Source: https://trellis.law/ca/motion-type/application-for-and-renewal-of-judgment-329
Timestamp: 2020-07-15 04:11:00
Document Index: 139080372

Matched Legal Cases: ['§683', '§683', '§683', '§ 70626', '§ 683', '§683', '§683', '§683', '§ 473', '§683', '§683', '§683', '§683', '§ 638', '§683', '§683', '§683', '§683', '§683', '§683', '§ 683']

Application for and Renewal of Judgment?
In California, a money judgment or a judgment for possession or sale of property is subject to a ten (10) year statute of limitations; after ten years, the judgment terminates and any lien or liability for enforcement is extinguished, even by an independent action. (California Code of Civil Procedure §683.020.)
"It appears that the ten-year period to enforce a judgment under §683.020 is a firm time period too, not subject to tolling." (Small V. Allen, 30-2018-01001426-Cu-Mc-Cjc (4/11/2019).)
“Unless the judgment is renewed [by an action on the judgment or by extension of a renewed judgment] a judgment is enforceable only for 10 years; at the end of this period, enforcement of the judgment is barred and any liens created by the enforcement process are extinguished. No further action, including levy, sale, collection, or delivery pursuant to the judgment, or pursuant to a writ or order issued to enforce the judgment, may take place…" (Pratali v. Gates (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th 632.)
"The enforcement period of a judgment is 10 years unless a judgment creditor timely files an application for renewal of judgment within that 10 year period, and the failure to do so is a substantive defense to enforcement of the judgment." (Continental Kfm Llc Vs Tan, 05Cc03493 (11/3/2017).)
However, the enforceability period for a money judgment or a judgment for possession or sale of property may be renewed (and therefore extended) by filing an application for renewal with the court that entered the judgment, served on the judgment debtor personally or by first-class mail, with proof of service filed with the court clerk. (California Code of Civil Procedure §§683.140 and 683.160.)
Filing the renewal application (and paying the appropriate filing fee, Gov.C. § 70626(b)) results in automatic renewal of the judgment. No court order or new judgment is required. The court clerk simply enters the renewal of judgment in the court records. (CCP § 683.150; Goldman v. Simpson (2008) 160 Cal. App.4th 255.)
Lien Pursuant to a Judgment
"[U]nless a judgment is renewed, a judgment lien on real property ends 10 years from date of the entry of the judgment…" Federal Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Charlton (1993) 17 Cal.App.4th 1066.
A renewal may be filed for a lump-sum money judgment or a judgment for possession or sale of property:
At any time before the original 10-year enforceability period ends; or
In the case of an additional renewal, at least five (5) years after the date the previous renewal was filed, but before the renewed 10-year enforceability ends. California Code of Civil Procedure §§683.120 - 683.130.
The ten year period within which to renew a judgment "is calculated from “date of entry of a money judgment,” not the date of notice of a money judgment." (National Credit Acceptance Inc Vs Narvaez, Jaime, 06Cd1391 (10/16/2017); California Code of Civil Procedure §683.020.)
A judgment may be renewed notwithstanding a stay of enforcement of the judgment, but the renewal of the judgment does not affect the stay of enforcement. (California Code of Civil Procedure §683.210.)
"[E]ven though a judgment…is not renewable…because the time for filing an application for renewal has expired, the judgment may be renewed…if the court which entered the judgment determines, on noticed motion filed within two years after the operative date, that authority to enforce the judgment after the 10-year period…would have been granted if a motion had been made…and the court, in its discretion, makes an order authorizing the renewal of the judgment. The notice of motion shall be served personally or by mail on the judgment debtor. A court of general jurisdiction has the power, after final judgment, and regardless of lapse of time, to correct clerical errors in its records, whether made by the clerk, counsel or the court itself, so that the records will conform to and speak the truth. This inherent power is confirmed by statute: 'The court may, upon motion of the injured party, or its own motion, correct clerical mistakes in its judgment or orders as entered, so as to conform to the judgment or order directed.” CCP § 473(d).'" (Columbia Credit Services Inc Vs Shishikyan, Gayane, 05E03363 (8/12/2017).)
Time Period Of Renewal
The renewed judgment extends the enforceability period for ten (10) years from the date the application was filed. (California Code of Civil Procedure §§683.120 and 683.130.)
A lien pursuant to a renewed money judgment is also renewed for ten (10) years from the filing date of the renewal application if a certified copy of the renewal application is recorded with the county recorder in the county where the real property subject to the judgment lien is located. California Code of Civil Procedure §683.180.
However, a judgment lien on an interest in real property that has been transferred subject to the lien is not extended by a renewal application if the transfer was recorded before the application for renewal was filed, unless:
A copy of the renewal application is personally served on the transferee; and
Proof of such service is filed with the court clerk within ninety (90) days after the filing date of the renewal application.
A lien pursuant to a judgment (other than a judgment lien on an interest in real property or an execution lien) is also renewed for ten (10) years from the filing date of the renewal application if, before the expiration of the lien, a certified copy of the application for renewal is served on or filed with the same person and in the same manner as the notice or order that created the lien. California Code of Civil Procedure §683.190.
Renewed Judgment Amount
In all cases, the renewed judgment must equal the amount required to satisfy the judgment on the filing date, including the the filing fee for the renewal application. California Code of Civil Procedure §683.150(c).
An application for renewal of a money judgment must include “the information necessary to compute the amount of the judgment as renewed.” CA Code of Civil Procedure § 638.140(d).
For a money judgment payable in installments:
The renewed judgment will be treated as a lump-sum money judgment due on the application date. California Code of Civil Procedure §683.140(c); and
The renewed judgment will equal:
For a judgment that has not been renewed:
Past due installments;
The costs added to the judgment pursuant to Section 685.090;
The filing fee for the renewal application; and
Accrued interest as of the renewal application filing date. California Code of Civil Procedure §683.150(d).
If the judgment has already been renewed, the additional renewed judgment equals the total of:
The judgment amount under the the previous renewal (including interest);
Unpaid installments that became due after the previous renewal (including interest);
Costs pursuant to Section 685.090 after the previous renewal (including interest); and
The filing fee for the renewal application. California Code of Civil Procedure §683.150(e).
For a judgment for possession or sale of property, the judgment is renewed for any remaining performance under the original judgment. (California Code of Civil Procedure §683.150(f).)
Vacating A Renewal
A judgment debtor may move to vacate or modify the renewal (serving notice of the motion on the judgment creditor personally or by mail) within thirty (30) days from the date that notice of the renewal application is filed with the court clerk. (California Code of Civil Procedure §§683.160 and 683.170.)
The renewal may be vacated on any ground that would be a defense to an action on the judgment, including:
The plaintiff is guilty of misconduct;
Suit on the judgment is barred by the statute of limitations in the state where enforcement is sought, Fidelity Creditor Service, Inc. v. Browne (2001) 89 Cal.App.4th 195; or
An allegation that:
The amount stated in the renewed judgment is incorrect; or
The renewal application was filed less than five (5) years from the date of the previous renewal. California Code of Civil Procedure §683.170.
If a renewal is vacated for either stating an incorrect judgment amount or being filed too early, the judgment creditor may reapply for renewal of the judgment in the correct time period or in the correct amount.
Useful Rulings on Application for and Renewal of Judgment
Small v. Allen
Defendant Deanna Allen’s Motion to Expunge the lis pendens is GRANTED. Discussion A lis pendens is a provisional remedy which is to be used sparingly. (Formula Inc. v. Superior Court (2008) 168 Cal.App.4th 1455, 1462; BGJ Associates, LLC v. Superior Court (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 952, 967.) “The history of the lis pendens legislation indicates a legislative intent to restrict rather than broaden the...
..t support the recording of a lis pendens.” (Campbell v. Superior Court (2005) 132 Cal.App.4th 904, 912; Wardley Development Inc. v. Superior Court (1989) 213 Cal.App.3d 391, 394.) The cases of Okuda and Coppinger have been unfavorably viewed by subsequent courts, to the extent they differ from this. (See Campbell, at 915.) The analysis of whether the cause of action constitutes a real property cla...
NATIONAL CREDIT ACCEPTANCE INC VS NARVAEZ, JAIME
Assignee Sacor Financial, Inc.’s motion to correct error in rejection of renewal of judgment is DENIED. Background The instant complaint was filed June 09, 2006, and was submitted for arbitration. On September 14, 2006, the Court confirmed the arbitration award in Plaintiff National Credit Acceptance, Inc.’s favor and entered judgment. On December 29, 2010, the judgment was assigned to Sacor Fi...
..of 10 years after the date of entry of a money judgment or a judgment for possession or sale of property: (a) The judgment may not be enforced. (b) All enforcement procedures pursuant to the judgment or to a writ or order issued pursuant to the judgment shall cease. (c) Any lien created by an enforcement procedure pursuant to the judgment is extinguished. Discussion Assignee Sacor Financia...
SHANNON VS DRIGGS
Motion for Order Reopening Case for Additional Evidence Plaintiff Mychael Shannon’s Motion for an order to reopen this case to allow additional evidence is Denied. The motion fails to set forth evidence or authorities sufficient to support the relief sought to allow the plaintiff to reopen this case against the defendant after the ten year statutory period to renew his judgment against the defenda...
..mmission Comment to section 683.020, which defines the period of enforceability, states: “Unless the judgment is renewed [by an action on the judgment or by extension of a renewed judgment] a judgment is enforceable only for 10 years; at the end of this period, enforcement of the judgment is barred and any liens created by the enforcement process are extinguished. No further action, including levy...
CONTINENTAL KFM LLC VS TAN
Judgment debtor’s motion to deem the application for and renewal of judgment void to the extent it has been filed by judgment creditor Continental KFM, Inc. Motion granted. While the mere fact that Continental KFM was not represented by counsel at the time it filed its application does not necessarily render it void (see CLD Construction, Inc. v. City of San Ramon (2004) 120 Cal.App.4th 1141, 1144...
..etary of State and the Franchise Tax Board does not have the privilege of renewing its judgment. (Timberline, Inc. v. Jaisinghani (1997) 54 Cal.App.4th 1361, 1368-1369.) While revivor of a corporation’s powers can validate acts taken in the course of the action, including matters occurring post judgment, it does not toll the running of a substantive defense, such as the statute of limitations. (Se...
TOOLBOX INC VS CARNOCHAN, KIMBERLY SUSAN
MOTION TO REINSTATE EXPIRED JUDGMENT (CCP 683.130 et seq.) TENTATIVE RULING: Motion of Plaintiff Toolbox, Inc. to Reinstate Expired Judgment is GRANTED. REQUEST FOR RELIEF: Grant Plaintiff’s application to renew the judgment on the grounds that it was erroneously rejected because the information on the application did not match the information on the judgment, or alternatively, due to attorney...
..ppleton Decl., ¶4 and Exh. 1.) On March 1, 2019, Judgment Creditor submitted an Application for Renewal of Judgment. (Id. at ¶6 and Exh. 3.) On March 7, 2019, the Application was rejected because the Plaintiff’s name was listed as “Tool Box, Inc.,” which did not match the judgment. (Id. at ¶7 and Exh. 5.) It was also rejected because no memorandum of costs or declaration of interest was filed refl...
FORD MOTOR CREDIT COMPANY VS KUDER, KENNETH ARTHUR
Defendant Kenneth Arthur Kuder’s Motion to Vacate the Renewal of Judgment is DENIED. I. Background On March 25, 2007, judgment was entered in favor of Plaintiff Ford Motor Credit Co. (“Plaintiff”) against Defendant Kenneth Arthur Kuder (“Defendant”). The judgment was subsequently renewed on November 1, 2007 and October 5, 2016. On September 14, 2018, Plaintiff filed an Acknowledgment of Satisfac...
..be vacated on any ground that would be a defense to an action on the judgment, including the ground that the amount of the renewed judgment as entered pursuant to this article is incorrect, and shall be vacated if the application for renewal was filed within five years from the time the judgment was previously renewed under this article. (b) Not later than 30 days after service of the notice of...
Recent Rulings on Application for and Renewal of Judgment
Everett Hewlett (1)
Georgina Torres Rizk Or Jon R. Takasugi (12)
James E. Blancarte Or Serena R. Murillo (17)
Marla J. Miller (9)
Yolanda Orozco Or Georgina Torres Rizk (10)
Los Angeles County, CA (167)
On July 31, 2018, WVJP filed an “Application for and Renewal of Judgment.” (Id., ¶5, Exh. 3.) On June 20, 2011, an abstract of judgment was issued; it was filed and recorded on August 3, 2011, with the Recorder’s Office for Los Angeles County. (Id., ¶6, Exh. 4.) On July 30, 2018, an amended abstract of judgment was issued; it was filed and recorded on August 9, 2018 with the Recorder’s Office for Los Angeles County. (Id., ¶7, Exh. 5.) On December 5, 2018, a writ of execution was issued.
HERMAN YEE VS ANN HON
On June 6, 2019, Hon and Lai filed an Application for and Renewal of Judgment, as well as a Memorandum of Costs After Judgment, Acknowledgment of Credit and Declaration of Accrued Interest. On September 23, 2019, Hon and Lai filed a Notice of Renewal of Judgment. On October 21, 2019, this instant case was deemed related to Case No. KC068890.
Motion for Application for Renewal of Judgment The Motion is Denied. There are two ways to keep a judgment alive under California law, which are governed by different procedures. One is for the judgment creditor to bring an independent action on the judgment, which proceeds as a regular civil action, and leads to a further judgment that is good for another ten years.
Finally, to the extent Judgment Debtor’s opposition seeks affirmative relief, namely, that the Court find the renewal of judgment in 2004 and 2013 to be improper and vacate those renewals, the Court makes no finding without noticed motion, as required by Code of Civil Procedure section 683.170. Conclusion Judgment Creditors, Dawn Lyle and Tom McAllister’s Motion for Charging Order is GRANTED IN PART, AND DENIED IN PART.
LOBEL FINANCIAL VS. JOHNSON
Plaintiff filed a notice for renewal of judgment on December 17, 2015 and served it by mail on December 21, 2015 at the same address used for Defendant throughout the case (5535 Scoville, Oakland). The court file reflects that a Final Return on a Writ of Execution on the judgment was filed by the Sheriff of Alameda County on or about March 16, 2018 showing that at one point before that date $1353.40 had been garnished from the Defendant’s salary at the Oakland Unified School District.
Based on the foregoing evidence, the Court finds that the renewal of judgment should be amended in the interest of justice. Asignee of Record Credilogical Systems, LLC’s Motion to Amend Renewal of Judgment is GRANTED. Moving party is ordered to give notice.
TENTATIVE RULING: Judgment Assignee Sarcor Financial, Inc.’s Motion to Correct Error in Rejecting Renewal of Judgment is DENIED.
MICHAEL KHABUSHANI VS NAJILA K. BRENT
J); (3) Notice of Renewal of Judgment entered December 7, 2015 in LASC Case No. PC00379 (Exh. K); (4) Quitclaim Deed transferring TRIUNFO property from Michael Khabushani to his wife, Zohreh Khabushani filed with the Ventura County Clerk and Recorder’s Office (Exh. L); (5) August 2, 2016 Bankruptcy Court Order denying Michael Khabushani’s Motion to Avoid Lien in case 1:09-bk-18679-MB (Exh.
YONG DENG, ET AL. VS FOOTHILL INDEPENDENT BANK, ET AL.
The preliminary title report generated by Chicago Title disclosed the 2006 Renewal of Judgment but did not reflect any lien on the Property in connection with the judgment. Mauriss became aware of the 2006 Renewal of Judgment upon viewing the preliminary title report. In October 2013, unbeknownst to Plaintiffs, Mauriss filed an ex parte application to vacate the 1996 Judgment based on the erroneous belief that the 2006 Renewal of Judgment constituted a lien on the Property.
However, the Court notes that Judgment Creditor did not timely its Application for Renewal of Judgment in 2017.
NUNEZ V. SERVIN
Motion: Defendant Elaine Cantu’s motion to vacate renewal of judgment Tentative Ruling: To grant. The renewal of judgment dated December 11, 2019, shall be vacated as to Defendant Elaine Cantu. The abstract of judgment dated December 12, 2019, shall be vacated as to Defendant Elaine Cantu. Explanation: Renewal of judgment can be vacated on the grounds that service of the underlying complaint was not executed per statute. (See Fidelity Creditor Service, Inc. v.
A-L FINANCIAL VS. LOVE-WILLIAMS
Based on the above chronology of events, this court grants the motion of Latonya Williams to vacate the renewal of judgment filed by the Plaintiff on July 15, 2019.
ARROWOOD INDEMNITY COMPANY V. KARL-FREDRIC SELIGMAN
The original default judgment entered against defendant on March 9, 2010, is vacated as is the renewal of judgment dated February 25, 2020. A dismissal hearing pursuant to CCP secs. 583.310 and 583.410 is set for Aug. 5, 2020, at 9:00 a.m. in Dept. 4. Defendant to submit a conforming order on his motion to the court for signature and filing, and to give notice of the dismissal hearing to plaintiff or its successor in interest.
Conclusion & Order For the foregoing reasons, Defendant Lovella Thomas’ Motion to Vacate Renewal of Judgment is DENIED. Moving party is ordered to give notice.
Plaintiff filed an Application for and Renewal of Judgment on September 3, 2009, and again on November 29, 2018. On May 14, 2019, a Writ of Execution was issued. On September 13, 2019, Defendant filed the instant Motion to Vacate Default Judgment (the “Motion”). On September 27, 2019, Plaintiff filed an Opposition. No reply was filed.
Villa’s Motion to Vacate Renewal of Judgment is CONTINUED TO MAY 21, 2020, at 10:30 a.m. in Department 25 at the SPRING STREET COURTHOUSE. At least 16 court days before the next scheduled hearing, Judgment Debtor Villa must file and serve supplemental papers correcting the deficiencies identified herein. Failure to do so may result in the Motion being placed off calendar or denied.
Notice of the renewal of judgment was served on Judgment Debtor on February 9, 2016. Judgment Debtor filed the instant Motion to Vacate the Renewal of Judgment on May 10, 2019. To date, no opposition has been filed. Judgment Debtor filed a notice of non-opposition and reply on January 17, 2020.
Conclusion & Order For the foregoing reasons, Judgment Debtor Karina Saucedo’s Motion to Vacate Renewal of Judgment is DENIED. Moving party is ordered to give notice.
WILSON, FRANK ET AL VS DELTA HOMES, INC. ET AL
On November 10, 2016, Lonnie Wilson filed an application for and renewal of judgment for $721,519. The judgment was renewed. On March 2017, the court denied a similar motion as the one that was denied on February 25, 2015. On November 16, 2018, the court denied a similar motion as the one filed in March 2017, except as to Acclaim Credit Technologies.
PACIFIC WESTERN BANK VS INSATIABLE ASSETS LLC.
On June 28, 2018, judgment creditor Pacific Western Bank filed an Application for and Renewal of judgment, seeking a total renewed judgment of $276,861.14. ANALYSIS: Judgment creditor Pacific Western Bank seeks the issuance of an order to appear for examination to Schock & Schock, a law corporation, through John P. Schock, to testify about his knowledge of the assets and liabilities of judgment debtors the DLG Family Limited Partnership and Bradley A. Barnes.
NATIONAL CREDIT ACCEPTANCE INC. VS KHAN, RONNIE
Ronnie Khan CORRECT ERROR IN REJECTING RENEWAL OF JUDGMENT (CCP § 683.010, et seq.) TENTATIVE RULING: The motion is GRANTED as follows. Under the court’s general authority to correct clerical mistakes, the court directs the clerk to re-process Judgment Assignee’s April 11, 2019 judgment renewal application. The clerk will review that application but will not reject it for failure to meet the 10-year expiration deadline.