This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 06/10/2019 at 08:12:17 (UTC).

BANK OF AMERICA N A VS PETER T KIM

Case Summary

On 08/14/2017 BANK OF AMERICA N A filed a Contract - Debt Collection lawsuit against PETER T KIM. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judges overseeing this case are DALILA CORRAL LYONS, DEBRE K. WEINTRAUB and DANIEL S. MURPHY. The case status is Disposed - Dismissed.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****2115

  • Filing Date:

    08/14/2017

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Dismissed

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Debt Collection

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judges

DALILA CORRAL LYONS

DEBRE K. WEINTRAUB

DANIEL S. MURPHY

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner

BANK OF AMERICA N.A.

Defendants and Respondents

KIM PETER T

DOES 1 TO 10

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorney

NELSON & KENNARD

 

Court Documents

Minute Order

3/9/2018: Minute Order

Unknown

1/5/2018: Unknown

Minute Order

1/9/2018: Minute Order

NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT OF ENTIRE CASE

1/24/2018: NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT OF ENTIRE CASE

Minute Order

11/14/2017: Minute Order

Unknown

11/14/2017: Unknown

NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

10/5/2017: NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

DECLARATION OF NON SERVICE

9/12/2017: DECLARATION OF NON SERVICE

NOTICE OF RECUSAL

8/29/2017: NOTICE OF RECUSAL

Minute Order

8/23/2017: Minute Order

Minute Order

8/17/2017: Minute Order

SUMMONS

8/14/2017: SUMMONS

COMPLAINT-CONTRACT

8/14/2017: COMPLAINT-CONTRACT

1 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 03/09/2018
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 32; (OSC-Failure to File Request for Dism; Order of Dismissal) -

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/09/2018
  • Minute Order

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/24/2018
  • Notice of Settlement; Filed by Bank of America, N.A. (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/24/2018
  • NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT OF ENTIRE CASE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/09/2018
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 32; Case Management Conference (Conference-Case Management; Case Deemed Settled) -

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/09/2018
  • Minute Order

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/05/2018
  • CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/14/2017
  • at 08:30 AM in Department 32; Case Management Conference (Conference-Case Management; Continued by Court) -

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/14/2017
  • CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 11/14/2017
  • Minute Order

    Read MoreRead Less
3 More Docket Entries
  • 09/12/2017
  • Declaration; Filed by Bank of America, N.A. (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/29/2017
  • Notice; Filed by Bank of America, N.A. (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/29/2017
  • NOTICE OF RECUSAL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/23/2017
  • at 00:00 AM in Department 1; (Order ReReassignment of Case; Case is reassigned) -

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/23/2017
  • Minute Order

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/17/2017
  • at 5:30 PM in Department 20; (Recusal; Case is reassigned) -

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/17/2017
  • Minute Order

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/14/2017
  • COMPLAINT-CONTRACT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/14/2017
  • Complaint; Filed by Bank of America, N.A. (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/14/2017
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC672115    Hearing Date: November 20, 2019    Dept: 32

bank of america, n.a.,

Plaintiff,

v.

PETER T. KIM, et al.

Defendants.

Case No.: BC672115

Hearing Date: November 20, 2019

[TENTATIVE] order RE:

MOTION to set aside dismissal and enter judgment pursuant to settlement

BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Bank of America, N.A. (“Plaintiff”) commenced this action against Defendant Peter T. Kim (“Defendant”) on August 14, 2017. The Complaint asserts a single cause of action for common counts.

On January 24, 2018, Plaintiff filed a notice of settlement of the entire case. On March 9, 2018, the Court granted Plaintiff’s oral motion to dismiss the case without prejudice and agreed to retain jurisdiction to enforce the parties’ settlement pursuant to CCP section 664.6.

LEGAL STANDARD

“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.” (CCP § 664.6.)

Under CCP section 664.6, “even though a settlement may call for a case to be dismissed, or the plaintiff may dismiss the suit of its own accord, the court may nevertheless retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement, until such time as all of its terms have been performed by the parties, if the parties have requested this specific retention of jurisdiction.” (Wackeen v. Malis (2002) 97 Cal.App.4th 429, 439.)

ANALYSIS

Plaintiff moves to set aside the dismissal and for entry of judgment in its favor in the sum of $13,492.12.

Plaintiff submits the following evidence. On December 26, 2017, the parties entered into a settlement agreement. (Sleezer Decl. ¶ 2, Ex. 1.) The settlement agreement provided, among other things, that judgment in the sum of $25,602.12 would not be entered against Defendant so long as Defendant agreed to pay Plaintiff an initial sum of $3,000 on or before November 17, 2017, monthly payments of $655 beginning December 30, 2017 and continuing through August 30, 2019, and a final payment of $310 on September 30, 2019. (Ibid.) The parties agreed that, in the event of Defendant’s default, the Court would be authorized to immediately enter judgment in Plaintiff’s favor in the full amount owed, excluding payments received but including court costs incurred in obtaining judgment. (Sleezer Decl. ¶ 3.)

On February 30, 2019, Defendant defaulted on the settlement agreement by failing to make the payment then due and owing. (Sleezer Decl. ¶ 4, Ex. 2.) To date, Defendant has paid $12,170, and Plaintiff has incurred court costs of $567. (Sleezer Decl. ¶ 7.) Under the terms of the settlement agreement, the total amount owed by Defendant to Plaintiff is $13,492.12. (Ibid.)

Based on this uncontested evidence, Plaintiff has established Defendant’s breach of the parties’ settlement agreement and the amount which Defendant presently owes Plaintiff.

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s motion is GRANTED. The Court hereby sets aside the dismissal and enters judgment against Defendant in the sum of $13,492.12.