UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
August 1, 2011
FIDELITY MORTGAGE OF CALIFORNIA, INC., ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
This matter is before the court on defendant and cross-claimant James York's ex parte application for an order to require Deanna Walters ("plaintiff") to pay property taxes and monthly rental payments into an agreed-upon blocked account or vacate the premises, or, in the alternative, show cause why she should not be held in civil contempt for her failure to do either or both of the aforementioned (the "ex parte application"). ECF 68.
On May 27, 2010, plaintiff and Mr. York stipulated to an arrangement whereby plaintiff would retain possession of the property at issue in this case for so long as she paid agreed upon rental payments into the blocked account and paid all property taxes. ECF 29. On the same day, the court approved the parties' stipulation by order. ECF 30.
On February 28, 2011, Mr. York submitted an ex parte application because plaintiff had failed to pay the full rental payments into the blocked account and had not paid property taxes. On April 5, 2011, this court entered an order in accordance with the joint stipulation of Mr. York and plaintiff mooting Mr. York's ex parte application based on plaintiff's agreement to pay all past due rental payments into the blocked account and pay all back taxes. ECF 76. The April 5th order also provides: "If Ms. Walters does not provide proof of payment of all arrearages for the Blocked Account on or before April 30, 2011 to Defendant James York and/or payment of the April 2011 property taxes on or before June 30, 2011, he can resubmit the matter to the Court via letter and Ms. Walters will waive any opposition to Defendant's resubmission of the matter." Id. ¶ 2.*fn1
On July 19, 2011, Mr. York renewed his ex parte application, stating that he had not received proof that plaintiff had paid the past due taxes or proof of payment of June or July rent into the blocked account. ECF 86. On July 25, 2011, Mr. York submitted a proposed order that would order plaintiff's vacating of the premises at issue. ECF 89. On July 28, 2011, plaintiff submitted a "response" to Mr. York's proposed order along with proof that the past due taxes were paid one day earlier, on July 27, 2011; plaintiff's response also represented that the June and July rent had been paid. ECF 90.
Plaintiff and Mr. York are hereby ordered to submit a joint report by August 5, 2011, setting forth their positions as to (i) whether all amounts due under the parties' stipulation have now been paid, even if belatedly; and (ii) what relief is appropriate going forward. If the court requires briefing of any issues raised by the parties' report, it will set a briefing schedule following review of the report.
IT IS SO ORDERED.