Search

Attributes

This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 08/14/2019 at 07:27:50 (UTC).

NATIONAL CREDIT ACCEPTANCE INC. VS KHAN, RONNIE

Case Summary

On 12/04/2008 NATIONAL CREDIT ACCEPTANCE INC filed an Other - Arbitration lawsuit against KHAN, RONNIE. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Van Nuys Courthouse East located in Los Angeles, California. The case status is Disposed - Other Disposed.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****5237

  • Filing Date:

    12/04/2008

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Other Disposed

  • Case Type:

    Other - Arbitration

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Van Nuys Courthouse East

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

NATIONAL CREDIT ACCEPTANCE INC.

Defendants

KHAN RONNIE

KHAN RONNIE AKA RONNIE KHAN

Not Classified By Court

SACOR FINANCIAL INC.

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorneys

PUGH, JOHN J.

PUGH JOHN J.

 

Court Documents

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

4/16/2019: 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

Memorandum of Points & Authorities - Memorandum of Points & Authorities

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

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

 

Docket Entries

  • 01/06/2020
  • Hearingat 0830 AM in Department 94 at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, CA 90012; Hearing on Motion for Order (name extension)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/19/2019
  • DocketHearing on Motion for Order Motion to Renew Judgment scheduled for 01/06/2020 at 08:30 AM in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at Department 94

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/18/2019
  • DocketNotice of Motion to Renew; Filed by: SACOR FINANCIAL, INC. (Non-Party); As to: RONNIE KHAN (Defendant)

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

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/18/2019
  • DocketProof of Service by Mail; Filed by: SACOR FINANCIAL, INC. (Non-Party); As to: RONNIE KHAN (Defendant)

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

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/16/2019
  • DocketNotice of Rejection - Miscellaneous Judgments; Filed by: Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/11/2019
  • DocketCase reassigned to Stanley Mosk Courthouse in Department 94 - Hon. Wendy Chang; Reason: Transfer for Reassignment

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/29/2009
  • DocketJUDGMENT BY COURT SIGNED AND FILED JUDGMENT BY COURT SIGNED AND FILED

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/01/2009
  • DocketPLEADING REJECT:// MEMORANDUM OF COSTS (SUMMARY) PER JUDGMENT DATED PLEADING REJECT:// MEMORANDUM OF COSTS (SUMMARY) PER JUDGMENT DATED 03-23-09 TOTAL AMOUNT OF INTEREST $1739.66

    Read MoreRead Less
2 More Docket Entries
  • 03/23/2009
  • DocketJUDICIAL ARBITRATION JUDGMENT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/23/2009
  • DocketCLERK'S NOTICE OF ENTRY OF JUDGMENT FILED AND MAILED

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/13/2009
  • DocketDECLARATION OF PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL IN RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE DECLARATION OF PLAINTIFF'S COUNSEL IN RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/09/2009
  • DocketMOTION FILED: MOT TO CONFIRM ARBIT AWRD HEARING SET FOR 3/23/09

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/09/2009
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE PROOF OF SERVICE PARTY SERVED: RONNIE KHAN PETITION TO CONFIRM ARBITRATION AWARD SUB SERVICE: 12-11-08

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/09/2009
  • DocketPETITIONER'S MEMO OF P&A IN SUPPORT OF HEARING ON PETITION TO CONFIRM PETITIONER'S MEMO OF P&A IN SUPPORT OF HEARING ON PETITION TO CONFIRM ARBITRATION AWARD

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/09/2009
  • DocketDECLARATION OF JOHN J. PUGH IN SUPPORT OF AWARD OF ATTORNEY FEES, COST DECLARATION OF JOHN J. PUGH IN SUPPORT OF AWARD OF ATTORNEY FEES, COST S AND INTEREST INCURRED TO CONFIRM ARBITRATION AWARD

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/09/2009
  • DocketPROOF OF SERVICE WAS FILED BY PETITIONER'S ATTORNEY PROOF OF SERVICE WAS FILED BY PETITIONER'S ATTORNEY

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/05/2009
  • DocketA/C - COMPLAINT FILED REASON: OTHERS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 12/04/2008
  • DocketPETITION FILED

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: 08E15237    Hearing Date: February 24, 2020    Dept: 26

National Credit Acceptance, Inc. v. Ronnie Khan

CORRECT ERROR IN REJECTING RENEWAL OF JUDGMENT

(CCP § 683.010, et seq.)

TENTATIVE RULING:

The motion is GRANTED as follows. Under the court’s general authority to correct clerical mistakes, the court directs the clerk to re-process Judgment Assignee’s April 11, 2019 judgment renewal application. The clerk will review that application but will not reject it for failure to meet the 10-year expiration deadline. The clerk’s reason to reject Judgment Assignee’s April 11, 2019 application was incorrect because the 10-year period began to run from the entry of judgment, which was April 29, 2009, not March 23, 2009, as the clerk cited.

ANALYSIS:

  1. Background

On April 29, 2009, the Court entered judgment in this action in favor of National Credit Acceptance, Inc. in the sum of $8,072.82.

On March 28, 2019, National Credit Acceptance, Inc. assigned the judgment to Sacor Financial, Inc. (“Assignee”).

On April 11, 2019, Assignee filed an Application for and Renewal of Judgment. On April 16, 2019, the Court’s clerk rejected the Application.

On June 18, 2019, Assignee filed this motion. On December 19, 2019, a notice re continuance of hearing was filed, continuing the hearing from January 6, 2020 to February 24, 2020. On February 10, 2020, Assignee filed a proof of service of the changed time and department location.

  1. Legal Standard

Code of Civil Procedure section 683.130(a) states:

“In the case of a lump-sum money judgment or a judgment for possession or sale of property, the application for renewal of the judgment may be filed at any time before the expiration of the 10-year period of enforceability provided by Section 683.020 or, if the judgment is a renewed judgment, at any time before the expiration of the 10-year period of enforceability of the renewed judgment provided by Section 683.120.”

Code of Civil Procedure section 683.020 states:

“Except as otherwise provided by statute, upon the expiration of 10 years after the date of entry of a money judgment or a judgment for possession or sale of property: [¶] (a) The judgment may not be enforced. [¶] (b) All enforcement procedures pursuant to the judgment or to a writ or order issued pursuant to the judgment shall cease. [¶] (c) Any lien created by an enforcement procedure pursuant to the judgment is extinguished.”

“Upon the filing of the application, the court clerk shall enter the renewal of the judgment in the court records.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 683.150(a).)

“Aside from statute, courts have an inherent power to correct judgments where there has been a clerical error by the clerk or by the judge himself. There is no time limit within which this correction need be made. The correction can often be made ex parte and even without notice. The only important limitation upon the power is that it must be used to correct ‘clerical’ errors, and cannot be used for ‘judicial’ errors.” (Lane v. Superior Court in and for Sikiyou County (1950) 98 Cal.App.2d 165, 168; see also Ames v. Paley (2001) 89 Cal.App.4th 668, 673-674.)

  1. Discussion

The Court’s clerk rejected Assignee’s April 11, 2019 Application for and Renewal of Judgment on April 16, 2019. The stated reason was the 10-year limitation expired on March 23, 2019. The clerk began the 10-year period from March 23, 2009, which appears on the judgment as the date the Court granted the Petition of National Credit Acceptance, Inc. to confirm arbitration award.

An application for renewal of judgment may be filed at any time before the expiration of 10 years after the date of entry of judgment. (See CCP §§ 683.130(a), 683.020.)

Here, the subject judgment was entered on April 29, 2009. (Scalia Decl. ¶ 2, Exh. A.) Thus, the expiration of the 10-year period was April 29, 2019. Accordingly, Assignee’s April 11, 2019 Application was timely.

The date of March 23, 2009 is the date the Court confirmed the arbitration award. “Except as otherwise provided by statute or in the judgment, a judgment is enforceable under this title upon entry.” (CCP § 683.010.) Here, the granting of the petition was not tantamount to an entry of judgment. The entry of judgment occurred on April 29, 2009, when the Court signed and filed the “Judgment by Court”, wherein the Court rendered judgment in favor of National Credit Acceptance, Inc.

Based on the foregoing, Assignee filed a timely application, so the Court’s court “shall enter the renewal of the judgment in the court records.” (CCP § 683.150(a).)

However, the clerk rejected the application.

Thus, under the court’s general authority to correct clerical mistakes, the court directs the clerk to re-process Judgment Assignee’s March 18, 2019 judgment renewal application. The clerk will review that application but will not reject it for failure to meet the 10-year expiration deadline. The clerk’s reason to reject Assignee’s April 11, 2019 application was incorrect because the 10-year period began to run from the entry of judgment, which was April 29, 2009, not March 23, 2009, as the clerk cited.

//

Moving party to give notice.