This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 12/11/2021 at 03:18:12 (UTC).

AMERICAN EXPRESS CENTURION BANK VS STACY SABINE

Case Summary

On 10/27/2017 AMERICAN EXPRESS CENTURION BANK filed a Contract - Debt Collection lawsuit against STACY SABINE. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Chatsworth Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is MELVIN D. SANDVIG. The case status is Disposed - Judgment Entered.
Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****8069

  • Filing Date:

    10/27/2017

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Judgment Entered

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Debt Collection

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

MELVIN D. SANDVIG

 

Party Details

Plaintiff

AMERICAN EXPRESS CENTURION BANK

Defendants

HESS STACY L

SABINE STACY

SABINEHESS STACY L

HESSABINE STACY L

SABINE STACY L

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

MICHAEL LINA M.

 

Court Documents

Legacy Document - LEGACY DOCUMENT TYPE: COMPLAINT FILED-SUMMONS ISSUED

10/27/2017: Legacy Document - LEGACY DOCUMENT TYPE: COMPLAINT FILED-SUMMONS ISSUED

Summons

10/27/2017: Summons

Notice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case

10/27/2017: Notice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case

Civil Case Cover Sheet

10/27/2017: Civil Case Cover Sheet

Notice - NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

10/27/2017: Notice - NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Legacy Document - LEGACY DOCUMENT TYPE: DECLARATION

11/16/2017: Legacy Document - LEGACY DOCUMENT TYPE: DECLARATION

Legacy Document - LEGACY DOCUMENT TYPE: DECLARATION

2/15/2018: Legacy Document - LEGACY DOCUMENT TYPE: DECLARATION

Legacy Document - LEGACY DOCUMENT TYPE: DECLARATION

2/15/2018: Legacy Document - LEGACY DOCUMENT TYPE: DECLARATION

Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

2/15/2018: Proof of Service (not Summons and Complaint)

Case Management Statement

3/14/2018: Case Management Statement

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER ENTERED: 2018-03-26 00:00:00

3/26/2018: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER ENTERED: 2018-03-26 00:00:00

Order - Dismissal

4/30/2018: Order - Dismissal

Legacy Document - LEGACY DOCUMENT TYPE: STIPULATION

4/30/2018: Legacy Document - LEGACY DOCUMENT TYPE: STIPULATION

Motion re: - MOTION FOR ORDER VACATING DISMISSAL AND ENTERING JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO CCP 664.6

10/29/2020: Motion re: - MOTION FOR ORDER VACATING DISMISSAL AND ENTERING JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO CCP 664.6

Memorandum of Costs (Summary)

10/29/2020: Memorandum of Costs (Summary)

Notice - NOTICE OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ORDER VACATING DISMISSAL AND ENTERING JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO CCP 664.6

10/29/2020: Notice - NOTICE OF PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR ORDER VACATING DISMISSAL AND ENTERING JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO CCP 664.6

Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION TO VACATE DISMISSAL AND ENTER JUDGMENT)

4/15/2021: Minute Order - MINUTE ORDER (HEARING ON MOTION TO VACATE DISMISSAL AND ENTER JUDGMENT)

Judgment - JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO CCP 664.6

4/15/2021: Judgment - JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO CCP 664.6

22 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 12/20/2021
  • Hearing12/20/2021 at 08:30 AM in Department F47 at 9425 Penfield Ave., Chatsworth, CA 91311; Hearing on Claim of Exemption/Third-Party Claim

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 12/10/2021
  • DocketDeclaration (DECLARATION); Filed by AMERICAN EXPRESS CENTURION BANK (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/10/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department F47, Melvin D. Sandvig, Presiding; Hearing on Claim of Exemption/Third-Party Claim - Held - Continued

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/10/2021
  • DocketMinute Order ((Hearing on Claim of Exemption/Third-Party Claim)); Filed by Clerk

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/08/2021
  • DocketResponse (to Opposition)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/20/2021
  • DocketClaim of Exemption; Filed by STACY SABINE (Defendant)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/15/2021
  • DocketNotice of Hearing on Claim of Exemption or in lieu of Third-Party Claim; Filed by AMERICAN EXPRESS CENTURION BANK (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/14/2021
  • DocketNotice of Opposition to Claim of Exemption; Filed by AMERICAN EXPRESS CENTURION BANK (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/14/2021
  • DocketNotice of Ruling; Filed by AMERICAN EXPRESS CENTURION BANK (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 09/08/2021
  • Docketat 08:30 AM in Department F47, Melvin D. Sandvig, Presiding; Hearing on Claim of Exemption/Third-Party Claim - Held

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
19 More Docket Entries
  • 03/14/2018
  • DocketCase Management Statement; Filed by AMERICAN EXPRESS CENTURION BANK (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 02/15/2018
  • DocketProof of Service (not Summons and Complaint); Filed by AMERICAN EXPRESS CENTURION BANK (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 02/15/2018
  • DocketDeclaration; Filed by AMERICAN EXPRESS CENTURION BANK (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 02/15/2018
  • DocketDeclaration; Filed by AMERICAN EXPRESS CENTURION BANK (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 11/16/2017
  • DocketDeclaration; Filed by AMERICAN EXPRESS CENTURION BANK (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/27/2017
  • DocketSummons; Filed by null

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/27/2017
  • DocketComplaint filed-Summons Issued; Filed by null

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/27/2017
  • DocketNotice (of Case Management Conference); Filed by Clerk

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/27/2017
  • DocketNotice of Case Assignment - Unlimited Civil Case; Filed by Clerk

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/27/2017
  • DocketCivil Case Cover Sheet; Filed by AMERICAN EXPRESS CENTURION BANK (Plaintiff)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less

Tentative Rulings

b'

Case Number: ****8069 Hearing Date: December 20, 2021 Dept: F47

Dept. F-47

Date: 12/20/21

Case #****8069

HEARING ON CLAIM OF EXEMPTION

Notice of Hearing filed on 10/15/21.

CLAIMANT: Judgment Debtor/Defendant Stacy Sabine aka Stacy L. Sabine aka Stacy L. Sabinehess aka Stacy L. Hessabine aka Stacy L. Hess

OPPOSING PARTY: Judgment Creditor/Plaintiff American Express Centurion Bank

NOTICE: ok

RULING: The claim of exemption is denied.

On 10/27/17, Plaintiff filed this action against Defendant for: (1) Common Counts: Book Account, Account Stated and (2) Quantum Meruit – Reasonable Value. On 4/15/21, judgment was entered against Defendant in the amount of $50,679.19. On 6/24/21, a writ of execution was issued for $50,719.19.

On 7/15/21, a wage garnishment was served on Marathon Fleet Repair Services, Inc. for wages earned by Defendant. See CCP 706.101; (Mikhalevich Decl.). Defendant filed her first Claim of Exemption indicating that she was willing to allow $29.00 to be withheld weekly from her earnings. See CCP 706.105. On 9/8/21, this Court denied Defendant’s Claim of Exemption and ordered the levying officer to release any funds held to the judgment creditor for payment on the judgment and to withhold $625.00 each month until the judgment is paid in full. (See 9/8/21 Minute Order; 9/8/21 Order Determining Claim of Exemption; 9/14/21 Notice of Ruling).

On 10/14/21, Plaintiff received notice that Defendant had filed another Claim of Exemption as to the wage garnishment execution for the wages earned from her employer, Marathon Fleet Repair Services, Inc. (See Claim of Exemption filed 10/20/21). In her second Claim of Exemption, Defendant indicates that she is willing to allow $75.00 to be withheld weekly from her earnings.

A judgment creditor may levy 25% of a judgment debtor’s disposable earnings. See CCP 706.050(a). Disposable earnings are the portion of an individual’s earnings that remains after deducting all amounts required to be withheld by law. CCP 706.011.

In support of her second Claim of Exemption filed on 10/20/21, Defendant included a financial statement which is markedly different from the financial statement submitted in support of her first Claim of Exemption which, as noted above, was denied. Both financial statements were executed by Defendant under penalty of perjury.

Defendant’s financial statement attached to her second Claim of Exemption indicates that her gross monthly pay is $4,000.00 as did the financial statement she submitted in support of her first Claim of Exemption. However, Defendant changed the amounts and/or explanation of items of almost all of the other entries without explanation. For example: (1) Defendants first financial statement dated 7/22/21fails to mention she has any children as dependents whereas the second financial statement dated 10/7/21 indicates that Defendant has two 16-year-old children and (2) Defendant’s first financial statement indicated her total monthly expenses were $12,300.00 whereas her second financial statement indicates her total monthly expenses are $3,650.00. The second financial statement also indicates that Defendant is living separate and apart from her spouse whereas the first financial statement did not and was signed by Defendant’s spouse. (See 7/22/21 Financial Statement and 10/7/21 Financial Statement). Defendant’s spouse signed the second financial statement, but the signature is crossed out and initialed.

On 11/8/21, two days before the original 11/10/21 hearing date on Defendant’s second Claim of Exemption, Defendant filed a “Response to Opposition” which is not signed under penalty of perjury. In the response to opposition, Defendant implies that she was unaware of the underlying judgment against her until her employer received the wage garnishment in July 2021. Defendant further contends that she has moved out of her house on Alder Court in Valencia and is renting a guest house in Valencia from a friend; however, her husband still lives in their house, but he is does not have a job. (The Court notes that although Defendant claims that she no longer lives in the Alder Court house, the address listed on Defendant’s second Claim of Exemption signed on 10/7/21, the Response filed on filed on 11/8/21 and the Proof of Service filed by Defendant on 12/13/21 all list the Alder Court address as Defendant’s address.) Defendant goes on to state that she makes $4,000/month and takes home $2,161.00 after taxes and insurance and claims that her monthly expenses exceed $3,650/month. Defendant also indicates that her current car payment is $300/month and her husband has the more expensive car she was previously driving. Defendant contends that the change in amount of monthly expenses is because she is no longer showing her mortgage expenses and husband’s expenses. Defendant contends that if $540/month is taken out of her monthly pay, she and her children could become homeless.

To allow Plaintiff an opportunity to respond to Defendant’s late response, the hearing was continued to 12/20/21. On 12/10/21, Plaintiff filed and served a declaration in reply to Defendant’s response. Plaintiff ‘s attorney contends that Defendant has not shown that she is legally separated from her spouse. Therefore, it is not clear what Defendant’s true and/or necessary monthly expenses are. Plaintiff still contends that Defendant has not met her burden of showing why $75.00 per pay period should be accepted and requests $540.25 per month be transferred to Plaintiff from Defendant’s pay.

Even considering Defendant’s Response, which is not signed under penalty of perjury, the basis for Defendant’s claimed monthly expenses keeps changing without sufficient explanation. In the Financial Statement attached to Defendant’s second Claim of Exemption, signed under penalty of perjury, Defendant indicates that her monthly expenses totaling $3,650 include: $1300 for rent; $500 for food and household supplies; $300 for utilities and telephone, $200 for clothing; $100 for medical and dental payments; $300 for transportation and auto expenses; $300 for installment payments (for another credit card, mortgage and second mortgage?); $100 for laundry and cleaning; $150 for entertainment and $400 for back taxes. The statement of “Necessities to Live for My Family” attached as exhibit A to Defendant’s response also sets forth monthly expenses of $3,650, but includes different items and/or amounts: $1500 for rent based on a $200 increase as of 11/1/21; $300 car payment; $350 for gas and insurance; $400 for utilities – water, gas and power; $500 for food and $400 for back taxes.

Based on Defendant’s Financial Statement signed under penalty of perjury, the Court finds that

Defendant has disposable monthly income of $2,161.00. Twenty-five percent of $2,161.00 is $540.25.

Defendant has failed to meet her burden as to why only $75.00 per week should be withheld from her paycheck. See CCP 703.580(b). The Court notes that $75.00 based on an average of 4 weeks in a month amounts to $300.00 per month which Defendant is willing to pay. If Defendant eliminates the $100.00 for laundry and cleaning and $150.00 for entertainment per month, it will be more than enough to satisfy the $540.25 Defendant is willing to accept per month.

Based on the foregoing, Defendant/Judgment Debtor’s Claim of Exemption is denied. Levying officer is to withhold $540.25 each month until the judgment is paid in full.

'


b'

Case Number: ****8069 Hearing Date: November 10, 2021 Dept: F47

Dept. F-47

Date: 11/10/21

Case #****8069

HEARING ON CLAIM OF EXEMPTION

Notice of Hearing filed on 10/15/21.

CLAIMANT: Judgment Debtor/Defendant Stacy Sabine aka Stacy L. Sabine aka Stacy L. Sabinehess aka Stacy L. Hessabine aka Stacy L. Hess

OPPOSING PARTY: Judgment Creditor/Plaintiff American Express Centurion Bank

NOTICE: ok

RULING: The hearing will be continued.

On 11/8/21, Judgment Debtor/Defendant Stacy Sabine aka Stacy L. Sabine aka Stacy L. Sabinehess aka Stacy L. Hessabine aka Stacy L. Hess filed a Response to Opposition. There is no proof of service attached to this response; therefore, it is not clear if it was served on counsel for Judgment Creditor/Plaintiff American Express Centurion Bank. If Defendant has not served the Response to Opposition on Plaintiff’s counsel, Defendant is ordered to immediately do so.

The hearing will be continued to allow Plaintiff an opportunity to respond to the Response to Opposition. Any response by Plaintiff is due to be filed and served at least 5 court days before the continued hearing date.

'


b'

Case Number: ****8069 Hearing Date: September 8, 2021 Dept: F47

Dept. F-47

Date: 9/8/21

Case #****8069

HEARING ON CLAIM OF EXEMPTION

Notice of Hearing filed on 8/4/21.

CLAIMANT: Judgment Debtor/Defendant Stacy Sabine aka Stacy L. Sabine aka Stacy L. Sabinehess aka Stacy L. Hessabine aka Stacy L. Hess

OPPOSING PARTY: Judgment Creditor/Plaintiff American Express Centurion Bank

NOTICE: ok

RULING: The claim of exemption is denied.

On 10/27/17, Plaintiff filed this action against Defendant for: (1) Common Counts: Book Account, Account Stated and (2) Quantum Meruit – Reasonable Value. On 4/15/21, judgment was entered against Defendant in the amount of $50,679.19. On 6/24/21, a writ of execution was issued for $50,719.19.

On 7/15/21, a wage garnishment was served on Marathon Fleet Repair Services, Inc. for wages earned by Defendant. See CCP 706.101; (Eum Decl.). Defendant has filed a Claim of Exemption indicating that she is willing to allow $29.00 to be withheld weekly from her earnings. See CCP 706.105. A judgment creditor may levy 25% of a judgment debtor’s disposable earnings. See CCP 706.050(a). Disposable earnings are the portion of an individual’s earnings that remains after deducting all amounts required to be withheld by law. CCP 706.011.

Defendant’s financial statement indicates that her gross monthly pay is $4,000.00 and her spouse has zero monthly income because he is “out of work.” Defendant indicates that her monthly expenses are $12,300.00. The only amount listed in the financial statement that appears to be required to be withheld by law is $1,200.00 for taxes which leaves $2,800.00 in disposable income. The Court notes that Plaintiff indicates Defendant’s financial statement indicates $1,500.00 is taken out for taxes. However, the financial statement lists $1,200.00 for federal and state withholding, FICA and SDI, $200.00 for medical and $100.00 for 401K.

Defendant’s monthly expenses include items which are not necessities and/or are excessive and/or appear to be duplicative. Defendant’s financial statement lists only Defendant and her spouse as depending on her monthly income. As such, $1,500.00 per month for food and household supplies, $300 for clothing and $400 for laundry and cleaning seem excessive. Similarly, the $1,000 per month for transportation and auto expenses, $825 of which is for a 2020 MBZ 6LE (Mercedes), is excessive. It is unclear what the $400 per month in medical and dental payments is for as Defendant indicates that $200 is taken out of her paycheck for medical. Defendant also indicates $600 per month for insurance (life, health, accident, etc.). Since medical insurance appears to taken out of Defendant’s paycheck ($200), it would not seem that any other insurance is a necessity. It is also not clear what the $1,000 per month in claimed school, childcare is for as Defendant does not list any children as dependents. Defendant fails to show how the $600 per month paid for a second mortgage takes priority over the subject judgment.

Defendant has failed to meet her burden as to why only $29.00 per week should be withheld from her paycheck. See CCP 703.580(b).

Plaintiff/Judgment Creditor indicates that it is willing to accept $625.00 toward the judgment which the Court finds to be reasonable under the circumstances.

Based on the foregoing, Defendant/Judgment Debtor’s Claim of Exemption is denied.

'


Case Number: ****8069    Hearing Date: April 15, 2021    Dept: F47

Dept. F-47

Date: 4/15/21

Case #****8069

MOTION TO VACATE DISMISSAL & ENTER JUDGMENT

Motion filed on 10/29/20.

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff American Centurion Bank

RESPONDING PARTY: Defendant Stacy Sabine aka Stacy L Sabine aka Stacy L Sabinehess aka Stacy L Hessabine aka Stacy L Hess

RELIEF REQUESTED: An order vacating the dismissal in this case and entering judgment against Defendant pursuant to CCP 664.6.

RULING: The unopposed motion is granted.

***Plaintiff indicates that it intends to submit on its moving papers without appearing pursuant to CRC 3.1304(c), if the motion is unopposed. See also CRC 3.1308.

Plaintiff is reminded to review the 5/3/19 First Amended General Order Re Mandatory Electronic Filing for Civil. When e-filing documents, parties must comply with the “TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS” which are set forth at page 4, line 4 through page 5, line 12 of the Court’s 5/3/19 First Amended General Order Re Mandatory Electronic Filing for Civil (particularly bookmarking declarations and exhibits). See also CRC 3.1110(f)(4). Failure to comply with these requirements in the future may result in papers being rejected, matters being placed off calendar, matters being continued so documents can be resubmitted in compliance with these requirements, documents not being considered and/or the imposition of sanctions.

On 10/27/17, Plaintiff filed this action for common counts book account and quantum meruit seeking damages in the amount of $55,299.19. (Penuela Decl. ¶3). In March 2018, the parties agreed to settle the matter with Defendant agreeing to pay Plaintiff $30,000.00, inclusive of court costs, in monthly payments. (Id. at ¶¶4-5, Ex.A). On 4/30/18, pursuant to the agreement of the parties, the Court dismissed the matter pursuant to CCP 664.6. (Id. at ¶6, Ex.B). Defendant has paid $5,200.00 toward the $30,000.00 settlement amount. (Id. at ¶7). Pursuant to the Stipulation for Conditional Entry of Judgment entered between the parties, on 10/15/20, Plaintiff sent Defendant a letter, via email, informing Defendant of the default and giving Defendant 7 days to cure. (Id. at ¶8, Ex.C). Defendant has failed to cure the default. (Id. at ¶9). Plaintiff now moves for an order vacating the dismissal in this case and entering judgment against Defendant pursuant to CCP 664.6.

At the time this motion was filed, CCP 664.6 provided:

If parties 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.

Based on the Stipulation for Conditional Entry of Judgment entered between the parties and Defendant’s default under the agreement, Plaintiff is entitled to have the dismissal set aside and have judgment entered against Defendant for the entire balance owed on the full amount originally due, $55,299.19, minus $5,200.00 for payments made, plus $580.00 in costs for a total judgment in the amount of $50,679.19.



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 MICHAEL LINA M