Search

Attributes

This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 03/18/2016 at 20:20:50 (UTC).

AMERICAN EXPRESS VS AVIDEH K. PALADINO

Case Summary

On 05/02/2014 AMERICAN EXPRESS filed a Contract - Debt Collection lawsuit against AVIDEH K PALADINO. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Torrance Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is STUART M. RICE. The case status is Disposed - Dismissed.

Case Details Parties Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****9833

  • Filing Date:

    05/02/2014

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Dismissed

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Debt Collection

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Torrance Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

STUART M. RICE

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

AMERICAN EXPRESS CENTURION BANK

Defendants

AVIDEH K. PALADINO

DOES 1-20

AVIDEH KIA NEMAZEE

AVIDH K. PALADINO

AVIDEH KIA PALADINO

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

LINDA M. MICHAEL ESQ.

Defendant Attorneys

LANA THOMPSON

SARA F. KHOSROABADI ESQ.

Court Documents

Court documents are not available for this case.

 

Docket Entries

  • 01/27/2016
  • Notice of Settlement Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/25/2016
  • Memo of Costs Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/25/2016
  • List of Witnesses Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/25/2016
  • Exhibit List Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/25/2016
  • Trial Brief Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/16/2015
  • Notice of Trial (RE: DEFENDANT'S TRIAL BRIEF ) Filed by Attorney for Defendant

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/30/2015
  • Ex-Parte Application (TO CONTINUE TRIAL ) Filed by Attorney for Defendant

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 10/30/2015
  • Stipulation (TO CONTINUE TRIAL ) Filed by Attorney for Defendant

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/22/2014
  • Statement-Case Management Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/18/2014
  • Statement-Case Management Filed by Attorney for Defendant

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 09/16/2014
  • Substitution of Attorney Filed by Defendant, & Defendant in Pro Per

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 06/19/2014
  • Answer to Complaint Filed Filed by Defendant, & Defendant in Pro Per

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/29/2014
  • Proof-Service/Summons (PTY SERVED: AVIDEHK. PALADINO, AKA AVIDEH KIA PALADINO, AKA AVIDEH KIA NEMAZEE, AKA AVIDH K. PALADINO ) Filed by Attorney for Plaintiff

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/02/2014
  • Summons Filed

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: YC069833    Hearing Date: February 22, 2021    Dept: M

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Southwest District

Torrance Dept. M

AMERICAN EXPRESS CENTURION BANK,

Plaintiff,

Case No.:

YC069833

vs.

[Tentative] RULING

AVIDEH K. PALADINO,

Defendant.

Hearing Date: February 22, 2021

Moving Parties: Plaintiff American Express Centurion Bank

Responding Party: None

Motion for Order Vacating Dismissal and Entering Judgment Pursuant to CCP 664.6

The court considered the moving papers.

RULING

The motion is GRANTED. The court vacates the dismissal entered on June 26, 2019. The court enters judgment in the amount of $220,843.91 against defendant Avideh K. Paladino. See Judgment.

BACKGROUND

On May 2, 2014, plaintiff American Express Centurion Bank filed a complaint against defendant Avideh K. Paladino for common counts book account and quantum meruit.

On June 26, 2019, pursuant to an order for entry of amended stipulation for conditional entry of judgment and dismissal pursuant to CCP §664.6, the case was dismissed and the court retained jurisdiction over the parties to enforce the stipulation.

LEGAL AUTHORITY

CCP § 664.6 states: “If parties to pending litigation stipulate, in a writing signed by the parties outside the presence of the court or orally before the court, for settlement of the case, or part thereof, the court, upon motion, may enter judgment pursuant to the terms of the settlement. If requested by the parties, the court may retain jurisdiction over the parties to enforce the settlement until performance in full of the terms of the settlement.”

“A trial court, when ruling on a section 664.6 motion, acts as a trier of fact. Section 664.6’s ‘express authorization for trial courts to determine whether a settlement has occurred is an implicit authorization for the trial court to interpret the terms and conditions to settlement.’” Skulnick v. Roberts Express, Inc. (1992) 2 Cal. App. 4th 884, 889 (citations omitted).

DISCUSSION

Plaintiff requests that the court vacate the dismissal entered on June 26, 2019 and enter judgment against defendant pursuant to the parties’ stipulation re entry of judgment, in the amount of $266,120.19, plus costs and less any payments made to date, for a total of $220,843.91.

Plaintiff explains that on March 4, 2019, defendant agreed to settle the matter and the parties executed a Stipulation for Conditional Entry of Judgment. Pursuant to the stipulation, defendant agreed to pay plaintiff $114,000 in monthly payments. Defendant has made payments in the amount of $43,000. To date, defendant has failed to make payments on the remaining settlement balance. Under the stipulation, plaintiff’s counsel notified defendant of his default and demanded that defendant cure within seven days. The stipulation also states that “[i]f Defendant fails to cure the default, Plaintiff may then obtain judgment” pursuant to CCP §664.6 for the entire balance owed by defendant. Defendant failed to cure. See Spencer Penuela decl.

The court retained jurisdiction pursuant to CCP §664.6 to enforce the settlement agreement. See Order for Entry of Amended Stipulation for Conditional Entry of Judgment filed on June 26, 2019.

Accordingly, the motion is GRANTED.

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of the ruling.

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where American Express Centurion Bank is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer KHOSROABADI SARA