Search

Attributes

This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 04/22/2021 at 01:33:16 (UTC).

SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, A FEDERALLY CHARTERED CREDIT UNION VS RAIJON JUSTIN PURVIS, ET AL.

Case Summary

On 07/02/2020 SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, A FEDERALLY CHARTERED CREDIT UNION filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against RAIJON JUSTIN PURVIS. 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:

    *******5562

  • Filing Date:

    07/02/2020

  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Spring Street Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Judge

JAMES E. BLANCARTE

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION A FEDERALLY CHARTERED CREDIT UNION

Defendants

PURVIS RAIJON JUSTIN AKA RAIJON J. PURVIS AN INDIVIDUAL

THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ACTING BY AND THROUGH THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES A GOVERNMENT ENTITY

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

ROCHA KAREL G

 

Court Documents

Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

3/3/2021: Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

Supplemental Declaration (name extension) - Supplemental Declaration Supplemental Points and Authorities in Support of Application for Court Order Granting Relief Under 50 U.S.C.A. 3952

3/25/2021: Supplemental Declaration (name extension) - Supplemental Declaration Supplemental Points and Authorities in Support of Application for Court Order Granting Relief Under 50 U.S.C.A. 3952

Request for Judicial Notice - Request for Judicial Notice

3/25/2021: Request for Judicial Notice - Request for Judicial Notice

Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

4/21/2021: Notice of Ruling - Notice of Ruling

Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion for Leave Motion for Leave to Repossess Mot...)

2/23/2021: Minute Order - Minute Order (Hearing on Motion for Leave Motion for Leave to Repossess Mot...)

Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order - Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

1/11/2021: Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order - Notice Re: Continuance of Hearing and Order

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

10/30/2020: Request for Entry of Default / Judgment - Request for Entry of Default / Judgment

Stipulation and Order (name extension) - Stipulation and Order REGARDING WAIVER OF APPEARANCE BY AND OF MONETARY RECOVERY AGAINST DEFENDANT THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACTING BY AND THROUGH THE CALIFORNI

8/27/2020: Stipulation and Order (name extension) - Stipulation and Order REGARDING WAIVER OF APPEARANCE BY AND OF MONETARY RECOVERY AGAINST DEFENDANT THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACTING BY AND THROUGH THE CALIFORNI

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

8/26/2020: Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

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

8/27/2020: Proof of Service by Substituted Service - Proof of Service by Substituted Service

Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

7/21/2020: Proof of Personal Service - Proof of Personal Service

Motion for Leave (name extension) - Motion for Leave Notice of Application and Application for Court Order Granting Relief Under 50 U.S.C.A. 3952; Memorandum of Points and Authorities; and Declaration

7/10/2020: Motion for Leave (name extension) - Motion for Leave Notice of Application and Application for Court Order Granting Relief Under 50 U.S.C.A. 3952; Memorandum of Points and Authorities; and Declaration

Proof of Service by Mail - Proof of Service by Mail

7/10/2020: Proof of Service by Mail - Proof of Service by Mail

Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

7/2/2020: Civil Case Cover Sheet - Civil Case Cover Sheet

Summons - Summons on Complaint

7/2/2020: Summons - Summons on Complaint

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

7/2/2020: Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case - Notice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case

Complaint - Complaint

7/2/2020: Complaint - Complaint

First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

7/2/2020: First Amended Standing Order - First Amended Standing Order

8 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 07/06/2023
  • Hearing07/06/2023 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
  • 12/30/2021
  • Hearing12/30/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department 25 at 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Non-Jury Trial

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/20/2021
  • DocketMinute Order (Hearing on Motion for Leave Motion for Leave to Repossess Mot...)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/20/2021
  • DocketHearing on Motion for Leave Motion for Leave to Repossess Motor Vehicle (SCRA) scheduled for 04/20/2021 at 10:00 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 updated: Result Date to 04/20/2021; Result Type to Held - Motion Granted

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/25/2021
  • DocketSupplemental Declaration Supplemental Declaration in Support of Application for Court Order Granting Relief Under 50 U.S.C.A. 3952; Filed by: SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, a federally chartered credit union (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/25/2021
  • DocketSupplemental Declaration Supplemental Points and Authorities in Support of Application for Court Order Granting Relief Under 50 U.S.C.A. 3952; Filed by: SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, a federally chartered credit union (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/25/2021
  • DocketRequest for Judicial Notice; Filed by: SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, a federally chartered credit union (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/03/2021
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by: SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, a federally chartered credit union (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/23/2021
  • DocketMinute Order (Hearing on Motion for Leave Motion for Leave to Repossess Mot...)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/23/2021
  • DocketOn the Court's own motion, Hearing on Motion for Leave Motion for Leave to Repossess Motor Vehicle (SCRA) scheduled for 02/23/2021 at 10:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25 Held - Continued was rescheduled to 04/20/2021 10:00 AM

    Read MoreRead Less
10 More Docket Entries
  • 07/10/2020
  • DocketHearing on Motion for Leave Motion for Leave to Repossess Motor Vehicle (SCRA) scheduled for 01/13/2021 at 10:00 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/10/2020
  • DocketProof of Service by Mail; Filed by: SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, a federally chartered credit union (Plaintiff); As to: RAIJON JUSTIN PURVIS (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/02/2020
  • DocketOrder to Show Cause Re: Failure to File Proof of Service scheduled for 07/06/2023 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/02/2020
  • DocketNon-Jury Trial scheduled for 12/30/2021 at 08:30 AM in Spring Street Courthouse at Department 25

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/02/2020
  • DocketFirst Amended Standing Order; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/02/2020
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Limited Civil Case; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/02/2020
  • DocketSummons on Complaint; Issued and Filed by: SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, a federally chartered credit union (Plaintiff); As to: RAIJON JUSTIN PURVIS (Defendant); THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, acting by and through the CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, a government entity (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/02/2020
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by: SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, a federally chartered credit union (Plaintiff); As to: RAIJON JUSTIN PURVIS (Defendant); THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, acting by and through the CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, a government entity (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/02/2020
  • DocketComplaint; Filed by: SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, a federally chartered credit union (Plaintiff); As to: RAIJON JUSTIN PURVIS (Defendant); THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, acting by and through the CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, a government entity (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/02/2020
  • DocketCase assigned to Hon. James E. Blancarte in Department 25 Spring Street Courthouse

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 20STLC05562    Hearing Date: April 20, 2021    Dept: 25

HEARING DATE: Tue., April 20, 2021 JUDGE /DEPT: Blancarte/25

CASE NAME: Schoolsfirst Federal Credit Union v. Purvis, et al.

CASE NUMBER: 20STLC05562 COMP. FILED: 07-02-20

NOTICE: OK DISC. C/O: 11-30-21

DISC. MOT. C/O: 12-15-21

TRIAL DATE: 12-30-21

PROCEEDINGS: APPLICATION FOR COURT ORDER GRANTING RELIEF UNDER 50 U.S.C.A. § 3952

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Schoolsfirst Federal Credit Union

RESP. PARTY: None

APPLICATION FOR COURT ORDER UNDER 50 U.S.C.A. § 3952

(50 U.S.C.A. § 3952)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Plaintiff’s Application for Court Order Granting Relief Under 50 U.S.C.A. § 3952 is 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 April 16, 2021 [ ] Late [X] None

REPLY: None filed as of April 16, 2021 [ ] Late [X] None

ANALYSIS:

  1. Background

On July 2, 2020, Plaintiff Schoolsfirst Federal Credit Union (“Plaintiff”) filed an action to quiet title against Defendants Raijon Justin Purvis aka Raijon J. Purvis (“Purvis”) and the State of California, acting by and through the California Department of Motor Vehicles (“DMV”).

On July 10, 2020, Plaintiff filed the instant Application for Court Order Granting Relief Under U.S.C.A. § 3952 (the “Application”).

On October 30, 2020, default was entered against Defendant Purvis.

At the initial February 23, 2021 hearing, the Court noted that Plaintiff did not provide any documentary evidence demonstrating Defendant Purvis was in default. (2/23/21 Minute Order.) Plaintiff was also ordered to provide supplemental briefing regarding the propriety of obtaining an order to sell and dispose of the subject Vehicle before the Court has made a determination as to Plaintiff’s request to quiet title of the Vehicle. (Id.)

Plaintiff filed supplemental papers on March 25, 2021. No opposition was filed.

  1. Request for Judicial Notice

Plaintiff’s request that the Court take judicial notice of (1) the Application for Court Order Granting Relief Under 50 U.S.C.A. § 3952 filed on November 19, 2018 in Balboa Thrift Loan Association v. Fuske, et al., Case No. 30-2018-01026766-CL-CL-CJC (the “Orange County Case”) and (2) Order Granting Application for Relief Under 50 U.S.C.A. § 3952 in the Orange County Case is GRANTED. (Evid. Code, § 452, subd. (d).)

  1. Legal Standard

The Servicemembers Civil Relief Act provides, in part, for the temporary suspension of judicial and administrative proceedings and transactions that may adversely affect the civil rights of servicemembers during their military service. (50 U.S.C.A §§ 3901, 3902.) With respect to certain installment contracts, 50 U.S.C.A. § 3952 provides as follows:

“(a) Protection upon breach of contract

(1) Protection after entering military service - After a servicemember enters military service, a contract by the servicemember for--

(A) the purchase of real or personal property (including a motor vehicle); or

(B) the lease or bailment of such property, may not be rescinded or terminated for a breach of terms of the contract occurring before or during that person's military service, nor may the property be repossessed for such breach without a court order.

(2) Applicability - This section applies only to a contract for which a deposit or installment has been paid by the servicemember before the servicemember enters military service.

(b) Misdemeanor - A person who knowingly resumes possession of property in violation of subsection (a), or in violation of section 3918 of this title, or who knowingly attempts to do so, shall be fined as provided in Title 18, or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.

(c) Authority of court - In a hearing based on this section, the court--

(1) may order repayment to the servicemember of all or part of the prior installments or deposits as a condition of terminating the contract and resuming possession of the property;

(2) may, on its own motion, and shall on application by a servicemember when the servicemember's ability to comply with the contract is materially affected by military service, stay the proceedings for a period of time as, in the opinion of the court, justice and equity require; or

(3) may make other disposition as is equitable to preserve the interests of all parties.”

  1. Discussion

This action arises from the purchase of a vehicle. Specifically, on or about August 16, 2018, Plaintiff and Defendant Purvis entered into a written Loan and Security Agreement and Disclosure Statement (the “Agreement”) for the purchase of a used 2017 Dodge Charger, VIN No. 2C3CDXBGOHH666839 (the “Vehicle”). (Mot., p. 3:3-8, Sanchez Decl., ¶ 6, Exh. 1.) The Agreement required Defendant Purvis to make monthly payments of $465.65 until September 25, 2024. (Id.) The Agreement also includes the following provision:

“When you are in default, we may demand immediate payment of the outstanding balance of the Loan without giving you advance notice and take possession of the Property without judicial process if this can be done without breach of the peace. If we ask, you promise to deliver the vehicle or boat, you agree that we may obtain a key or other device necessary to unlock and operate it, when you are in default…After we have possession of the Property, we can sell it and apply the money to any amounts you owe us. We will give you notice of any public disposition or the date after which a private disposition will be held. Our expenses for taking possession of and selling the Property will be deducted from the money received from the sale…” (Id.)

Plaintiff does not seek a monetary judgment against Defendant Purvis at this time; it only seeks relief under the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act and an order quieting title of the Vehicle in Plaintiff’s name alone. (Compl., ¶ 11, Prayer, ¶¶ 1-2.) With this Application, Plaintiff seeks an order from the Court permitting the Vehicle to be sold under 50 U.S.C.A. § 3952(c)(3). (Mot., p. 6:3-15.)

Plaintiff states that Defendant Purvis voluntarily handed possession of the Vehicle to Plaintiff on or about April 18, 2020 and presents evidence demonstrating Defendant Purvis has been on active military duty since September 4, 2019. (Mot., Sanchez Decl., ¶¶ 8, 10, Exh. 3.)

Plaintiff also provides a declaration from Doris Sanchez (“Sanchez”), a Collections Recovery Supervisor, who states that Defendant Purvis defaulted on the terms, conditions, and covenants of the Agreement by failing to make the monthly payments due and owing since May 2019. (Id. at ¶ 8.) In its supplemental papers, Sanchez states that a notice of intent to sell the Vehicle was sent to Defendant Purvis on June 17, 2020 but no response to the notice was received. (3/25/21 Supp. Sanchez Decl., ¶¶ 11-14, Exh. 1.) Sanchez further states that after April 18, 2020, Defendant Purvis made four payments on the Agreement in varying amounts, none of which were sufficient to bring the account current. (Id. at ¶ 15.) Sanchez also states she attaches a copy of Defendant Purvis’ ledger, but the document itself does not include any information demonstrating it belongs to Defendant Purvis. (Id. at ¶ 16, Exh. 1.)

As noted above, Plaintiff was also asked to provide additional briefing on the propriety of obtaining an order to sell and dispose of the Vehicle before the Court made a determination as to Plaintiff’s request to quiet title of the Vehicle. (2/23/21 Minute Order.)

In its supplemental papers, Plaintiff argues Defendant Purvis voluntarily surrendered the Vehicle and “declined to respond to the Notice of Intent to Sell thereby consenting to Plaintiff selling the Vehicle in order to mitigate its losses related to the Agreement.” (3/25/21 Supp. Brief, p. 4:16-20.) However, the Court is not convinced that Defendant Purvis’ failure to respond was tantamount to consent. Indeed, it is entirely possible and reasonable that, as an active-duty military member, Defendant Purvis was unable to respond.

Plaintiff also argues that its counsel has sought, and been granted, identical relief in similar cases. (3/25/21 Supp. Brief, p. 4:21-27.) As evidence, Plaintiff cites to (1) the Application for Court Order Granting Relief Under 50 U.S.C.A. § 3952 filed in the Orange County Case and (2) Order Granting Application for Relief Under 50 U.S.C.A. § 3952 in the Orange County Case, which have been judicially noticed. (3/25/21 RJN, Exhs. A, B.) However, the application only sought to “conduct repossession of the subject vehicle.” (Id.) The order granting that application did not permit the moving party to do anything other than repossess the Vehicle. (Id.) Here, Plaintiff’s request for relief is not “identical” to the Orange County Case as it does not seek repossession of the Vehicle; it seeks to sell and dispose of Defendant Purvis’ Vehicle.

Plaintiff also cites Associates Discount Corp. v. Armstrong, (NY City Ct., 1942) 33 N.Y.S. 2d 36, 37 in support of its argument. (3/25/21 Supp. Brief, p. 4:22-27.) In Associates Discount, the defendant was inducted into the army after entering into a contract for the purchase of an automobile and missed several payments. (Id.) The defendant filed an affidavit admitting he was financially unable to continue the payments under the contract during the time he was serving in the army. (Id.) At some time during the course of the litigation, the plaintiff acquired possession of the automobile in question. (See id.) The defendant sought a stay of the proceedings. (Id.) In granting summary judgment to the plaintiff, the court reasoned that a stay was unnecessary and unjustifiable as it was established that the defendant was not able to pay the balance under the contract or make the installment payments therein. (Id. at p. 38.) The court also noted that the plaintiff had presented six bids for the vehicle, many of which exceeded the amount owed by the defendant. (Id. at pp. 38-39.) The Court further noted that a different result may have been possible if the balance due under the contract exceeded the value of the vehicle at the time. (Id. at p. 39.)

Unlike Associates Discount, here, Defendant Purvis has not submitted any declaration admitting he is unable to pay. Nor has Defendant’s inability to pay been conclusively established, such as through a motion for summary judgment.

Thus, the Court does not find it appropriate to issue an order disposing of the Vehicle at this time.

  1. Conclusion & Order

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s Application for Court Order Granting Relief Under 50 U.S.C.A. § 3952 is DENIED.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where SCHOOLSFIRST FEDERAL CREDIT UNION is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer ROCHA KAREL G