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”). On January 30, 2019, Judgment Creditor filed an Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment (the “Acknowledgment”). Realizing that it was a mistake, Judgment Creditor filed a Motion to Vacate Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment on May 20, 2019.
Judgment Creditor seeks to vacate the Acknowledgment under CCP § 473(b) based on “clerical error.” (Motion p. 2.) “Section 473(b) provides for both discretionary and mandatory relief. [Citation.]” (Pagnini v. Union Bank, N.A. (2018) 28 Cal.App.5th 298, 302.) Having reviewed the moving pap
Type
Other Real Property (not eminent domain, landlord/tenant, foreclosure) (Limited Jurisdiction)
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
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”). On January 30, 2019, Judgment Creditor filed an Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment (the “Acknowledgment”). Realizing that it was a mistake, Judgment Creditor filed a Motion to Vacate Acknowledgment of Satisfaction of Judgment on May 20, 2019.
Judgment Creditor seeks to vacate the Acknowledgment under CCP § 473(b) based on “clerical error.” (Motion p. 2.) “Section 473(b) provides for both discretionary and mandatory relief. [Citation.]” (Pagnini v. Union Bank, N.A. (2018) 28 Cal.App.5th 298, 302.) Having reviewed the moving pap