United States District Court, E.D. California
ORDER AND FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
F. BRENNAN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
miscellaneous case was before the court on January 11, 2017,
for hearing on plaintiff's motion for an order assigning
it the rights of defendant and judgment debtor Manjit
Singh's right to payment of money from Ontime Express
Line Inc. ECF No. 3. Attorney Lawrence Lockwood appeared on
behalf of plaintiff and defendant Singh appeared pro se. No
appearance was made by defendant Shamsher Braich.
hearing, the court granted Mr. Singh's request for
additional time to obtain legal representation, and attorney
Stephen Reynolds subsequently filed a notice of appearance on
behalf of Mr. Singh. On April 19, 2017, Mr. Singh was ordered
to file a response to plaintiff's motion by May 3, 2017,
but he failed to do so. ECF No. 6. Accordingly, Singh's
counsel was ordered to file, by no later than May 24, 2017,
an opposition or statement of non-opposition to
plaintiff's motion and to show cause why sanctions should
not be imposed for failure to comply with the April 19 order.
Mr. Reynolds has since filed, on his client's behalf, a
limited opposition to plaintiff's motion (ECF No. 8), but
he has not responded to the court's order to show cause.
reason's explained below, the court imposes monetary
sanctions for Mr. Reynold's failure to timely file a
response to plaintiff's motion and recommends that
plaintiff's motion be granted.
Order to Show Cause
noted above, Mr. Reynolds was ordered to show cause why
sanctions should not be imposed for his failure to file an
opposition or statement of non-opposition to plaintiff's
motion. ECF No. 7. Although he subsequently filed a response
to the pending motion, he failed to provide any explanation
for his initial failure to timely file an opposition or
statement of non-opposition to the pending motion.
Reynolds has not shown good cause for why sanctions should
not be imposed for his violation of the court's April 19,
2017 order, sanctions are imposed in the amount of $100. This
sum shall be paid to the Clerk of the Court no later than 21
days from the date of this order. This sanction is personal
to Mr. Reynolds and is not to be passed on to his clients in
the form of attorney fees or costs. Mr. Reynolds shall file a
declaration within 21 days of the date of this order that his
client has been so informed.
Order for Assignment
obtained a judgment in the United States District Court for
the District of Maryland against Manjit Singh and Shamsher
Braich, jointly and severally, in the sum of $93, 000.88.
Plaintiff subsequently registered the judgment in this
district for enforcement. ECF No. 1. Plaintiff now seeks an
order assigning to plaintiff Mr. Singh's right to payment
of money from Ontime Express Line, Inc., a corporation owned
solely by Mr. Singh. ECF No. 3.
Rule of Civil Procedure 69(a)(1) provides that a “money
judgment is enforced by a writ of execution, ” and that
the procedure used “must accord with the procedure of
the state where the court is located, but a federal statute
governs to the extent it applies.” Under California
law, “the court may order the judgment debtor to assign
to the judgment creditor . . . all or part of a right to
payment due or to become due, including but not limited
to” rents, commissions, and royalties. Cal. Civ. P.
Code § 708.510(a).
granting of an assignment order is, essentially, a
placeholder for a judgment creditor, and that when the
judgment creditor seeks to actually enforce his rights
against an obligor, an obligor may then raise any relevant
defenses against such enforcement.” Greenbaum v.
Islamic Republic of Iran, 782 F.Supp.2d 893, 895 (C.D.
Cal. 2008). Accordingly, notice of the motion for an
assignment order need not be provided to the obligor, who
“is not affected by the assignment order until notice
of the order is received.” Id. at 896; see
also Cal. Civ. P. Code § 708.510(b).
motion for an assignment order does not require detailed
evidentiary support, a party seeking an assignment order is
required to identify the intended source that is obligated to
make payments to the judgment debtor. UMG Recording, Inc.
v. BMG Music Grp., Inc., 2009 WL 2213678, at * 2-3 (C.D.
Cal. July 9, 2009). In deciding whether to order an
assignment, the court may consider the (1) the reasonable
requirements of a judgment debtor and the persons supported
by the judgment debtor, (2) other obligations owed by the
judgment debtor in satisfaction of other judgments and wage
assignments, (3) the amount due on the judgment, (4) and
“the amount being or to be received in satisfaction of
the right to payment that may be assigned.” Cal. Civ.
P. Code § 708.510(c). “A right to payment may be
assigned . . . only to the extent necessary to satisfy the
money judgment.” Id. § 708.510(d).
seeks an order assigning to it Mr. Singh's “right
to payment of money due or to become due, whether styled [as]
accounts receivable, general intangibles, accounts, deposit
accounts, royalties, fees, commissions, distributions,
dividends, or otherwise, from his wholly-owned corporation
known as Ontime Express Line Inc.” ECF No. 3 at 11. In
his opposition, Singh does not dispute that plaintiff is
entitled to an order of assignment. Rather, Singh only argues
that plaintiff is not entitled to any his “earnings,
” which are exempt from assignment pursuant to
California Code of Civil Procedure § 706.105. ECF No. 8
at 2. Plaintiff concedes that it is not entitled to
assignment of Singh's earnings and notes that its request
“is narrowly- tailored to obtain payments due, or to
become due, other than ‘earnings' that might be due
[Singh] as an ‘employee.'” ECF No. 10.
plaintiff does not seek an assignment of Singh's
earnings, and there is no dispute that it is entitled to the
requested relief, plaintiff's motion must be granted.
III. Conclusion Accordingly, it is hereby order that
Mr. Reynolds is sanctioned in the amount of $100. This sum
shall be paid to the Clerk of the Court no later than 21 days
from the date of this order. This sanction is personal to Mr.
Reynolds and is not to be passed on to his clients in the
form of ...