Your recipients will receive an email with this envelope shortly and will be able to access it on trellis. You can always see your envelopes by clicking the Inbox on the top right hand corner.
Your subscription has successfully been upgraded.
When a money judgment is satisfied, the judgment creditor shall immediately file an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment. (Code of Civ. Proc., § 724.030; Horath v. Hess (2014) 225 Cal.App.4th 456, 468.) If a judgment creditor fails to file the acknowledgment immediately, the judgment debtor may mail a demand that creditor file an acknowledgment. (Code of Civ. Proc., § 724.050.) If the judgment creditor does not comply, the judgment debtor may seek an order acknowledging satisfaction of judgment. (Code of Civ. Proc., § 724.050(d); Schumacher v. Ayerve (1992) 9 Cal.App.4th 1860, 1863.) Section 724.050 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides the sole statutory procedure to require a judgment creditor to file an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment or, if he or she refuses, to obtain a satisfaction of judgment entered by the court clerk. (Quintana v. Gibson (2003) 113 Cal.App.4th 89, 91.)
A court may only order satisfaction of judgment when a judgment has been satisfied in fact by full payment or release. (Schumaker v. Ayerve (1992) 9 Cal.App.4th 1860, 1863.) “A money judgment may be satisfied by payment of the full amount required to satisfy the judgment or by acceptance by the judgment creditor of a lesser sum in full satisfaction of the judgment.” (Code of Civ. Proc., § 724.010(a).) “This section has been interpreted to require the trial court to first determine whether the judgment has been satisfied in fact before ordering entry of satisfaction of judgment.” (Schumacher v. Ayerve (1992) 9 Cal.App.4th 1860, 1863.)
When a judgment debtor files a motion for acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment, the court may determine whether there was an agreement for satisfaction of the judgment by payment of less than the full amount of the judgment. (Horath v. Hess (2014) 225 Cal.App.4th 456, 467.) If a contract is susceptible to two different reasonable interpretations, the contract is ambiguous. (Id. at 464; Walton v. Mueller (2009) 180 Cal.App.4th 161, 174.)
“Payment to a judgment creditor is governed by the cases and statutes which govern commercial transactions. Like a contract creditor, a judgment creditor may demand payment in cash.” (Long v. Cuttle Constr. Co. (1998) 60 Cal.App.4th 834, 837.) Nonetheless, a judgment creditor may agree to accept some other consideration in satisfaction of the judgment. (Rettner v. Shepherd (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 943, 950.) “The acceptance of any valuable thing in discharge of the debt amounts to payment, but it is the distinct agreement of the creditor to accept the thing in discharge of the debt that gives it the character of payment. Without this, the transaction is regarded either as furnishing matter of setoff or as security collateral to the original debt, according as the subject received is in possession or in action.” (Strain v. Security Title Ins. Co. (1954) 124 Cal.App.2d 195, 200.)
A satisfaction of judgment which has been filed and entered may be set aside by appropriate proceedings and for proper cause; fraud, undue influence, and mistake are the generally recognized grounds for vacating a satisfaction of judgment. (Remillard Brick Co. v. Dandini (1950) 98 Cal. App. 2d 617, 622.) Where a satisfaction of judgment has been erroneously entered, it may be cancelled either upon motion made in the original action or by means of an independent action in equity between the parties. (Kinnison v. Guar. Liquidating Corp. (1941) 18 Cal. 2d 256, 265.) A satisfaction of judgment may be vacated and the judgment revived under appropriate circumstances. (Kachiq v. Boothe (1971) 22 Cal. App. 3d 626, 632.)
MOTION TO VACATE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT (CCP § 473(b)) TENTATIVE RULING: Judgment Creditor Metropolitan Adjustment Bureau Corp.’s Motion to Vacate Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment is GRANTED. ANALYSIS: I. Discussion On August 23, 2012, the Court entered a default judgment in favor of Plaintiff Creditor Metropolitan Adjustment Bureau Corp. (“Judgment Creditor”) and against Defendant Robert L. Zeilon (“Judgment Debtor”).
METROPOLITAN ADJUSTMENT BUREAU VS ZEILON, ROBERT L.
12Y00397
Jul 17, 2019
James E. Blancarte or Wendy Chang
Los Angeles County, CA
Notice And Motion To Vacate Acknowledgment Of Satisfaction Of Judgment Set for hearing on Tuesday, October 25, 2011, Line 5, PLAINTIFF CREDITORS TRADE ASSOCIATION, INC., DBA GREAT COLLECTION BUREAU'S Notice And Motion To Vacate Acknowledgment Of Satisfaction Of Judgment - Plaintiff Creditors Trade Association?s Motion to Vacate Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment is Granted. No opposition filed.
CREDITORS TRADE ASSOCIATION, INC., DBA GREAT VS. SUHAIL ELIAS KHOURY, INDIVIDUALLY DBA E & E MARKET ET AL
CGC10501951
Oct 25, 2011
San Francisco County, CA
In this case, the Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment was inadvertently filed based on misinformation provided to counsel. As noted in the moving papers: As set forth in the Declaration of Joleen New, filed herewith, on March 16, 2017, Sacor Financial, Inc., the assignee of Record of the judgment herein...received a check from a title company to satisfy the judgment in this case.
BLYTHE VENTURES, INC. VS. JONES, NORA
06C00690
Nov 09, 2017
Elaine Lu or Yolanda Orozco
Los Angeles County, CA
Moition For Order Compelling Acknowledgment Of Satisfaction Of Judgment (Control Date) Matter on calendar for Wednesday, June 17, 2015, Line 2, Motion For Order Compelling Acknowledgment Of Satisfaction Of Judgment. Off calendar as a duplicate entry. =(302/EHG)
JOHNA PECOT ET AL VS. SAN FRANCISCO DEPUTY SHERIFF'S ASSOCIATION, A ET AL
CGC10501168
Jun 17, 2015
San Francisco County, CA
Case Number: BC635357 Hearing Date: January 4, 2024 Dept: 52 Judgment Debtor Mimi Park, aka Mi Jin Kims Motion to Compel Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment Judgment debtor Mimi Park aka Mi Jin Kim moves under Code of Civil Procedure section 724.050 to compel judgment creditor FCP Brands, Inc. to file acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment.
FCP BRANDS INC VS JOHNNY CHOI ET AL
BC635357
Jan 04, 2024
Los Angeles County, CA
Notice Of Motion To Compel Pltf To File Acknowledgment Of Satisfaction Of Judgment Matter on calendar for Tuesday, December 18, 2012, Line 10, DEFENDANT SF GREEN CAB LLC'S Motion To Compel Plaintiff To File Acknowledgment Of Satisfaction Of Judgment. The matter is off calendar per the request of the moving party. = (302/MJM)
AMY BRIGGS VS. SF GREEN CAB LLC ET AL
CGC11512759
Dec 18, 2012
San Francisco County, CA
Notice Of Motion And Motion To Vacate Acknowledgment Of Satisfaction Of Judgment-Full Made In Error Ccp Section 473 And Ccp Section 1008 Set for hearing on Monday, September 12, 2016, Line 9, PLAINTIFF ALIGN TECHNOLOGY, INC.'S Motion To Vacate Acknowledgment Of Satisfaction Of Judgment-Full Made In Error CCP Section 473 And CCP Section 1008. Plaintiff's motion to vacate acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment is granted. No opposition filed and good cause shown.
ALIGN TECHNOLOGY, INC. VS. HELMUT RAGNITZ ET AL
CGC16550039
Sep 12, 2016
San Francisco County, CA
satisfaction of judgment with the court. (2) Execute, acknowledge, and deliver an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment to the person who made the demand.
EVERS V. FORD MOTOR COMPANY
30-2019-01080359
Jun 25, 2021
Orange County, CA
Here, where Plaintiff delayed more than eight years from the discovery of the alleged fraud before resuming action to set aside an Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment, Plaintiff did not diligently seek relief. Accordingly, the Court must deny the Motion to Set Aside Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment.
ISAD -PANA VS. EGHTESAD
MSC03-02448
Apr 19, 2017
Contra Costa County, CA
Jennifer Anne Liu BC614019 Order Re: Defendant’s Motion To Compel Plaintiff To File Acknowledgment of Satisfation of Judgment The Court grants defendant’s motion To Compel Plaintiff to File an Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment and for sanction.
STACY VUONG VS JENNIFER ANNE LIU ET AL
BC614019
Feb 25, 2019
H. Chester Horn
Los Angeles County, CA
Personal Injury/ Tort
Auto
Until such time as all amounts ordered paid by Plaintiff to Defendant have in fact been paid and received, any motion for Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment is premature.
DALE LAUE V. LILIANA ORTIZ
2013-1-CV-250570
Jan 28, 2016
Santa Clara County, CA
Notice Of Motion And Moiton To Compel Compliance With Demand For Acknowledgment Of Satisfaction Of Judgment Matter on calendar for Monday, December 23, 2013, Line 4: RESPONDENTS MICHELE ARMANINO'S and LALANNE LLC'S Moiton To Compel Compliance With Demand For Acknowledgment Of Satisfaction Of Judgment The motion is continued to January 28, 2014, on the Court's motion.
ROBERT LALANNE VS. MICHELE ARMANINO ET AL
CPF13513216
Dec 23, 2013
San Francisco County, CA
On December 10, 2018, Plaintiff National Enterprises, Inc. filed an Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment as to Johnsen. (See 12/10/18 Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment.) For this reason, there is no longer any basis to order a sale of Johnsen’s dwelling because she has satisfied her judgment debt. The OSC Hearing re: Sale of Dwelling is TAKEN OFF CALENDAR as MOOT. Court clerk is to give notice.
NATIONAL ENTERPRISES INC VS JOHNSEN, GORDON M
07K02824
Jan 15, 2019
Wendy Chang or Jon R. Takasugi
Los Angeles County, CA
Ntc And Motion To Vacate Renewal Of Judgment And Compel Execution And Service Of Acknowledgment Of Satisfaction Of Judgment SET FOR HEARING ON FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 16, 2007, LINE 3 DEFENDANT CHRISTOPHER E. GRELL IND DBA LAW OFFICE OF CHRISTO'S Notice And Motion To Vacate Renewal Of Judgment And Compel Execution And Service Of Acknowledgment Of Satisfaction Of Judgment IS DENIED. THERE HAS BEEN NO APPLICATION TO RENEW THE JUDGMENT AND SO THERE IS NO RENEWAL JUDGMENT OF FILE.
BENEDETTO VS GRELL
CGC01322696
Nov 16, 2007
San Francisco County, CA
("Plaintiff") file an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment (full) with the Court; and (ii) Plaintiff execute, acknowledge and deliver to Defendants an acknowledgment ofsatisfaction of judgment (full) in recordable form; and for an order that Plaintiff pay attorneys fees in the sum of $ 3,575.00 or according to proof, and costs in the sum of $60.00 incurred by Defendants, on the grounds that the judgment as entered has been satisfied in full; that demand for acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment per
REXEL INC VS EMPOWERED ENERGY SOLUTIONS INC
37-2017-00020408-CU-BC-CTL
Dec 05, 2018
San Diego County, CA
Contract
Breach
Defendant Dean Seniff'S Motion To Compel Acknowledgment Of Satisfaction Of Judgment And Request For Monetary Sanctions And Penalty Matter on calendar for Tuesday, June 10, 2011, Line 6, DEFENDANT DEAN SENIFF'S Motion To Compel Acknowledgment Of Satisfaction Of Judgment And Request For Monetary Sanctions And Penalty. Off calendar as moot. Plaintiff filed a satisfaction of judgment on June 25, 2012.
STEPHEN WU VS. DEAN SENIFF ET AL
CGC09495707
Jul 10, 2012
San Francisco County, CA
Here, on September 22, 2014, Miller served Clark with a written demand for acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment. However, although Clark filed an acknowledgment of partial satisfaction of judgment, it is undisputed that Clark has failed to file an acknowledgment of full satisfaction of judgment.
IRWIN R MILLER VS. EDWARD L CLARK
56-2011-00407071-CU-BC-VTA
Jan 13, 2015
Ventura County, CA
MOTION FOR ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF SATISFACTION OF JUDGMENT TENTATIVE RULING: The Motion is GRANTED. Plaintiff claims Defendant still owes an additional $1,050.49 in post-judgment costs, as detailed in the Memorandum of Costs filed on October 25, 2018. However, this amount is less than the amount Defendant overpaid on the judgment ($1,962.21), which means Defendant has satisfied the judgment and Plaintiff should have filed an Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment. (Code Civ. Proc., §724.030.)
WORLD WINE BOTTLES LLC V. TERRAVANT WINE COMPANY
26-68226
Nov 14, 2018
Napa County, CA
On the contrary, it made numerous attempts to file the Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment. As such, penalties and attorneys' fees are not appropriately awarded. IT IS SO ORDERED. This ruling is the order of the Court, filed as of this date. No formal order is required.
TRIUMPH PARTNERSHIPS LLC VS. LARRY YACKLEY
37-2008-00050665-CL-CL-NC
Apr 05, 2017
San Diego County, CA
Collections
Collections
That section states that, if a money judgment has been satisfied, the judgment debtor . . . may serve personally or by mail on the judgment creditor a demand in writing that the judgment creditor do one or both of the following: (1) file an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment with the court [or] (2) execute, acknowledge, and deliver an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment to the person who made the demand.
SHAHROUZ JAHANSHAHI VS RODNEY T LEWIN
BC644230
Apr 21, 2022
Los Angeles County, CA
Info Tech is not entitled to an order compelling acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment at this time. While Info Tech may be entitled to an order compelling acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment in connection with CLG’s $9,660.80 judgment on its cross-complaint, Info Tech’s request that the awarded monetary sanctions be included in the judgment is unsupported.
INFO TECH CORPORATION VS CALIFORNIA LAWYERS GROUP LLP
BC563358
Oct 21, 2020
Los Angeles County, CA
Real Property
other
Notice Of Motion And Moiton To Compel Compliance With Demand For Acknowledgment Of Satisfaction Of Judgment Matter on calendar for Wednesday, December 4, 2013, Line 9: RESPONDENTS MICHELE ARMANINO'S and LALANNE LLC'S Motion To Compel Compliance With Demand For Acknowledgment Of Satisfaction Of Judgment The motion is continued to December 23, 2013, to give the moving party a chance to comply with San Francisco Local Rule 2.6B.
ROBERT LALANNE VS. MICHELE ARMANINO ET AL
CPF13513216
Dec 04, 2013
San Francisco County, CA
Notice Of Motion And Motion To Compel Acknowledgment Of Satisfaction Of Judgment Set for hearing on Tuesday, December 27, 2016, Line 1, PETITIONER BALBOA INSURANCE COMPANY'S Motion To Compel Acknowledgment Of Satisfaction Of Judgment. The motion, to which no opposition was filed, is GRANTED.
BALBOA INSURANCE COMPANY VS. ADRIENNE THOMAS
CPF14513800
Dec 27, 2016
San Francisco County, CA
s unopposed motion to set aside the Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment is granted. The Court deems the lack of opposition to the motion to be a concession as to the merits of the motion. Furthermore, a satisfaction of judgment which has been filed and entered may be set aside by appropriate proceedings and for proper cause. Fraud, undue influence, and mistake are the generally recognized grounds for vacating a satisfaction of judgment. Remillard Brick Co. v. Dandini (1950) 98 Cal.
MERCY AIR SERVICE INC VS. SCHRITTER
37-2015-00022740-CU-CL-NC
Aug 03, 2017
San Diego County, CA
Collections
Collections
The default judgment entered on October 13, 2020, is hereby SET ASIDE and VACATED. The acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment filed on April 5, 2021, is hereby SET ASIDE. The case is dismissed with prejudice at plaintiff's request.
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. VS SUNDBY
RG19007296
Jul 02, 2021
Alameda County, CA
SC045301 Related to Case No. 18SMCV00199 Hearing Date June 24, 2022 Motion for an Order Compelling the Immediate Filing of Satisfactions of Judgment Defendants fully paid plaintiffs judgment, but plaintiff failed to file satisfaction of judgment or release the judgment lien. Defendants move for an order compelling the filing of the satisfactions of judgment. When a money judgment is satisfied, the judgment creditor shall immediately file with the court an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment.
WAYNE HAGENDORF VS GARY CONWAY, ET AL.
SC045301
Jun 24, 2022
Los Angeles County, CA
, and deliver an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment to the person who made the demand.”
JUANA ROMAN VS AMERICAN BEAUTY COLLEGE
KC064485
Sep 13, 2016
Los Angeles County, CA
Personal Injury/ Tort
Fraud
Stonehaven obtained a judgment on the cross-complaint. Cross-Defendant Arthur R. Aslanian now moves to compel Stonehaven to file an acknowledgement of satisfaction of the judgment. TENTATIVE RULING: Cross-Defendant Arthur R. Aslanian’s motion to compel acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment is DENIED. DISCUSSION: Motion to Compel Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment Request for Judicial Notice Cross-Defendant Arthur R.
4402 MAMMOTH INVESTORS LLC VS STONEHAVEN LLC ET AL
BC656986
Jun 14, 2021
Los Angeles County, CA
Section 724.050 states, in pertinent part, (a) If a money judgment has been satisfied, the judgment debtor… may serve personally or by mail on the judgment creditor a demand in writing that the judgment creditor do one or both of the following: (1) File an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment with the court. (2) Execute, acknowledge, and deliver an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment to the person who made the demand.
CITIBANK, N.A. VS WILLIAMS
MCV-252959
Aug 02, 2023
Sonoma County, CA
Notice Of Motion And Motion To Compel Creditor To Execute Acknowledgment Of Satisfaction Of Judgment Matter on calendar for Thursday, May 15, 2014, Line 4, DEFENDANTs MATTHEW DAVIS and REEAH DAVIS' Motion To Compel Creditor To Execute Acknowledgment Of Satisfaction Of Judgment. Denied in light of the Court's ruling granting Plaintiff's Motion to Set Aside Order Granting Motion to Strike Costs.
CMC INVESTMENTS INC. DBA DOLLAR RENT A CAR VS. MATTHEW DAVIS ET AL
CPF11511670
May 15, 2014
San Francisco County, CA
of Satisfaction of Judgment in Full, Memorandum of Points and Authorities, Declaration of Joshua G Hamilton, 08/31/2021 APPEARANCES Joshua G.
2017-00505141
Sep 01, 2021
Ventura County, CA
Defendant filed a proposed judgment, and judgment was entered on February 6, 2019. On August 12, 2019, defendant sent plaintiff a cashier’s check for $43,611.25. Defendant moves to compel plaintiff to file an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment. Plaintiff argues defendant still owes costs, interest and attorney’s fees. When a money judgment is satisfied, the judgment creditor shall immediately file an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment. Cal. Code of Civ. Proc. §724.030.
DALE REICHENEDER VS JENNIFER VENCILL
SC129766
Jan 16, 2020
Los Angeles County, CA
of judgment with the court. (2) Execute, acknowledge, and deliver an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment to the person who made the demand.
SHERIFF PLUMBING INC. VS KENNETH GRAY
KC067580
Oct 18, 2017
Los Angeles County, CA
A default judgment was entered in favor of Plaintiff Metropolitan Adjustment Bureau Corp. (“Plaintiff”) and against Defendant Robert Zeilon (“Defendant”) on August 23, 2012. Plaintiff subsequently filed an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment on January 30, 2019.
METROPOLITAN ADJUSTMENT BUREAU VS ZEILON, ROBERT L.
12Y00397
May 21, 2019
James E. Blancarte or Wendy Chang
Los Angeles County, CA
Defendants move for an order compelling BHE to release the abstract of judgment by filing a notice of satisfaction of judgment. “If an abstract of a money judgment has been recorded with the recorder of any county and the judgment is satisfied,” the judgment creditor must file and serve an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment. Cal. Code Civ. Proc. §724.040. A court may only order satisfaction of judgment when a judgment has been satisfied in fact by full payment or release. Schumaker v.
BEVERLY HILLS ESTATE VS. MARTIN WARNER ET. AL.
SC120070
Jul 30, 2019
Los Angeles County, CA
On April 7, 2022, Plaintiff filed a Full Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment, notifying this Court that Defendant had paid the judgment entered on November 26, 2018, in full. On June 28, 2022, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Order Vacating and Setting Aside Acknowledgment of Full Satisfaction of Judgment, accompanied by the Declaration of Martin F. Goldman.
HOREB BOBCAT SERVICE & RENTAL, INC. VS. GILAD AVIDOR INCORPO
LC106496
Jul 28, 2022
Los Angeles County, CA
The judgment creditor filed an "Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment" indicating he has "accepted payment or performance other than that specified in the judgment in full satisfaction of the judgment."
ALEX GILANIANS VS. ARMEN B. ASSARIAN
EC051051
May 26, 2017
Los Angeles County, CA
Collections
Collections
Notice Of Motion And Motion To Compel Acknowledgment Of Satisfaction Of Judgment And Request For Monetary Sanctions And Penalty Set for hearing on Tuesday, May 29, 2012, Line 4. DEFENDANT DEAN SENIFF Motion To Compel Acknowledgment Of Satisfaction Of Judgment And Request For Monetary Sanctions And Penalty. Granted. Plaintiff's counsel is required to pay $980 to defendant no later than June 15, 2012. In the context of this case, the interest shortfall of $17.17 is a trifle.
STEPHEN WU VS. DEAN SENIFF ET AL
CGC09495707
May 29, 2012
San Francisco County, CA
The court finds that attorney Jack Scully acted with just cause in refusing to execute an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment. (CCP 724.050(e).) Moving parties to give notice.
Yomtoubian vs. Camellia Diamonds Ltd. 30-2009-00119619-CU-OR-CJC
Nov 01, 2016
Orange County, CA
The court finds that attorney Jack Scully acted with just cause in refusing to execute an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment. (CCP 724.050(e).) Moving parties to give notice.
YOMTOUBIAN VS. CAMELLIA DIAMONDS LTD.
30-2009-00119619-CU-OR-CJC
Nov 01, 2016
Orange County, CA
A judgment creditor cannot indefinitely postpone an acknowledgement of satisfaction of judgment simply by refusing to cash a debtor’s check. The court is allowed, and indeed required, to enter a satisfaction of judgment after the debtor pays the full amount of the judgment and the creditor refuses to execute an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment. Therefore, the court intends to grant respondent’s motion for entry of an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment.
SMARTMED, INC. VS FIRST CHOICE MEDICAL GROUP, INC.
17CECG01179
Jun 15, 2023
Fresno County, CA
Motion: Compel Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment. Ruling: Off-calendar. Filing fees not paid.
PETRIK VS. MAHAFFEY
05CC10571
Aug 28, 2017
Orange County, CA
This motion is made pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 724.050, which permits a judgment debtor to serve a demand that the judgment creditor prepare and file an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment. If the judgment creditor does not comply with this demand, the judgment debtor "may apply to the court on noticed motion for an order requiring the judgment creditor to comply with the demand." Id. at (d).
PACIFICA COMPANIES LLC VS. PATEL
37-2012-00092404-CU-NP-CTL
Oct 18, 2018
San Diego County, CA
Personal Injury/ Tort
other
Acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment filed on 7/28/17.
SHARIFI VS. THE TARRANT FAMILY TRUST DATED SEPTEMBER 29, 2003
30-2015-00802490-CU-PT-CJC
Aug 01, 2017
Orange County, CA
MOTION To Set Aside The Recorded Acknowledgment Of Satisfaction Of Judgment GRANT-NO OPPOSITION FILED.(302/REQ/JU)
FORD MOTOR CREDIT COMPANY VS. JUE, LELAND ET AL
CGC00181244
May 04, 2005
San Francisco County, CA
On the Court’s own motion, Defendant and Judgment Debtor Susan G. Snow’s Motion to Compel Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment, etc. is CONTINUED to Wed., March 14, 2018, 3:00 p.m., Courtroom 19.
TIMBERLAND V. SNOW
SCV-257269
Mar 07, 2018
Richard J. Henderson for the Hon. Allan D. Hardcastle
Sonoma County, CA
Plaintiff satisfied the Judgment for Costs. Defendant filed an Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment. The Judgment Debtor Examination was vacated.
NGUYEN VS. TRAN
30-2014-00729544-CU-PO-CJC
Jan 08, 2017
Orange County, CA
Court notes that an Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment, indicating that judgment has been paid in full, was filed on December 13, 2021.
AUTO RESOURCES VS NATESSA WINSTON
21CV-01460
Jan 26, 2022
Merced County, CA
Furthermore, because Hayman filed an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment and the Court deemed the judgment satisfied, Plaintiff was successful in asserting this position and received a benefit from it. The legal effect of having a party file an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment is that the judgment creditor can no longer take any actions to collect from the judgment debtor. ( Brochier v. Brochier (1941) 17 Cal.2d 822, 825.)
MICHAEL TREIMAN VS HAYMAN HOLDINGS, LLC, ET AL.
21STCV23353
Nov 09, 2023
Los Angeles County, CA
Respondents’ Motion to Compel Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment is DENIED as premature. There is as yet no Judgment entered in this matter subject to Acknowledgment of Satisfaction. Petitioners shall submit a Proposed Judgment in accordance herewith.
YING ZHANG, ET AL. VS FUTIM G. MAK, ET AL.
19GDCP00098
May 24, 2019
Los Angeles County, CA
"When a money judgment is satisfied, the judgment creditor immediately shall file with the court an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment." (CCP §724.030.) If a judgment has been satisfied, and no acknowledgement of satisfication of judgment has been filed, the judgment creditor may demand in writing that the judgment creditor execute, acknowledge, and deliver an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment to the person who made the demand. (CCP §724.050(a)(2).)
K & K CAPITAL INVESTMENTS VS. IPC (USA), INC.
56-2008-00320140-CU-NP-VTA
Mar 10, 2014
Ventura County, CA
The Court notes plaintiff filed an Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment in Full on June 14, 2022.
AMARR GARAGE DOORS VS JONATHAN MENDOZA
22CV-00414
Aug 22, 2022
Merced County, CA
The Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment filed on August 11, 2017 in Case Number 17CV01035 was inadvertently filed in the wrong case. The Court will execute an Order Striking Filing. No appearance is necessary.
PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOC VS MCDONALD, MIKE
17CV01035
Apr 10, 2019
Butte County, CA
The Court notes that an Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment in full was filed on March 23, 2023.
PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA VS JOHN KUDULIS
21CV-00159
Jul 12, 2023
Merced County, CA
MCV-000251, Looney v Yamashiro, LLC Plaintiff’s motion to appoint a receiver to seize the judgment debtor’s liquor license to satisfy the judgment is DROPPED as MOOT. On October 11, 2022, Plaintiff filed an Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment acknowledging that the judgment has been satisfied in full and the defendants have been released.
LOONEY VS YAMASHIRO, LLC
MCV-000251
Jan 11, 2023
Sonoma County, CA
.: 37-2019-00009803-CU-CO-CTL CASE TITLE: GF GALAXY CORPORATION VS DOT VN INC [IMAGED] CASE CATEGORY: Civil - Unlimited CASE TYPE: Contract - Other EVENT TYPE: Motion Hearing (Civil) CAUSAL DOCUMENT/DATE FILED: Motion - Other, 08/16/2023 Defendant Phuoc Lee Johnson's Motion to Compel Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment (ROA 168) is ordered VACATED. Plaintiff has appealed the court's ruling partially granting Defendant's motion to tax costs. The appeal is currently pending.
GF GALAXY CORPORATION VS DOT VN INC
37-2019-00009803-CU-CO-CTL
Dec 22, 2023
San Diego County, CA
DEF Anthony Farragh Motion to Vacate This matter appears moot based on the recent filing of an “acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment”. If any party believes the motion remains viable, they shall appear and argue accordingly. Otherwise the motion will be denied.
TOLERICO VS. FARRAGH
30-2008-00113295
Mar 04, 2021
Orange County, CA
Nature of Proceedings: Motion Remittitur filed after reversal by Court of Appeal Rulings: Costco’s motion for acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment is granted under section 724.050; Costco shall recover its costs on appeal. Costco is not entitled to recover the attorney fees it has incurred in its successful effort to have Lisec repudiated.
CIFUENTES VS COSTCO
1338554
Jan 05, 2016
Santa Barbara County, CA
On April 12, 2018, the title insurer took the position that the Public Administrator could not prove that the judgment lien against decedent's ex-husband had not been satisfied. No acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment is known to exist. No family member is aware of the judgment having been satisfied. The estate's judgment lien was nevertheless wrongfully dishonored upon the judgment debtor's conveyance of the asset.
IN THE MATTER OF BERTHA TELLO
56-2017-00499656-PR-LA-OXN
May 16, 2018
Ventura County, CA
Plaintiff has not responded to the aforesaid August 14, 2023 letter by filing a partial acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment as of the October 16, 2023 motion filing date. ( Id. , ¶ 9). The motion is granted. Plaintiff is to deliver an acknowledgment of partial satisfaction of judgment in the amount of $15,000.00 to Colorado within 10 days from the date of the hearing.
JOHN RODRIGUEZ VS CITY OF IRWINDALE ET AL
BC665690
Nov 13, 2023
Los Angeles County, CA
Notice Of Motion And Motion To Tax Costs Sought By Judgment Asignee Christopher Andreas Matter on Calendar for Tuesday , January 7, 2014, Line 4, RESPONDENTS MICHELE ARMANINO, LALANNE LLC'S Motion To Tax Costs Sought By Judgment Asignee Christopher Andreas Continued on the Court's own motion to January 28, 2014 to be heard on the same date as the Motion to Compel Compliance with Demand for Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment.
ROBERT LALANNE VS. MICHELE ARMANINO ET AL
CPF13513216
Jan 07, 2014
San Francisco County, CA
Defendant/judgment debtor’s motion to withdraw and cancel abstract of judgment. No opposition. Motion denied, without prejudice. Moving party has failed to provide the court with authority supporting the court’s power to “withdraw” or “cancel” an abstract of judgment. An abstract of judgment can be only extinguished by an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment or by the judgment creditor’s release of the lien. See, Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Charlton (1993) 17 Cal.App.4th 1066, 1070.
AMERICAN MODERN HOME INS CO VS FAHMIAN
05CC12158
Jan 01, 2017
Orange County, CA
of satisfaction of judgment with the court;” and/or “(2) Execute, acknowledge, and deliver an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment to the person who made the demand.”
TIMBERLAND V. SNOW
SCV-257269
Mar 14, 2018
Sonoma County, CA
The court notes that Defendants motion is procedurally defective, as Defendant does not submit evidence showing that Defendant served a demand on Plaintiffs that they either (1) File an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment with the court, or (2) Execute, acknowledge, and deliver an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment to the person who made the demand. [1] (CCP § 724.050(a).)
SAJJAD TAKALLOU, ET AL. VS ELAINE MUNOZ
18STCV04181
Jul 19, 2022
Los Angeles County, CA
(2) Execute, acknowledge, and deliver an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment to the person who made the demand. (b) The demand shall include the following statement: Important warning. If this judgment has been satisfied, the law requires that you comply with this demand not later than 15 days after you receive it.
KAVOOS ROSTAMI VS JOHN ANDRADE
BC453138
Oct 19, 2022
Los Angeles County, CA
(2) Execute, acknowledge, and deliver an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment to the person who made the demand. (b) The demand shall include the following statement: Important warning. If this judgment has been satisfied, the law requires that you comply with this demand not later than 15 days after you receive it.
KAVOOS ROSTAMI VS JOHN ANDRADE
BC453138
Oct 18, 2022
Los Angeles County, CA
The following documents are set aside and vacated as void: Entry of Default dated January 5, 2016 (ROA # 20); Judgment entered May 4, 2017 (ROA # 25); DL-30 dated December 5, 2017 (ROA # 27); and Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment – Full filed on April 24, 2018 (ROA # 28).
UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION VS. IBARRA
37-2015-00016315-CU-IC-CTL
Nov 06, 2019
San Diego County, CA
Insurance
Intellectual Property
Motion: Compel Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment. Moving Party Defendant Douglas Mahaffey. Responding Party Judgment Creditor Berger Kahn. Opposition filed. Ruling: Defendant Mahaffey’s Motion to Compel Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment is DENIED. The Request for Sanctions and Attorney Fees is DENIED. The Request for refund of payments made is DENIED. Based upon CCP 666, the court extinguishes the sanction award for $6,963.00 payable to Plaintiffs Petrik.
PETRIK VS. MAHAFFEY
05CC10571
Dec 04, 2017
Orange County, CA
Mtn To Compel Further Responses Set for hearing on Thursday, August 29, 2013, Line 1, PLAINTIFF INVESTEK PROPERTIES COMPANY LLC, INVESTEK PROPERTIES COMPANY, A GENERAL PARTNERSHIP Mtn To Compel Further Responses Continued on the court's own motion to be heard on September 30, 2013 at 9:00 am in Department 302 to be heard after the Motion for Order Requiring Plaintiff to Comply with Demand for Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment that is currently set for September 13, 2013.
INVESTEK PROPERTIES VS ALTA MESA WIND
CGC99306249
Aug 29, 2013
San Francisco County, CA
On November 15, 2016, counsel for Loancare made a demand for satisfaction of judgment pursuant to Code of Civil Proc., § 724.040 (“If an abstract of a money judgment has been recorded with the recorder of any county and the judgment is satisfied, the judgment creditor shall immediately do both of the following: (a) File an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment with the court. (b) Serve an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment on the judgment debtor. Service shall be made personally or by mail.”)
ATTORNEY COLLECTION SERVICES, VS. PIERCE, D`ARTAGNAN D.
00CT2883
Aug 21, 2017
Elaine Lu or Georgina Torres Rizk
Los Angeles County, CA
TENTATIVE RULING: The Motion of Defendant for Order Entering Satisfaction of Judgment and for Attorney's Fees and Damages is DENIED. Pursuant to CCP section 724.050, Defendant demanded the filing of an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment after it paid the judgment for $7,000. However, CCP section 724.050(b) provides the judgment debtor's demand shall include the following statement: "Important warning.
FORTNER VS CONTE
37-2015-00040195-CU-PA-CTL
Jun 07, 2018
San Diego County, CA
Personal Injury/ Tort
Auto
On April 20, 2022, Plaintiff filed an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment indicating that Defendant has fully satisfied the default judgment that was entered on June 16, 2021 (Satisfaction of Judgment). II. Discussion Based on the Satisfaction of Judgment, the Motion is now moot. III. Conclusion & Order The motion is placed off-calendar as moot. Moving party is ordered to give notice.
MERCURY INSURANCE COMPANY VS MARTIN BALTAZAR
21STLC01161
Apr 25, 2022
Los Angeles County, CA
On June 16, 2021, Judgment Creditor filed a full acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment by Judgment Debtor. (EJ-100 filed 6/16/21.) On July 2, 2021, the Court Clerk re-set the instant motion for October 12, 2021. As Judgment Creditor has filed an acknowledgment of full satisfaction of judgment, there is no purpose for an assignment order. CONCLUSION AND ORDER Based on the foregoing, Judgment Creditor Hospice Source LLC’s motion for assignment order is TAKEN OFF CALENDAR AS MOOT.
HOSPICE SOURCE LLC VS ALL SEASONS HEALTHCARE INC.
21STCP00958
Oct 12, 2021
Los Angeles County, CA
Paragraph III, vi, of the agreement states: “MCKILLOP and INNLEY will execute an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment in favor of WALLACE and HHOMC and WALLACE and HHOMC shall execute an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment in favor of MCKILLOP and INNLEY in case number YC070181.” Thus, the plain language of the agreement demonstrates the parties agreed that the amount set forth in the settlement encompassed all amounts that were set forth in the second amended judgment.
MCKILLOP VS WALLACE
YC070181
Jun 22, 2021
Los Angeles County, CA
Defendant filed the instant Motion to Set Aside the Entry of Default and Default Judgment (the “Motion”) on June 22, 2018. At the previous hearing on this Motion, the Court continued it to allow Defendant to file supplemental papers to address certain defects the Court identified. To date, no such supplemental papers have been filed. The Court notes that on November 28, 2018, Plaintiff filed an Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment. For the foregoing reasons, the Motion is TAKEN OFF CALENDAR.
INTERINSURANCE EXCHANGE OF THE VS CIFUENTES, RONALD
17K03504
Dec 12, 2018
Wendy Chang or Jon R. Takasugi
Los Angeles County, CA
Motion to Compel Satisfaction of Judgment Defendant initially brought his motion under Code of Civil Procedure section 724.050, which allows a judgment debtor to serve a demand on the judgment creditor to do one of the following two things if a money judgment has been satisfied: 1) file an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment with the court; or 2) execute, acknowledge, and deliver an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment to the person who made the demand. (Code Civ. Proc., § 724.050, subd. (a).)
GIC874841
Dec 08, 2023
San Diego County, CA
(2) Execute, acknowledge, and deliver an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment to the person who made the demand. (Code Civ. Proc., § 724.050, subd. (a).) Mrs. Billingsley contends that she is entitled to an acknowledgement of satisfaction because she has satisfied her portion of the obligation, i.e., $0.00 of the total amount owed to plaintiff, $3,436,120. However, plaintiff argues that Mrs.
PNC BANK, N.A. VS. MATTHEW BILLINGSLEY
21CECG02603
Mar 07, 2023
Fresno County, CA
Superior Court of Nevada County Tentative Ruling Truckee Branch Defendants' Motion for Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment is granted as prayed. Pursuant to CCP '724.050(d), the court clerk shall enter the Satisfaction of Judgment which was entered on 3/21/19. Defendants are awarded $1,150.00 pursuant to CCP '724.050(e), for failing to comply with the demand to enter the Satisfaction of Judgment.
HODGE V. PEIK
CU17-082542
Sep 22, 2019
Nevada County, CA
In addition, Plaintiff/Judgment creditor filed a notice of acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment on June 4, 2021.
GARGIR FINANCIAL SERVICES VS THE ABAS GROUP, ET AL.
20SMCV00476
Jun 25, 2021
Timothy Lee Johnson
Los Angeles County, CA
On July 14, 2021, Aspire filed this motion for an order compelling Respondents to file an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment. Respondents filed an opposition on August 4, 2021. Aspire filed a reply on August 9, 2021. Where a judgment has been satisfied, but the judgment creditor refuses to file an acknowledgment of this satisfaction, Code of Civil Procedure section 724.050 provides the relevant procedure for obtaining such an acknowledgement by court order.
ASPIRE GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY VS JOSE GARCIA, ET AL.
21STCV25145
Aug 17, 2021
Los Angeles County, CA
(2) Execute, acknowledge, and deliver an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment to the person who made the demand.” As provided above, Defendant would need to bring a motion under CCP § 724.050 (with proof of full payment of the judgment) to have Plaintiff file a satisfaction of judgment to resolve the issue presented in the Motion—a motion to vacate a renewal of judgment is not the proper procedure.
COAST NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPA VS MENDOZA, ANTONIO MOISES
07CJ3424
Apr 23, 2019
James E. Blancarte or Wendy Chang
Los Angeles County, CA
of satisfaction of judgment because those fees and costs were incurred before Plaintiff violated the claimed deadline.
BECKER VS TADLOCK
56-2013-00434082-CL-EN-VTA
Jan 14, 2014
Ventura County, CA
Other
Enforcement
In this case, the court already granted a motion to enforce the settlement agreement under CCP § 664.6 on April 4, 2018 and entered judgment in accordance with the written settlement agreement. On August 22, 2018, plaintiff filed an Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment, indicating the judgment was satisfied in full.
CREDITORS SPECIALTY SERVICE, INC. VS. JUAN JOSE CUBERO, ET
EC065617
Sep 14, 2018
Los Angeles County, CA
In the Court’s view, this action is nothing more than a demand for acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment, per the statutory procedure found in Code of Civil Procedure § 724.050(d), which requires a noticed motion to obtain such an order. As that section provides the exclusive statutory basis for demanding satisfaction of judgment, Quintana v. Gibson (2003) 113 Cal.
JOHN PARK VS HYEON JOO PARK ET AL
BC621285
Jan 06, 2017
Los Angeles County, CA
Real Property
Quiet Title
On October 14, 2020, following the latest continuance, Plaintiff filed an Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment indicating that Plaintiff has accepted Defendant’s payment as full satisfaction of judgment and has released her from any further obligation. In light of Defendant’s full satisfaction of the judgment, her motion to vacate the judgment and stay its enforcement is MOOT. Accordingly, Defendant’s motion is taken OFF CALENDAR as MOOT. Moving party to give notice, unless waived.
PROPERTY REHAB TRUST, LLC VS SHARON BABB, ET AL.
19STCP03667
Dec 03, 2020
Los Angeles County, CA
Judgment debtor is not entitled to an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment until the judgment has been paid in full. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 724.010, subd. (a).) Judgment creditor to give notice.
TWO WORLDS, INC. VS. JOHNSON
30-2008-00111817-CU-BC-CJC
Jun 01, 2017
Orange County, CA
Counsel for plaintiff to file Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment once funds are received. DATE: 08/16/2022 MINUTE ORDER Page 1 DEPT: 43 VEN-FNR-10.03
2021-00556851
Aug 16, 2022
Ventura County, CA
CCP §724.050(a) provides: “If a money judgment has been satisfied, the judgment debtor … may serve personally or by mail on the judgment creditor a demand in writing that the judgment creditor do one or both of the following: (1) File an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment with the court; (2) Execute, acknowledge, and deliver an acknowledgment of satisfaction of Page 3 of 5 judgment to the person who made the demand.” A judgment creditor is required to comply within 15 days of receipt of the demand.
TBF FINANCIAL I LLC VS HEMET SAN JACINTO VALLEY CH
RIC1707490
Jul 21, 2020
Riverside County, CA
As a Motion to Compel Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment Even if the court were to consider the instant motion as one to compel acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment, the instant motion still fails. Judgment Debtor Davies fails to show that the judgment was satisfied. Instead, Judgment Debtor Davies provides only a conclusory declaration. Specifically, Judgment Debtor Davies states in full that “[t]his action was filed against me and my partner Nicholas Limer in 2011.
ROBERT MCKENNA ET AL VS DAVID DAVIES ET AL
BC451589
Jan 04, 2021
Los Angeles County, CA
Collections
Promisory Note
That same day, the Court entered a judgment in favor of Plaintiff Gerard Facchini (“Plaintiff”) and against Defendant Showfx, Inc. (“Defendant”) in the amount of $8,758.90. The Labor Commissioner filed an acknowledgment of full satisfaction of judgment on January 30, 2020. On March 5, 2021, the Labor Commissioner filed the instant Motion to Set Aside and/or Strike Erroneously filed Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment (the “Motion”). No Opposition was filed.
GERARD FACCHINI VS SHOWFX , INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION
17STCP01281
Apr 12, 2021
Los Angeles County, CA
days after full satisfaction of judgment.
RICARDO PRADO ET. AL. VS. DARIN STOYTCHEV ET. AL.
SC122980
Aug 31, 2023
Los Angeles County, CA
Scripps is therefore ordered to execute, acknowledge, and deliver an acknowledgment of partial satisfaction of judgment in that amount. However, there is no indication that Calgary has paid the attorney fees and costs that were awarded, and although Calgary removed portions of the LED signs, it did not fully comply with the terms of the non-monetary relief within the stated timeframe. Calgary is therefore not entitled to an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment in full.
SCRIPPS ENERGY LLC VS CALGARY ENTERPRISES
37-2022-00017583-CU-BC-CTL
Oct 27, 2023
San Diego County, CA
The opposition states attorney time was spent opposing Varas first motion to tax, preparing an application to sell the dwelling, engaging in settlement negotiations, drafting a settlement agreement and responding to Varas attempt to obtain an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment. Some attorneys fees are recoverable. The total sought is excessive, for example 30 hours spent in June 2023 responding to Varas efforts to obtain a notice for satisfaction of judgment.
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA LAND USE, INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION VS ALIREZA VARASTEHPOUR, ET AL.
21SMCP00166
Aug 08, 2023
Los Angeles County, CA
In 2015, Plaintiff obtained a judgment against Defendant in the amount of $27,291. According to Defendant, he made payments totaling $49,851, which includes interest and overpayment. Defendant made a demand to file a satisfaction of judgment on Plaintiff's former counsel and his new counsel. Plaintiff has not filed a satisfaction of judgment. Defendant made a demand in writing that Plaintiff (Creditor) file an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment. (C.C.P., § 724.050(a)(1).)
BATTA VS. ALRAYYAN
37-2013-00078020-CU-BC-CTL
Jun 23, 2023
San Diego County, CA
The judgment was renewed on December 6, 2012 by Plaintiff’s Assignee, LVNV Funding, LLC (“LVNV Funding”). On March 5, 2019, Defendant filed a motion to vacate the default judgment pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (d). The motion was denied without prejudice on April 29, 2019. On May 6, 2019, Defendant filed the instant Motion to Vacate Default and Default Judgment. On June 25, 2019, Plaintiff filed a full Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment.
(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)
LAM12CG6441
Oct 02, 2019
James E. Blancarte or Serena R. Murillo
Los Angeles County, CA
On August 29, 2018, Johnson filed a Third Amended Cross-Complaint alleging Corsini breached the agreement by failing to file an Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment, or remove the lien on Johnson’s property. On August 12, 2019, Johnson filed a request to dismiss just the lien in the Third Amended Cross-Complaint. The dismissal was entered as to the entire Third Amended Cross-Complaint.
(NO CASE NAME AVAILABLE)
LAM17K02986
Oct 07, 2019
James E. Blancarte or Serena R. Murillo
Los Angeles County, CA
do one or both of the following: (1) File an acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment with the court
JON CARPENTER VS MARTIN M LEE PROPERTIES INC
BC423174
Jul 29, 2022
Los Angeles County, CA
No proof of service has been filed for the Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment. Also, on 11/7/22, the Samples took their Motion for Attorney Fees which was scheduled for 11/17/22 off calendar. Based on Plaintiffs filing of the Acknowledgment of Full Satisfaction of Judgment, before costs were entered thereon, the Court, on its own motion, strikes Plaintiffs Memorandum of Costs filed on 7/20/22. As such, the instant motion is placed off calendar as moot.
JEFFREY DRUMMEN VS. JULIA SURTSHIN ET. AL.
PC058730
Dec 01, 2022
Los Angeles County, CA
Janeke’s Motion to Compel Acknowledgement of Satisfaction of Judgment: The motion appears to be frivolous and/or moot. Allen recorded an unequivocal, notarized acknowledgment of full satisfaction of judgment entered in this action on March 29, 2017. RJN, Exh. B. On September 5, 2017, Allen filed an unequivocal, notarized acknowledgment of full satisfaction of judgment in this case.
CHARLES JANEKE VS JULIETTE Z ALLEN ET AL
BC583198
Sep 25, 2017
Los Angeles County, CA
Real Property
Quiet Title
Causal Document & Date Filed : Petition - Other, 01/12/2018 Initiating petitioner Luis Recharte nominally attempted to specially administer his mother's probate estate in order to obtain acknowledgment of satisfaction of judgment on a judgment which had never been satisfied.
IN THE MATTER OF BERTHA TELLO
56-2017-00499656-PR-LA-OXN
Feb 22, 2018
Ventura County, CA
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Please wait a moment while we load this page.