Motion to Set Aside or Vacate Judgment, Default or Dismissal in Robert Elliott vs. Mechanics Bank, a California corporation, as the Successor-in-Interest to Rabobank, N.A., a California corporation, et al.| Trellis.Law

On December 20, 2021 a MechanicsBank - NOM_Mtn to Set Aside Default_2022-4-14+EX+S was filed involving a dispute between Robert T. Elliott, and Mechanics Bank, A California Corporation, As The Successor-In-Interest To Rabobank, N.A., A California Corporation, Mechanics Bank, A California Corporation, Successor By Merger To Rabobank, N.A., Mechanics Bank, Successor-In-Interest By Merger To Rabobank, N.A., Rabobank, N.A., A California Corporation, for Breach of Contract/Warranty Unlimited (06) in the District Court of Monterey County.

Preview
1 Matthew S. Kennedy – CSB No. 125620
MATTHEW S. KENNEDY, A Professional Law Corporation
2 Post Office Box 1031
San Luis Obispo, California 93406-1031
3 (805) 544-5002 / (805) 544-5003
E-Mail: msk@KennedyLawRealty.com
4
Attorneys for Defendant Mechanics Bank,
5 successor-in-interest by merger to Rabobank, N.A.
(Rabobank, N.A. erroneously also named)
6
7
8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9 COUNTY OF MONTEREY
10
11 ROBERT T. ELLIOTT, CASE NO. 21 CV 003944
Assigned to: Hon. Carrie M. Panetta
12 Plaintiff,
13 vs. NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO
VACATE / SET ASIDE REQUEST TO
14 MECHANICS BANK, a California ENTER DEFAULT OR, IF APPLICABLE,
corporation, as the Successor-in-Interest to ANY DEFAULT ENTERED; DECLARATION
15 Rabobank, N.A., a California corporation; OF MATTHEW S. KENNEDY; AND
RABOBANK, N.A., a California EXHIBITS
16 corporation; and DOES 1 - 40, inclusive,
DATE: May 27, 2022
17 Defendants. TIME: 8:30 a.m.
DEPT: 14
18
19 Complaint filed: December 20, 2021
CMC: April 19, 2022
20 Trial Date: None Assigned
21
22 TO PLAINTIFF ROBERT T. ELLIOTT AND HIS ATTORNEY OF RECORD:
23 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on May 27, 2022, at 8:30 a.m., or as soon thereafter as the
24 matter can be heard, in Department 14, of the above-titled Court located at 1200 Aguajito Road,
25 Monterey, California, Defendant Mechanics Bank, successor-in-interest by merger to Rabobank,
26 N.A., and Rabobank, N.A., erroneously also named, will move the Court for an order setting
27 aside the defaults entered against them on March 25, 2022. This Motion is made pursuant to Code
28 of Civil Procedure section 473(b).
-1-
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO VACATE / SET ASIDE REQUEST TO ENTER DEFAULT OR, IF
APPLICABLE, ANY DEFAULT ENTERED; DECLARATION OF MATTHEW S. KENNEDY; AND EXHIBITS
1 This Motion to set aside entry of default is based upon this Notice, the attached
2 Memorandum of Points and Authorities, the attached Declaration of Matthew S. Kennedy and
3 accompanying exhibits, all pleadings, papers and records on file in this action, and upon such
4 other matters as may be presented at the hearing of this Motion.
5 Dated: April 14, 2022 MATTHEW S. KENNEDY,
A Professional Law Corporation
6 Digitally signed by
Matthew Scott
Kennedy, Esq.
7 Date: 2022.04.14

By: /s/ Matthew S. Kennedy, Esq. 07:13:03 -07'00'

8
MATTHEW S. KENNEDY
9 Attorney for Defendant Mechanics Bank,
successor-in-interest by merger to Rabobank, N.A.
10 (Rabobank, N.A. erroneously also named)
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-2-
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO VACATE / SET ASIDE REQUEST TO ENTER DEFAULT OR, IF
APPLICABLE, ANY DEFAULT ENTERED; DECLARATION OF MATTHEW S. KENNEDY; AND EXHIBITS
1 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
2 I. RELEVANT FACTS.
3 This action arises from a Judgment entered on July 8, 2008 in the Monterey County
4 Superior Court Case No. M82496 in favor of Rabobank, N.A. and against Plaintiff Robert T.
5 Elliott, among others. [See Complaint, p. 3.]
6 On or about August 30, 2019 Defendant Mechanics Bank (the Surviving Corporation)
7 became the successor-in-interest by merger to Rabobank, N.A. (the Disappearing Corporation).
8 This merger transferred all right, title, and interest in any sums of money due to Rabobank, N.A.
9 to Mechanics Bank. Legally, Rabobank, N.A. no longer exists and ithas been acquired by
10 Mechanics Bank. [Declaration of Matthew S. Kennedy (“Kennedy Dec.”), ¶¶ 4, 5, attached; Ex.
11 A, Rabobank, N.A. v. Premium Fresh Farms, LLC, et al., Notice of Assignment of Judgment,
12 dtd. April 3, 2022, attached.]
13 While there have been discussions over the years by Plaintiff, initially with Rabobank,
14 N.A., and then following the merger in 2019, with Defendant, Mechanics Bank, as well as with
15 the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) and Small Business Development Center
16 (SBDC), regarding the Judgment, despite Plaintiff’s assertions there has been no resolution.
17 Hence, on December 20, 2021, Plaintiff chose to file the within action against Defendant
18 Mechanics Bank, successor-in-interest by merger to Rabobank, N.A., and Rabobank, N.A.,
19 erroneously also named, for breach of a purported settlement agreement that the Bank strongly
20 denies exists or ever existed. [Kennedy Dec., ¶ 6.]
21 The Bank was served, via substituted service, with the Complaint on January 7, 2022. On
22 February 4, 2022, the Bank’s attorney, Matthew S. Kennedy, began a dialogue with attorney
23 Nina Patane, counsel for Plaintiff Elliott, for the parties to explore early resolution with an
24 extension for the Bank to answer the Complaint to March 2, 2022. [Kennedy Dec., ¶ 7.]
25 On March 16, 2022, while up to said date the parties were still engaged in early resolution
26 discussions, Plaintiff’s counsel advised Attorney Kennedy to “Please file an answer to the
27 complaint forthwith.” On March 17, 2022, Attorney Kennedy responded that “we have put aside
28 preparation of a responsive pleading” to continue discussing resolution and “we will need two
-1-
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO VACATE / SET ASIDE REQUEST TO ENTER DEFAULT OR, IF
APPLICABLE, ANY DEFAULT ENTERED; DECLARATION OF MATTHEW S. KENNEDY; AND EXHIBITS
1 weeks to formulate and file a responsive pleading.” Further, Attorney Kennedy affirmed that
2 “the Bank will file its responsive pleading by Wednesday, March 30, 2022.” [Ex. B, Email
3 string between Attorney Kennedy and Attorney Patane from Mar. 16, 2022 through Apr. 11,
4 2022 (“Email String between Counsel”), at pp. 8-10, attached.] Attorney Patane made no
5 objection to the Bank filing a responsive pleading by March 30, 2022. [Kennedy Dec., ¶¶ 8, 9;
6 Ex. B, Email String between Counsel, pp. 8-10.]
7 Instead, without notice or warning, Plaintiff Elliott, through Attorney Nina Patane, filed
8 a Request to Enter Default against the named Defendants on Friday, March 25, 2022 and seeking
9 a Court judgment. [Ex. B, Email String between Counsel, pp. 8-10.] This prevented the Bank
10 from filing its Answer to the Complaint and Case Management Conference Statement. [Kennedy
11 Dec., ¶ 10.]
12 Thereafter, there were numerous emails between counsel with Attorney Kennedy
13 forwarding a Stipulation and Order to set aside the default and Attorney Patane pushing back
14 wanting to see the Answer before agreeing to sign the Stipulation and/or being too busy to address
15 setting aside the default. [Kennedy Dec., ¶ 11; Ex. B, Email String between Counsel, pp. 1-8.]
16 On Monday morning, April 11, 2022, Attorney Kennedy emailed Attorney Patane,
17 I have no record any of any response from you to my below E-Mail [Sent:
Wednesday, April 6, 2022 4:54 PM] which was sent extending the benefit
18 of the doubt here that you will sign the Stipulation. If you don’t sign it by
end of day [2022-4-11], then I will conclude you have no intention to do
19 so and I will be required to file a motion to set it aside.
20 I look forward to your professional courtesy in letting me know one way
or other.
21
[Kennedy Dec., ¶ 12; Ex. B, Email String between Counsel, p. 1.]
22
23 Attorney Patane did not respond on April 11. She did not respond until almost 5:00 p.m.
24 on April 12 challenging the contents of the Bank’s proposed Answer as well as challenging the
25 merger/acquisition by Mechanics Bank of Rabobank, N.A. Neither are appropriate conditions to
26 vacate/set aside Plaintiff’s default and litigate the legal issues alleged. Consequently, she did not
27 agree to sign the Stipulation and she did not agree to set aside the default – leaving the Bank no
28 alternative but to file this Motion. [Kennedy Dec., ¶¶ 13, 14.]
-2-
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO VACATE / SET ASIDE REQUEST TO ENTER DEFAULT OR, IF
APPLICABLE, ANY DEFAULT ENTERED; DECLARATION OF MATTHEW S. KENNEDY; AND EXHIBITS
1 Defendant Mechanics Bank, successor-in-interest by merger to Rabobank, N.A., has
2 spent two weeks attempting to request Plaintiff’s counsel to set aside the default. However,
3 Plaintiff’s counsel Attorney Patane has, par for the course, delayed responding to the Bank’s
4 requests and when she finally does, she raises roadblocks irrelevant to the issue of setting aside
5 the default request. [Kennedy Dec., ¶ 15; Ex. B, Email String between Counsel.]
6 As of the drafting of this Motion and upon checking the Monterey County Superior Court
7 online case search, there has been no actual Notice of Entry of Default filed, nor any request by
8 Plaintiff Elliott for Court judgment or Judgment entered against the Bank. 1 Accordingly,
9 Defendant Mechanics Bank, successor-in-interest by merger to Rabobank, N.A., seeks this Court
10 to issue an Order vacating Plaintiff’s Request to Enter Default and, if applicable, and default
11 entered and allowing the Bank to file its Proposed Answer, attached as Exhibit C. [Kennedy Dec.,
12 ¶ 16.]
13 II. PURSUANT TO CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE SECTION 473(b), THE COURT
SHOULD VACATE / SET ASIDE PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST TO ENTER
14 DEFAULT BASED ON INADVERTENCE, SURPRISE, OR EXCUSABLE
NEGLECT.
15
16 Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (b), states in relevant part:
17 The court may, upon any terms as may be just, relieve a party of his or her
legal representative from a judgment, dismissal, order, or other proceeding
18 taken against him taken against him or her through his or her mistake,
inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect. Application for this relief
19 shall be accompanied by a copy of the answer or other pleading proposed
to be filed therein, . . . and shall be made within a reasonable time, in no
20 case exceeding six months, after the judgment, order or proceeding was
taken.
21
22 The policy of the law is to have every case tried on its merits and that policy views with
23 disfavor a party who, regardless of the merits, attempts to take advantage of the mistake,
24 inadvertence, or neglect of his adversary. This policy is so strong that “any doubts in applying
25
26
1
Following Plaintiff’sRequest to Enter Default filed on March 25, 2022, Plaintiffthrough Attorney Patane
27 deposited jury fees and filed a Case Management Conference Statement on April 4, 2022. Yet, Attorney Patane has
not agreed to vacate/set aside Plaintiff’s Request to Enter Default.
28
-3-
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO VACATE / SET ASIDE REQUEST TO ENTER DEFAULT OR, IF
APPLICABLE, ANY DEFAULT ENTERED; DECLARATION OF MATTHEW S. KENNEDY; AND EXHIBITS
1 section 473 must be resolved in favor of the party seeking relief from default.” (Elston v. City of
2 Turlock (1985) 38 Cal.3d 227, 233; Slusher v. Durrer (1977) 69 Cal.App.3d 747, 753.)
3 In the present case, when Plaintiff’s attorney requested on March 16, 2022 that
4 Defendant’s attorney file an answer “forthwith”, Defendant’s attorney represented, without any
5 objection by Plaintiff, that a responsive pleading would be filed no later than Wednesday, March
6 30. The Bank would have filed its Answer timely but for Plaintiff’s attorney surreptitiously filing
7 a Request to Enter Default on Friday, March 25 without any warning or advance notice to
8 Attorney Kennedy. Thus, the Bank’s inability to file its Answer to the Complaint resulted from
9 the mistake or surprise as set out in Attorney Kennedy’s declaration, attached.
10 Further, the Bank brings this Motion within two weeks of learning of Plaintiff’s Request
11 to Enter Default and after numerous good faith attempts to engage Plaintiff’s attorney to stipulate
12 to vacate the default request. There has yet to be a Notice of Entry of Default or a judgment.
13 Defendant Mechanics Bank, successor-in-interest by merger to Rabobank, N.A., and its attorney
14 Matthew S. Kennedy attaches the Bank’s proposed Answer, and Attorney Kennedy will appear
15 at the Case Management Conference on April 19, 2022, even though this Motion cannot be heard
16 until May 27, 2022.
17 III. CONCLUSION.
18 Based on the foregoing, Defendant Mechanics Bank, successor-in-interest by merger to
19 Rabobank, N.A., respectfully requests that the Court vacate and/or set aside Plaintiff’s Request
20 to Enter Default filed on March 25, 2022 and, if applicable, any default entered against
21 Mechanics Bank, successor-in-interest by merger to Rabobank, N.A.
22 Dated: April 14, 2022 MATTHEW S. KENNEDY,
A Professional Law Corporation Digitally signed by
23 Matthew Scott
Kennedy, Esq.
Date: 2022.04.14
24 /s/ Matthew S. Kennedy, Esq. 07:13:35 -07'00'

25 MATTHEW S. KENNEDY
Attorney for Defendant Mechanics Bank,
26 successor-in-interest by merger to Rabobank, N.A.
(Rabobank, N.A. erroneously also named)
27
28
-4-
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO VACATE / SET ASIDE REQUEST TO ENTER DEFAULT OR, IF
APPLICABLE, ANY DEFAULT ENTERED; DECLARATION OF MATTHEW S. KENNEDY; AND EXHIBITS
1 DECLARATION OF MATTHEW S. KENNEDY
2 I, Matthew S. Kennedy, declare as follows:
3 1. I am an attorney licensed to practice in the State of California, and the attorney of
4 record for Defendant Mechanics Bank, successor-in-interest by merger to Rabobank, N.A., in the
5 within action. I submit this declaration in support of Defendant Mechanics Bank’s Notice of
6 Motion and Motion to Vacate/Set Aside Plaintiff’s Request to Enter Default.
7 2. The facts contained herein are within my personal knowledge and if called to testify
8 thereto would competently and truthfully do so.
9 3. This action arises from a Judgment entered on July 8, 2008 in the Monterey County
10 Superior Court Case No. M82496 in favor of Rabobank, N.A. and against Plaintiff Robert T.
11 Elliott, among others. Defendants in that matter defaulted and breached their loan agreement with
12 Rabobank N.A.
13 4. On or about August 30, 2019 Defendant Mechanics Bank became the successor-in-
14 interest by merger to Rabobank, N.A. This merger transferred all right, title, and interest in any
15 sums of money due to Rabobank, N.A. to Mechanics Bank. Legally, Rabobank, N.A. no longer
16 exists and it has been acquired by Mechanics Bank. For the Court’s further reference, in addition
17 to the public-at-large assessable records on this merger, see
18 https://www.mechanicsbank.com/About-Us/Who-We-Are/News-Press/2019-News-Articles-
19 Press-Releases/Mechanics-Bank-Completes-Acquisition-of-Rabobank-NA .
20 5. Moreover, to further clarify the acquisition in light of Plaintiff Elliott’s within action,
21 on April 3, 2022 I prepared a Notice of Assignment of Judgment on behalf of Mechanics Bank
22 and then filed the Notice in Monterey County Superior Court Case No. M82496, Rabobank, N.A.
23 v. Premium Fresh Farms, LLC, et al. on April 4, 2022. A true and correct copy of the Notice of
24 Assignment is attached as Exhibit “A”.
25 6. There have been discussions over the years by Plaintiff Elliott and his various
26 attorneys, initially with Rabobank, N.A., and then following the merger in 2019, with Defendant,
27 Mechanics Bank, as well as with the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) and Small
28 Business Development Center (SBDC), regarding satisfying the Judgment. However, despite
-5-
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO VACATE / SET ASIDE REQUEST TO ENTER DEFAULT OR, IF
APPLICABLE, ANY DEFAULT ENTERED; DECLARATION OF MATTHEW S. KENNEDY; AND EXHIBITS
1 Plaintiff’s assertions there has been no resolution or agreement. On December 20, 2021 Plaintiff
2 Elliott chose to file the within action against Defendant Mechanics Bank, successor-in-interest
3 by merger to Rabobank, N.A., and Rabobank, N.A., erroneously also named, for breach of a
4 purported settlement agreement that the Bank strongly denies exists or ever existed.
5 7. The Bank was served, via substituted service, with the Complaint on January 7, 2022.
6 On February 4, 2022, I began a dialogue via email and by telephone with attorney Nina Patane,
7 counsel for Plaintiff Elliott, for the parties to explore early resolution with an extension for the
8 Bank to answer the Complaint to March 2, 2022. Attached as Exhibit “B” is a true and correct
9 copy of the email string between Attorney Patane and I from March 16, 2022 through April 11,
10 2022. Emails from my initial contact with Attorney Patane on February 7, 2022 through March
11 15, 2022 have been redacted from the email string as they primarily contain confidential
12 settlement communications under California Evidence Code section 1152 and Federal Rule of
13 Evidence 408.
14 8. On March 16, 2022, while up to said date the parties were stillengaged in early
15 resolution discussions, Attorney Patane advised me to “Please file an answer to the complaint
16 forthwith.” On March 17, 2022, I responded that “we have put aside preparation of a responsive
17 pleading” to continue discussing resolution and “we will need two weeks to formulate and file a
18 responsive pleading.” I affirmed to Attorney Patane that I would file the Bank’s responsive
19 pleading by Wednesday, March 30, 2022.” See Exhibit “B” at page 10, attached.
20 9. I did not receive via email or a voicemail with any objection from Attorney Patane to
21 the Bank filing a responsive pleading by March 30, 2022.
22 10. Then, without notice or warning, I learned on Tuesday, March 29, 2022 that Attorney
23 Nina Patane filed a Request to Enter Default against the named Defendants on Friday, March 25,
24 2022, and seeking a Court judgment. This prevented me from filing an Answer to the Complaint
25 on behalf of Mechanics Bank and its Case Management Conference Statement.
26 11. Thereafter, I had numerous emails with Attorney Patane forwarding her a Stipulation
27 and Order to set aside the default and Attorney Patane pushing back wanting to see the Answer
28
-6-
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO VACATE / SET ASIDE REQUEST TO ENTER DEFAULT OR, IF
APPLICABLE, ANY DEFAULT ENTERED; DECLARATION OF MATTHEW S. KENNEDY; AND EXHIBITS
1 before agreeing to sign the Stipulation and/or being too busy to address setting aside the default.
2 See Exhibit “B” at pages 1 through 8, attached.
3 12. On Monday morning, April 11, 2022, I emailed Attorney Patane (see Exhibit “B” at
4 page 1), in pertinent part:
5 I have no record any of any response from you to my below E-Mail
[Sent: Wednesday, April 6, 2022 4:54 PM] which was sent extending the
6 benefit of the doubt here that you will sign the Stipulation. If you don’t
7 sign it by end of day [2022-4-11], then I will conclude you have no
intention to do so and I will be required to file a motion to set it aside.
8 I look forward to your professional courtesy in letting me know
9 one way or other.

10 13. Attorney Patane did not respond on April 11. She did not respond until almost 5:00
11 p.m. on April 12 challenging the contents of the Bank’s proposed Answer as well as challenging
12 the merger/acquisition by Mechanics Bank of Rabobank, N.A. In my professional opinion,
13 neither are appropriate issues to vacate/set aside Plaintiff’s Request to Enter Default; these are
14 legal issues best suited to the course of litigation.
15 14. Consequently, at the close of business on April 12, 2022, Attorney Patane had not
16 signed the Stipulation, nor did she agree to set aside the default – leaving me no alternative but
17 to file this Motion.
18 15. I spent two weeks on behalf of Defendant Mechanics Bank, successor-in-interest by
19 merger to Rabobank, N.A., attempting in good faith to have Attorney Patane set aside the Request
20 to Enter Default to no avail. This was after I had agreed and represented to file the Bank’s Answer
21 on or before March 30, 2022.
22 16. Further, attached as Exhibit “C” is a true and correct copy of the proposed Answer to
23 Complaint of Defendant Mechanics Bank, successor-in-interest by merger to Rabobank, N.A.
24 that I intend to file with the Court. A previous form of this Answer was forwarded to Attorney
25 Patane with a draft Stipulation and Order on March 31, 2022; I amended that form of Answer on
26 April 3, 2022, and together with an updated Stipulation, I E-Mailed the same to attorney Patane
27 under my E-Mail to her [Sent: Sunday, April 3, 2022 2:07 PM] See Exhibit “B” at pgs. 3-4, attached.
28
-7-
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO VACATE / SET ASIDE REQUEST TO ENTER DEFAULT OR, IF
APPLICABLE, ANY DEFAULT ENTERED; DECLARATION OF MATTHEW S. KENNEDY; AND EXHIBITS
1 17. As of the drafting of this Motion, on April 14, 2022 I checked the Monterey County
2 Superior Court online case search, there has been no actual Notice of Entry of Default filed, nor
3 any request by Plaintiff Elliott for Court judgment or Judgment entered against the Bank.
4 Executed on April 14, 2022 at Nuevo Vallarta, Nayarit, Mexico. I declare under penalty
5 of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
Digitally signed by
6 Matthew Scott
Kennedy, Esq.
Date: 2022.04.14
7 /s/ Matthew S. Kennedy, Esq. 07:14:06 -07'00'

Matthew S. Kennedy, Declarant
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-8-
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO VACATE / SET ASIDE REQUEST TO ENTER DEFAULT OR, IF
APPLICABLE, ANY DEFAULT ENTERED; DECLARATION OF MATTHEW S. KENNEDY; AND EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT “A”
1 Matthew S. Kennedy - State Bar No. 125620
MATTHEWS. KENNEDY
2 A Professional Law Corporation ELECTRONICALLY FILED BY
Post Office Box 1031 Superior Court of California,
3 San Luis Obispo, California 93406-1031 County of Monterey
(805) 544-5002 / (805) 544-5003 On 4/4/2022 8:00 AM
4 E-Mail: msk@KennedyLawRealty.com By: Mariela Hernandez, Deputy
5 Attorneys for Judgment Creditor
Mechanics Bank, successor by merger to
6 Rabobank, N.A.
7

8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9 COUNTY OF MONTEREY
10 MONTEREY DIVISION - UNLIMITED CIVIL
11

12 RABOBANK, N.A., CASE NO: M82496
13 Judgment Creditor,
NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF
14 vs. JUDGMENT
15 Premium Fresh Farms, LLC, etal.

16 Judgement Debtors.

17 Judgment Entered: July 08, 2008
18
19

20 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT effective on or about August 30, 2019, Mechanics

21 Bank acquired by merger, Rabobank, N.A. [original Plaintiff/ Judgment Creditor herein].

22 Mechanics Bank is now the successor in interest to original judgment creditor, Rabobank, N.A.

23 Judgment Creditor, Mechanics Bank is now the assignee, holder and owner of the within

24 judgment formally in favor of original Judgment Creditor, Rabobank, N.A. and against Judgment
25 Debtors Premium Fresh Farms, LLC, et. al. ("Judgment"), and said merger transferred all right,

26 title, and interest in any sums of money due to original judgment creditor, Rabobank, N.A. by
27 reason of the Judgment to Judgment Creditor, Mechanics Bank.
28 ///

- 1-
Rabobank, N.A. v. Premium Fresh Farms, LLC, etal.
Monterey County Sup. Ct. Case No: M82496
EXHIBIT "A"
NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF JUDGMENT
1 DATED: April 3, 2022 MATTHEWS. KENNEDY
A Professional Law Corporation
2 Digitally signed by Matthew
Scott Kennedy, Esq.
3 Date: 2022.04.03 13:34:33 -07'00'
By: /s/ Matthew S. Kennedy, Esq.
4 MATTHEWS. KENNEDY
Attorneys for Judgment Creditor, Mechanics
5
Bank, successor by merger to
6 Rabobank, N.A.

9
10

14
15

19
20

23
24

-2-
Rabobank, N.A. v. Premium Fresh Farms, LLC, eta!.
Monterey County Sup. Ct. Case No: M82496
EXHIBIT "A"
NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF JUDGMENT
1
PROOF OF SERVICE
2
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
3
I am employed in the County of San Luis Obispo, State of California. I am over the age
4 of 18 and not a party to the within action; my business address is Post Office Box 1031, San Luis
Obispo, California 93406-1031.
5
On April 3, 2022, I served the foregoing document described as NOTICE 0
6 ASSIGNMENT OF JUDGMENT on the interested parties in this action addressed as follows:
7 SEE ATTACHED MAILING I SERVICE LIST

8 The following is the procedure in which service of this document was effected:

9 D BY MAIL: I am "readily familiar" with the firm's practice of collection and processing
correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with the U.S. Postal
10 Service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at San Luis Obispo,
California, in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of the party
11 served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is
more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit.
12
0 BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY: I deposited such envelope, with delivery fees paid or
13 provided for, in a box or other facility regularly maintained by UPS/Federal Express, or
delivered to a driver or courier authorized by UPS/Federal Express to receive documents.
14
D BY FACSIMILE: I caused this document to be transmitted via facsimile to the facsimile
15 nurnber(s) of the addressee(s).

16 C2:I BY E-MAIL: I caused this document to be transmitted via e-mail to the e-mail
address(es) listed for the addressee(s). D The document is being transmitted via e-mail
17 pursuant to agreement of counsel authorizing service of the document via e-mail; or C2:I
The document is being transmitted via e-mail as a courtesy only and not pursuant to any
18 stipulation of counsel authorizing service of the document via e-mail.
C2:I BY E-MAIL: Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1010.6 and California
19 Rules of Court, rule 2.251, I caused this document to be transmitted via e-mail to the
e-mail address(es) listed for the addressee(s). No electronic message or other indication
20 that the transmission was unsuccessful was received within a reasonable time after the
transmission.
21
C2:I ELECTRONIC SERVICE: Pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rules 2.250 et seq.
22 and 2.251(a)(2)(B) and California Code of Civil Procedure section 1010.6(C)(2). The
document was submitted to Odyssey eFileCA to be electronically filed with the above
23 referenced California Superior Court (the "Court") and Odyssey eFileCA was instructed
to electronically serve the document; or C2:I The document is being transmitted via
24 Odyssey eFileCA as a courtesy only and not pursuant to any stipulation of counsel
authorizim! service of the document via e-mail.
25 Executed on April 3, 2022, at Nuevo Vallarta, Nayarit, Mexico. I declare under penalty
of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true and correct.
26
By: Matthew S. Kennedy /s/ Matthew S. Kennedy, Esq.
27 Digitally signed by Matthew
Scott Kennedy, Esq.
28 Date: 2022.04.03 13:34:55
-07'00'

-3-
Rabobank, N.A. v. Premium Fresh Farms, LLC, eta!.
Monterey County Sup. Ct. Case No: M82496
EXHIBIT "A"
NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF JUDGMENT
1 PROOF OF SERVICE MAILING LIST
MECHANICS BANK, Successor by Merger, Rabobank, N.A. v. Premium Fresh Farms,
2 LLC, etal.,
Monterey County Sup. Ct. Case No: M82496
3
Paul W. Moncrief, Esq. Attorney for Judgment Debtors John D.
4
Moncrief & Hart, PC, Tamagni, James S. Tamagni, and Richard J
5 16 W Gabilan St. Tamagni
Salinas, CA 93901-2713
6 Tel: 831-759-0900
E-Mail: paul@moncriefhart.com
7
Nina M. Patane Attorney for Judgment Debtor Robert T
8 Patane Gumberg Avila, LLP Elliott
4 Rossi Circle, Ste 231
9 Salinas, CA 93907
Tel: 831.755.1461
10 Email: npatane@pglawfirm.com

13
14

17
18

19
20
21
22
23

25
26

27
28

-4-
Rabobank, N.A. v. Premium Fresh Farms, LLC, eta!.
Monterey County Sup. Ct. Case No: M82496

EXHIBIT "A"
NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF JUDGMENT
EXHIBIT “B”
From: Matthew S. Kennedy
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2022 8:04 AM
To: Nina Patane
Cc: Christina Miccoli
Subject: RE: Robert T. Elliott v. Mechanics Bank, etal | Monterey Sup. Ct., Case No. 21CV003944
Importance: High

Good morning Nina, I have no record any of any response from you to my below E-Mail [Sent:
Wednesday, April 6, 2022 4:54 PM] which was sent extending the benefit of the doubt here that you
will sign the Stipulation. If you don’t sign it by end of day [2022-4-11], then I will conclude you
have no intention to do so and I will be required to file a motion to set it aside.
I look forward to your professional courtesy in letting me know one way or other.
Thank you, standing by for your confirmation ...
Please confirm your receipt of this E-Mail - thank you.
Best regards,
Matthew S. Kennedy, Esq.

From: Matthew S. Kennedy
Sent: Wednesday, April 6, 2022 4:54 PM
To: 'Nina Patane'
Cc: 'Christina Miccoli'
Subject: RE: Robert T. Elliott v. Mechanics Bank, etal | Monterey Sup. Ct., Case No. 21CV003944

Hi Nina, thank you for the below E-Mails [pasted to this E-Mail string - Sent: Wednesday, April 6,
2022 3:34 PM | Sent: Wednesday, April 6, 2022 4:02 PM]. There is only one Defendant here –
Mechanics Bank, successor by merger to Rabobank, N.A., and this office represents that party to
this action.
You can satisfy yourself with regard to the same as this litigation progresses. For now, I need to
get this Stipulation | CMC filed and upon the order being issued, the Bank’s Answer on file, so
that we can be prepared to have a meaningful discussion with the judge at the April 19th CMC
hearing.
I await your decision on signing the Stipulation as requested.
Have a nice evening.
Please confirm your receipt of this E-Mail - thank you.
Best regards,

Matthew S. Kennedy, Esq.

From: Nina Patane npatane@pglawfirm.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 6, 2022 4:02 PM
To: Matthew S. Kennedy msk@kennedylawrealty.com
Cc: Christina Miccoli cmiccoli@pglawfirm.com
Subject: Re: Robert T. Elliott v. Mechanics Bank, etal | Monterey Sup. Ct., Case No. 21CV003944
I also received some info on Rabobank and an assignment. I want to evaluate to be sure you represent both
defendants.
Nina Patane
Sent from my iPhone
EXHIBIT "B"
Page 1 of 10
From: Nina Patane npatane@pglawfirm.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 6, 2022 3:34 PM
To: Matthew S. Kennedy msk@kennedylawrealty.com
Cc: Christina Miccoli cmiccoli@pglawfirm.com
Subject: Re: Robert T. Elliott v. Mechanics Bank, etal | Monterey Sup. Ct., Case No. 21CV003944
Hi Matt. I have not forgotten-just managing priorities. I need to review and evaluate the various pieces of
information you sent. Haven’t had the time as I am in depositions on a very serious case.
Nina Patane
Sent from my iPhone

From: Matthew S. Kennedy
Sent: Wednesday, April 6, 2022 2:55 PM
To: 'Nina Patane'
Cc: 'Christina Miccoli'
Subject: RE: Robert T. Elliott v. Mechanics Bank, etal | Monterey Sup. Ct., Case No. 21CV003944
Importance: High

Good afternoon Nina, in your below E-Mail [Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2022 12:46 PM] you
stated “I have generally discussed this with my client and we will sign a properly prepared
stipulation to set aside with the answer to be filed attached as an exhibit. ”.
I complied with that request and sent you a Stipulation with the Answer attached [Sent:
Thursday, March 31, 2022 2:52 PM].

You responded in your E-Mail [Sent: Friday, April 1, 2022 5:14 PM] “Hi Matt. Please finalize
answer and indicate in stipulation the attached answer shall be filed immediately upon entry of
order.”

I complied with that request and sent you a Stipulation with the Answer attached that as I
explained required the Answer to be filed on the next court day following the Court’s service of
the Order [Sent: Saturday, April 2, 2022 7:30 AM].

In my E-Mail [Sent: Sunday, April 3, 2022 2:07 PM] I sent you the latest draft of the Stipulation
redated to April 4, 2022 and the revised Answer requesting you sign and return of the Stipulation
for my e-filing and so that I could also timely file my CMC statement on April 4.

I have now complied with all of your requests without further objection from you. Inexplicably,
despite my do so, you have become nonresponsive since Friday, April 1, 2022.
Since then, on April 4, you have filed your CMC, and pos

Case Info

Case No.

(Subscribe to View)

Document Filed Date

April 14, 2022

Case Filing Date

December 20, 2021

County

Parties

Andrea Cruz Avila Attorney for the Plaintiff
Matthew Scott Kennedy Attorney for the Defendant
Mechanics Bank, a California corporation, as the Successor-in-Interest to Rabobank, N.A., a California corporation Defendant
MECHANICS BANK, a California corporation, successor by merger to Rabobank, N.A. Defendant
Mechanics Bank, successor-in-interest by merger to Rabobank, N.A. (Rabobank, N.A. erroneously also named) Defendant
Nina Michele Patane Attorney for the Plaintiff
Rabobank, N.A., a California corporation Defendant
Robert T. Elliott Plaintiff
Scott Kennedy Attorneys for Defendants
MATTHEW SHELTON Attorneys for Defendants
Paul Moncrief Attorney
David Shapiro Attorney
Robert Tapscott Attorney
Michael Sosnowski Attorney

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Document for Robert Elliott vs. Mechanics Bank, a California corporation, as the Successor-in-Interest to Rabobank, N.A., a California corporation, et al.

Preview

Related Topics

Case Info

Parties