Search

Attributes

This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 08/14/2019 at 07:13:09 (UTC).

NATIONAL CREDIT ACCEPTANCE, IN VS LUNG, HSU

Case Summary

On 03/19/2009 NATIONAL CREDIT ACCEPTANCE, IN filed an Other - Other Judgment lawsuit against LUNG, HSU. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is MICHAEL J. RAPHAEL. The case status is Disposed - Judgment Entered.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****1490

  • Filing Date:

    03/19/2009

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Judgment Entered

  • Case Type:

    Other - Other Judgment

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

MICHAEL J. RAPHAEL

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

SACOR FINANCIAL INC.

Defendant

LUNG HSU AKA HSU HWALUNG L AKA LUNG HSU HWA

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorneys

LAW OFFICE OF JOSEPH W. SCALIA. APC - JOSEPH W. SCALIA

Attorney at LAW OFFICE OF JOSEPH W. SCALIA. APC

SCALIA JOSEPH W.

 

Court Documents

Notice of Rejection - Miscellaneous Judgments - Notice of Rejection - Miscellaneous Judgments

3/26/2019: Notice of Rejection - Miscellaneous Judgments - Notice of Rejection - Miscellaneous Judgments

Declaration (name extension) - Declaration in Support of Renewal of Jmt

6/18/2019: Declaration (name extension) - Declaration in Support of Renewal of Jmt

Proof of Service by Mail - Proof of Service by Mail

6/18/2019: Proof of Service by Mail - Proof of Service by Mail

Notice (name extension) - Notice of Motion to Renew

6/18/2019: Notice (name extension) - Notice of Motion to Renew

Memorandum of Points & Authorities - Memorandum of Points & Authorities

6/18/2019: Memorandum of Points & Authorities - Memorandum of Points & Authorities

 

Docket Entries

  • 06/18/2019
  • DocketNotice of Motion to Renew; Filed by: (SACOR FINANCIAL, INC.) (Plaintiff); As to: HSU LUNG (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/18/2019
  • DocketProof of Service by Mail; Filed by: (SACOR FINANCIAL, INC.) (Plaintiff); As to: HSU LUNG (Defendant)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/18/2019
  • DocketMemorandum of Points & Authorities; Filed by: (SACOR FINANCIAL, INC.) (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/18/2019
  • DocketDeclaration in Support of Renewal of Jmt; Filed by: (SACOR FINANCIAL, INC.) (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/26/2019
  • DocketNotice of Rejection - Miscellaneous Judgments; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/27/2015
  • DocketMINUTE ORDER - CAUSE CALLED AT 01:30P M, IN DEPT. 077 , HON. MICHAEL J. RAPHAEL PRESIDING FOR EXAM. OF JUDGMENT DEBTOR. NO APPEARANCE BY OR FOR EITHER PARTY. COURT ORDERS MATTER PLACED OFF CALENDAR.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/27/2015
  • DocketMINUTE ORDER - CAUSE CALLED AT 01:30P M, IN DEPT. 077 , HON. MICHAEL J. RAPHAEL PRESIDING FOR EXAM. OF JUDGMENT DEBTOR. NO APPEARANCE BY OR FOR EITHER PARTY. COURT ORDERS MATTER PLACED OFF CALENDAR.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/25/2014
  • DocketAPPLICATION UNDER SEC. 708.110 CCP FOR ISSUANCE OF ORDER OF EXAMINATION FOR JUDGMENT DEBTOR (LUNG, HSU) AKA (HSU, HWALUNG L) AKA (LUNG, HSU HWA) ISSUED. HEARING SET FOR 01/27/15 AT 01:30P M, IN DEPT. 077 . RECEIPT # LAC240110021

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/03/2014
  • DocketMINUTE ORDER - CAUSE CALLED AT 01:30P M, IN DEPT. 077 , HON. MICHAEL J. RAPHAEL PRESIDING FOR EXAM. OF JUDGMENT DEBTOR. NO APPEARANCE BY OR FOR EITHER PARTY. COURT ORDERS MATTER PLACED OFF CALENDAR.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/03/2014
  • DocketMINUTE ORDER - CAUSE CALLED AT 01:30P M, IN DEPT. 077 , HON. MICHAEL J. RAPHAEL PRESIDING FOR EXAM. OF JUDGMENT DEBTOR. NO APPEARANCE BY OR FOR EITHER PARTY. COURT ORDERS MATTER PLACED OFF CALENDAR.

    Read MoreRead Less
10 More Docket Entries
  • 11/16/2011
  • DocketNOTICE OF RENEWAL OF JUDGMENT AND PROOF OF SERVICE FILED AS TO (LUNG, HSU) AKA (HSU, HWALUNG L) AKA (LUNG, HSU HWA) . DATE OF SERVICE WAS ON 11/09/11 . NO ENFORCEABLE EXECUTION TO ISSUE PRIOR TO 12/14/11 .

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/15/2011
  • DocketDECLARATION AND ORDER RE: LOST ORIGINAL NOTICE OF RENEWAL OF JUDGMENT RECEIVED. CASE FILE FORWARDED TO DEPT. 002 FOR CONSIDERATION.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/03/2011
  • DocketASSIGNMENT OF JUDGMENT TO (SACOR FINANCIAL, INC.) FILED.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/19/2011
  • DocketREJECT SHEET SENT TO (NATIONAL CREDIT ACCEPTANCE, INC.) A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION FOR REJECTION OF ASSIGNMENT OF JUDGEMENT REASON: THE PLAINTIFF NAMED IN THE BODY OF THE DOCUMENT DOES NOT CONFORM TO THE JUDGEMENT. SUBMITTED ON 04/19/11

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/14/2011
  • DocketREJECT SHEET SENT TO (NATIONAL CREDIT ACCEPTANCE, INC.) A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION FOR REJECTION OF PROOF OF SERVICE FOR RENEWAL OF JUDGEMENT REASON: NO ORIGINAL NOTICE OF RENEWAL SUBMITTED. SUBMITTED ON 04/14/11

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/28/2010
  • DocketWRIT OF EXECUTION RETURNED FROM SACRAMENTO COUNTY WHOLLY UNSATISIFIED. COSTS $40.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/19/2009
  • DocketAPPLICATION FOR AND RENEWAL OF JUDGMENT FILED. TOTAL JUDGMENT RENEWED IN THE SUM OF $ PROOF. RN PAID . Filing Fee: 20.00

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/19/2009
  • DocketAPPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF JUDGMENT HAVING BEEN FILED, ALL PAPERS PREVIOUSLY FILED UNDER CASE NUMBER 99C02914 ARE PLACED INTO THE CASE FILE UNDER THIS NUMBER. JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO RENEWAL OF JUDGMENT ENTERED AS FOLLOWS:

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/19/2009
  • DocketJUDGMENT ENTERED ON THE APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF JUDGMENT AS A FINAL DISPOSTION ON 03/19/09 , FOR (NATIONAL CREDIT ACCEPTANCE, INC.) A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION , AGAINST (LUNG, HSU) AKA (HSU, HWALUNG L) AKA (LUNG, HSU HWA) , PRINCIPAL (LINE E) $ 2968.91 , INTEREST AFTER JUDGMENT (LINE F) $ 4177.24 , FEE FOR FILING RENEWAL (LINE G) $ 20.00 . TOTAL $ 7,166.15 .

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/19/2009
  • DocketNOTICE OF RENEWAL OF JUDGMENT ISSUED. ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENT STAYED UNTIL PROOF OF SERVICE IS FILED.

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 09CJ1490    Hearing Date: August 17, 2020    Dept: 25

HEARING DATE:    Mon., August 17, 2020 JUDGE /DEPT: Blancarte/25

CASE NAME National Credit Acceptance, Inc. v. Lung

CASE NUMBER: LAM09CJ1490 JUDGMENT: 12-03-99

NOTICE: OK RENEWAL JDMT:  03-19-09

PROCEEDINGS    MOTION TO CORRECT ERROR IN REJECTING RENEWAL OF JUDGMENT

MOVING PARTY:   Judgment Assignee Sarcor Financial, Inc.

RESP. PARTY: None

MOTION TO REINSTATE EXPIRED JUDGMENT

(CCP § 683.010, et seq.)

TENTATIVE RULING:

Judgment Assignee Sarcor Financial, Inc.’s Motion to Correct Error in Rejecting Renewal of Judgment 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 August 12, 2020 [   ] Late [X] None

REPLY: None filed as of August 12, 2020 [   ] Late [X] None

ANALYSIS:

  1. Background

On December 3, 1999, the Court entered a judgment in favor of Judgment Creditor National Credit Acceptance, Inc. (“Judgment Creditor”) and against Judgment Debtor Hsu Lung aka Hwalung L. Hsu aka Hsu Hwang Lung (“Judgment Debtor”) in the amount of $8,814.76 (the “Judgment”) under the original Case No. 99C02914. (Mot., Scalia Decl., ¶ 3, Exh. A.) On June 3, 2011, Sarcor Financial, Inc. (“Assignee of Record”) filed an Assignment of Judgment demonstrating Judgment Creditor assigned it all rights to the Judgment. (6/3/11 Assignment of Judgment.) On March 19, 2009, the Judgment was renewed in the amount of $7,166.15. (Mot., Scalia Decl., ¶ 3, Exh. A.)

On March 18, 2019, Assignee of Record filed an application to renew the Judgment. (Mot., Scalia Decl., ¶ 5, Exh. C.) On March 26, 2019, the Court rejected the application because it included an incorrect case number. (Id. at ¶ 6, Exh. D; 3/26/19 Notice of Rejection.) The clerk also noted that because the Judgment had now expired, Assignee of Record needed to file a motion for an order to reinstate the judgment. (Id. at ¶ 6, Exh. D; 3/26/19 Notice of Rejection.)

On June 18, 2019, Assignee of Record filed a motion to correct error in rejecting the renewal of judgment, which was originally scheduled for hearing for December 23, 2019. However, it is unclear from the record why this motion was never heard.

On December 27, 2019, Assignee of Record filed the instant Motion to Correct Error in Rejecting Renewal of Judgment (the “Motion”). No opposition was filed. The motion came up for hearing on July 1, 2020, at which time the Court continued the matter to allow Assignee of Record to submit supplemental briefing in support of its position. (7/1/20 Minute Order.)  

  1. Legal Standard & Discussion

A money judgment is enforceable for 10 years from the date of its entry. (Code Civ. Proc., § 683.010.) After 10 years, a judgment may not be enforced, all enforcement procedures pursuant to the judgment must cease, and any liens created by an enforcement procedure are extinguished. (Id.)

In the case of a lump-sum money judgment, a judgment creditor may file an application to renew the judgment at any time before the expiration of the 10-year period of enforceability. (Code Civ. Proc., § 683.130, subd. (a).) (Italics added.) The application for renewal of judgment must include “(a) [t]he title of the court where the judgment is entered and the cause and number of the action, (b) [t]he date of entry of the judgment and where entered in the records of the court; (c) [t]he name and address of the judgment creditor and the name and last known address of the judgment debtor…; and (d) …[t]he information necessary to compute the amount of the judgment as renewed…” (Code Civ. Proc., § 683.140, subds. (a)-(d).)

Here, Assignee of Record argues that it timely filed the application for renewal of judgment before the 10-year expiration deadline. (Mot., p. 2:15-17; p. 3:11-13; Scalia Decl., ¶ 7.) As evidence, it submits a copy of a One Legal confirmation page demonstrating that, on March 18, 2019 at 2:27 p.m., Assignee of Record’s counsel filed an application for renewal of judgment for this action, Case No. LAM09CJ1490. (Id., Scalia Decl., ¶ 5, Exh. C.) However, the application incorrectly listed the original Case No. as 09C02914 instead of Case No. 99C02914. (Id., Scalia Decl., ¶ 5, Exh. C, ¶ 3.) It also incorrectly stated that the judgment had previously been renewed under Case No. 09B01490. (Id. at ¶ 4.) Notably, the number 09B01490 appears to have been stamped by the Court next to the case number on the March 19, 2009 Application for and Renewal of Judgment. (Id.) Assignee of Record also argues the clerk erred in rejecting the application and not allowing it the opportunity to fix the errors noted and resubmit to the Court. (Id.)

First, the Court notes that Assignee of Record’s evidence demonstrates it timely filed an application for renewal of judgment before it expired on March 19, 2019. (Mot., Scalia Decl., ¶ 5, Exh. C.) Code of Civil Procedure section 683.150 requires that upon application, “the court clerk shall enter the renewal.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 683.150, subd. (a).) “[T]he functions of the clerk are purely ministerial.” (Rojas v. Cutsforth (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 774, 777–778.) Notably, the errors on the Assignee of Record’s application do not affect the validity of the underlying judgment. Having timely filed the application and consistent with their ministerial duties, the court clerk should have accepted the application and allowed Assignee of Record an opportunity to correct any errors. (See Rojas v, Cutsforth (1998) 67 Cal.App.4th 774, 777 [noting that where a defect is insubstantial, the court clerk should file the submitted document and thereafter notify the attorney or party that the defect should be promptly corrected].)

Accordingly, Assignee of Record’s unopposed Motion is GRANTED. 

  1. Conclusion & Order

For the foregoing reasons, Judgment Assignee Sarcor Financial, Inc.’s Motion to Correct Error in Rejecting Renewal of Judgment is GRANTED.

Moving party is ordered to give notice.  

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where Sacor Financial, Inc. is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer SCALIA JOSEPH WILLIAM