (See Tsakos Shipping & Trading S.A. v. Juniper Garden Town Homes, LTD., supra, 12 Cal.App.4th at p. 94-95 [after concluding defendant met its burden of proving a meritorious defense to the underlying action, the Court returned to the issue of whether a basis existed for vacating the notice of entry of judgment in California].) Indeed, to vacate this Judgment on the sole basis that defenses to the underlying action exist would not give full faith and credit to Nevada’s Judgment.

Thus, because Defendant has not demonstrated a valid defense to the enforcement of the Judgment exists, the Motion is DENIED.

  1. Conclusion & Order

For the foregoing reasons, Defendant Amatzia B.G.D., LLC’s Motion to Vacate Sister State Judgment is DENIED.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.