Search

Attributes

This case was last updated from Los Angeles County Superior Courts on 06/09/2019 at 04:11:22 (UTC).

CITY NATIONAL BANK VS THE HARP LLC ET AL

Case Summary

On 02/17/2017 CITY NATIONAL BANK filed a Contract - Other Contract lawsuit against THE HARP LLC. This case was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Courts, Stanley Mosk Courthouse located in Los Angeles, California. The Judge overseeing this case is EDWARD B. MORETON. The case status is Disposed - Judgment Entered.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    ****1155

  • Filing Date:

    02/17/2017

  • Case Status:

    Disposed - Judgment Entered

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Other Contract

  • Court:

    Los Angeles County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Stanley Mosk Courthouse

  • County, State:

    Los Angeles, California

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

EDWARD B. MORETON

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner

CITY NATIONAL BANK

Defendants and Respondents

HARP LLC THE

DOES 1-20

NEW LIFE RECOVERY GROUP

NULIFE TREATMENT CENTERS

MEINTS JOHN DAVID

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Petitioner Attorney

POLSINELLI LLP

 

Court Documents

PROOF OF SERVICE OF APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPEARANCE AND EXAMINATION JOHN D. MEINTS,

2/28/2018: PROOF OF SERVICE OF APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPEARANCE AND EXAMINATION JOHN D. MEINTS,

NOTICE OF JUDGMENT DEBTOR'S EXAMINATION OF JOHN D. MEINTS, AS AGENT FOR THE HARP LLC D/B/A NULIFE TREATMENT CENTERS AND D/B/A NEW LIFE RECOVERY GROUP, LLC

2/28/2018: NOTICE OF JUDGMENT DEBTOR'S EXAMINATION OF JOHN D. MEINTS, AS AGENT FOR THE HARP LLC D/B/A NULIFE TREATMENT CENTERS AND D/B/A NEW LIFE RECOVERY GROUP, LLC

NOTICE OF JUDGMENT DEBTOR'S EXAMINATION OF JOHN D. MEINTS, AS AGENT FOR THE HARP LLC D/B/A NULIFE TREATMENT CENTERS AND D/B/A NEW LIFE RECOVERY GROUP, LLC

4/10/2018: NOTICE OF JUDGMENT DEBTOR'S EXAMINATION OF JOHN D. MEINTS, AS AGENT FOR THE HARP LLC D/B/A NULIFE TREATMENT CENTERS AND D/B/A NEW LIFE RECOVERY GROUP, LLC

Minute Order

6/25/2018: Minute Order

APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPEARANCE AND EXAMINATION

7/12/2018: APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPEARANCE AND EXAMINATION

Minute Order

8/1/2018: Minute Order

Motion to Amend Judgment

2/21/2019: Motion to Amend Judgment

Notice

4/16/2019: Notice

CITY NATIONAL BANK'S COMPLAINT FOR: (1) BREACH OF CONTRACT-TERM LOAN; ETC

2/17/2017: CITY NATIONAL BANK'S COMPLAINT FOR: (1) BREACH OF CONTRACT-TERM LOAN; ETC

PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS & COMPLAINT

2/27/2017: PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS & COMPLAINT

NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

3/13/2017: NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT

4/7/2017: REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT

NOTICE RE: CONTINUANCE OF HEARING

5/19/2017: NOTICE RE: CONTINUANCE OF HEARING

MEMO COSTS SUMMARY

8/3/2017: MEMO COSTS SUMMARY

CASE SUMMARY IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION FOR COURT JUDGMENT ON DEFAULT

8/3/2017: CASE SUMMARY IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION FOR COURT JUDGMENT ON DEFAULT

ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT

8/3/2017: ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT

DECLARATION OF NOEL S. COHEN IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION FOR COURT JUDGMENT ON DEFAULT

8/3/2017: DECLARATION OF NOEL S. COHEN IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION FOR COURT JUDGMENT ON DEFAULT

NOTICE OF ENTRY OF JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF CITY NATIONAL BANK

8/8/2017: NOTICE OF ENTRY OF JUDGMENT IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF CITY NATIONAL BANK

59 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 05/13/2019
  • at 09:30 AM in Department 44, Edward B. Moreton, Presiding; Hearing on Motion to Amend Judgment - Not Held - Rescheduled by Party

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/10/2019
  • Notice (Third Notice to Continued Hearing on Alter Ego Judgment); Filed by City National Bank (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/17/2019
  • at 09:30 AM in Department 44, Edward B. Moreton, Presiding; Hearing on Motion to Amend Judgment - Not Held - Rescheduled by Party

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/16/2019
  • Notice (Second Notice of Continued Hearing on Motion to Amend Judgment); Filed by City National Bank (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/21/2019
  • at 09:30 AM in Department 44, Edward B. Moreton, Presiding; Hearing on Motion to Amend Judgment - Not Held - Rescheduled by Party

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/20/2019
  • Notice ( of Continued Hearing on Motion to Amend Judmgment); Filed by City National Bank (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/13/2019
  • at 09:30 AM in Department 44, Edward B. Moreton, Presiding; Hearing on Motion to Amend Judgment - Not Held - Rescheduled by Party

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/21/2019
  • Motion to Amend Judgment; Filed by City National Bank (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/06/2019
  • Notice of Ruling; Filed by City National Bank (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/04/2019
  • at 09:30 AM in Department 44, Edward B. Moreton, Presiding; Hearing on Claim of Exemption/Third-Party Claim (:Examination of Judgment debtor Samrah Johnson) - Held

    Read MoreRead Less
124 More Docket Entries
  • 04/07/2017
  • Default Entered; Filed by Plaintiff/Petitioner

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 04/07/2017
  • REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/13/2017
  • NOTICE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 03/13/2017
  • Notice of Case Management Conference; Filed by Clerk

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/27/2017
  • Proof-Service/Summons

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/27/2017
  • PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS & COMPLAINT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/27/2017
  • PROOF OF SERVICE SUMMONS & COMPLAINT

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/17/2017
  • Complaint; Filed by City National Bank (Plaintiff)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/17/2017
  • CITY NATIONAL BANK'S COMPLAINT FOR: (1) BREACH OF CONTRACT-TERM LOAN; ETC

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/17/2017
  • SUMMONS

    Read MoreRead Less

Tentative Rulings

Case Number: BC651155    Hearing Date: January 29, 2021    Dept: 50

 

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

Department 50

city national bank,

Plaintiff,

vs.

the harp, llc, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.:

BC 651155

Hearing Date:

January 29, 2021

Hearing Time:

10:00 a.m.

[TENTATIVE] ORDER RE:

CLAIM OF EXEMPTION

Background

On August 3, 2017, judgment was entered in favor of Plaintiff City National Bank (“Plaintiff”) and against Defendants The Harp, LLC dba Nulife Treatment Center and dba New Life Recovery Group and John David Meints (jointly, “Defendants”) (the “Judgment”). Notice of entry of judgment was served on August 8, 2017. On June 24, 2019, the Court issued an order granting Plaintiff’s motion to amend the Judgment to add an alter ego as judgment debtor: Nulife Wellness Group, LLC.

On December 3, 2019, Creditors Adjustment Bureau, Inc. (“Assignee”) filed an Assignment of Judgment, showing Plaintiff assigned and transferred the Judgment to Assignee. Per the Assignment of Judgment, $735,133.86 remained unpaid and owing from Defendants.

On December 24, 2020, Assignee filed a Notice of Hearing on Claim of Exemption as well as a Notice of Opposition to Claim of Exemption. Per these filings, a Notice of Filing Claim of Exemption was mailed on December 10, 2020, in which Samrah Meints, the spouse of Defendant John David Meints, claims that the bank account at Wells Fargo Bank ending in 3648 (the “Wells Fargo Account”) is exempt pursuant to Financial Code section 17410.[1] Ms. Meints asserts that the Wells Fargo Account is not community property, does not belong to her, and that it is instead held by her as Trustee of the Estate of Jasim Al-Kuraishi.

Discussion

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 703.550, subdivision (a), Assignee was required to file, within 15 days after service of the notice of claim of exemption, a notice of opposition to the claim of exemption and a notice of motion for an order determining the claim of exemption. The Court notes that no notice of motion for an order determining the claim of exemption appears to have been filed. Copies of the notice of opposition and notice of motion are also required to be filed with the levying officer. Once the documents are filed with the levying officer, the levying officer “shall promptly file the claim of exemption with the court.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 703.550, subd. (a).) The claim of exemption does not appear to have been filed. Nevertheless, Assignee attaches a copy of the claim of exemption to its Notice of Opposition. Moreover, the Court notes that Assignee also attaches a memorandum of points and authorities to the Notice of Opposition. Therefore, the Court construes the Notice of Opposition to also be Assignee’s motion for an order determining the claim of exemption.

Assignee contends that Ms. Meints has failed to meet her burden of proof to show that the Wells Fargo Account is exempt by providing direct tracing of the Wells Fargo Account for at least a period of six months. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 703.580, subd. (b) [“At a hearing under this section, the exemption claimant has the burden of proof.”]; Code Civ. Proc., § 703.080, subd. (a) [“Subject to any limitation provided in the particular exemption, a fund that is exempt remains exempt to the extent that it can be traced into deposit accounts or in the form of cash or its equivalent.”]; Code Civ. Proc., § 703.080, subd. (b) [“The exemption claimant has the burden of tracing an exempt fund.”].) In support of her claim of exemption, Ms. Meints provides a statement for the Wells Fargo Account for the month of October 2020. But Assignee points out that all deposits made to the Wells Fargo Account have been redacted, therefore, Ms. Meints has not shown where the funds in the Wells Fargo Account originated.

Additionally, Assignee offers evidence that Ms. Meints has been using funds from the Wells Fargo Account to pay her and her husband’s personal loan with AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc. dba GM Financial (“GM Financial”). Assignee asserts that in response to a Deposition Subpoena for Production of Business Records to GM Financial seeking information regarding Mr. Meints’s personal account with GM Financial, GM Financial produced a Credit Application. The Credit Application is a joint application for credit signed by both John Meints and Samrah Meints. (Assignee’s Ex. 3, pp. 3-4.) Furthermore, payment information produced by GM Financial shows that Ms. Meints made payments to GM Financial from the Wells Fargo Account. (Assignee’s Ex. 3, pp. 5-6.)

The Court is permitted to base its determination on the claim of exemption and the notice of opposition, and there is no requirement that additional evidence be provided. (Code Civ. Proc., § 703.580, subd. (c) [“The claim of exemption is deemed controverted by the notice of opposition to the claim of exemption and both shall be received in evidence. If no other evidence is offered, the court, if satisfied that sufficient facts are shown by the claim of exemption (including the financial statement if one is required) and the notice of opposition, may make its determination thereon. If not satisfied, the court shall order the hearing continued for the production of other evidence, oral or documentary.”].) Based on the claim of exemption and the notice of opposition, the Court determines that Ms. Meints has failed to satisfy her burden of showing that the Wells Fargo Account is exempt.

Conclusion

Based on the foregoing, the Court orders that the Wells Fargo Account ending in 3648 is not exempt. The Court orders Assignee to give notice of this order.

DATED: January 29, 2021 ________________________________

Hon. Teresa A. Beaudet

Judge, Los Angeles Superior Court


[1] Financial Code section 17410, subdivision (a) provides: “Escrow or trust funds are not subject to enforcement of a money judgment arising out of any claim against the licensee or person acting as escrow agent, and in no instance shall such escrow or trust funds be considered or treated as an asset of the licensee or person performing the functions of an escrow agent.”

related-case-search

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases


Latest cases where The Harp is a litigant

Latest cases where CITY NATIONAL BANK is a litigant