Loc Pham vs. Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC

Motion Other

Cal. Super. - 4th Dist.August 4, 2015

A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 20 70 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 ( 7 1 4 ) 5 1 6 - 2 7 0 0 T E L E P H O N E : B L N Oo 0 J O N Wn 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ANDERSON LAW FIRM ELECTRONICALLY FILED MARTIN W. ANDERSON, State Bar No. 178422 Superior Court of California, 2070 North Tustin Avenue County of Orange Santa Ana, California 92705 11042046 at 01:42:00 Pi Tel: (714) 516-2700 = Fax: (714) 532-4700 Clerk of the Superior Court LAW OFFICE OF JEFFREY KANE By Davon ‘welasquez Deputy Clerk JEFFREY KANE, State Bar No. 183974 20902 Brookhurst Street, Suite 210 Huntington Beach, California 92646 Tel: (714) 964-6900 = Fax: (714) 964-6944 Attorneys for Plaintiff Loc Pham SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER LOC PHAM, Case Number 30-2015-00802473 HON. THEODORE HOWARD Plaintiff, DEPARTMENT C18 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION V. FOR A TURNOVER ORDER AND AN ASSIGNMENT ORDER; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; SUPPORTING DECLARATION JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH AMERICA, LLC et al. Complaint Filed: August 4, 2015 Defendants. Trial Date: September 19, 2016 Reservation No.: 72476948 Hearing Date: December 1, 2016 Hearing Time: 1:30 p.m. TO THE COURT, ALL PARTIES, AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT on December 1, 2016, at 1:30 p.m., in Department C18 of the above-entitled Court, located at 700 Civic Center Drive West, Santa Ana, CA, before Hon. Theodore Howard, Plaintiff Loc Pham will and hereby does move this Court for an order directing Defendant Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC to pay the amounts that remain due under the Judgment entered on September 1, 2016, to the Orange County Sheriff’s Department _i- NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR A TURNOVER ORDER AND AN ASSIGNMENT ORDER A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 20 70 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 ( 7 1 4 ) 5 1 6 - 2 7 0 0 T E L E P H O N E : B L N Oo 0 J O N Wn 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 and for an assignment order directing anyone that owes money to Defendant to instead pay the money owed to the Orange County Sheriff so that it can be applied towards the Judgment. This motion will be made pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 699.040 and 708.510 because the Judgment has not been satisfied. This motion will be based upon this notice of motion, the attached memorandum of points and authorities, supporting declarations, and exhibits, upon the pleadings and papers on file in this action, and upon any additional evidence that the Court may permit. 11 11 - 11 - NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR A TURNOVER ORDER AND AN ASSIGNMENT ORDER A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 20 70 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 ( 7 1 4 ) 5 1 6 - 2 7 0 0 T E L E P H O N E : B L N Oo 0 J O N Wn 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION cus cs smumsanmess co snusssssness ooussmmssssnnes 4506 855594550555 5106555535555 55.5 5 5959575 40545 4808 F300 S001 93550 1 STATEMENT OF FACTS oss wsnumsonssms sssonsvossmsss wassoeisse (56 505555555 4 6555555355055 55.68 65555985 50545 58555555 1 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES uous wsnssssssessnsssmss sssssesossnvss vas mrssssanes 6 LL THE JUDGMENT HAS NOT BEEN SATISFIED ,cisucissmsussussissssssmssssessosonsssmmonss aves sssso e 6 II. THE COURT SHOULD ISSUE A TURNOVER ORDER ........cccccccoeiiiiiiiiiiiiiniiiiis 7 1. THE COURT SHOULD ISSUE AN ASSIGNMENT ORDER ........ccccccoeiiiniiiiiiiins 7 CONC ETMN 0 m0 05,5555 055.558.545.545... AS454 5 055,588 4, 055 8 DECLARATION OF MARTIN W. ANDERSON i cums sus ss 55 cussasn sss san cows ans sss sanes snansss sos cases 9 DECLARATION OF JEFFREY KANE .......cooiiiiiiiiiiinii cece 14 - 1ii - NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR A TURNOVER ORDER AND AN ASSIGNMENT ORDER A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 20 70 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 ( 7 1 4 ) 5 1 6 - 2 7 0 0 T E L E P H O N E : B L N Oo 0 J O N Wn 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 INTRODUCTION Defendant, a multi-national corporation, continues to conduct routine business activities in California, including by paying its lawyers to defend against Plaintiff’s efforts to collect the Judgment in this case. Yet it refuses to pay what it owes under a Judgment that was entered against it more than sixty days ago. Accordingly, Plaintiff now requests that the Court issue an order requiring Defendant to pay the balance remaining due under the Judgment and for an order assigning any payments that may be due to the Defendant from others so that they may be applied to the Judgment as well. STATEMENT OF FACTS On August 4, 2015, Plaintiff Loc Pham filed this automobile lemon law action against Defendant Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC (“JLRNA”). The Complaint alleges six causes of action and seeks damages and civil penalties exceeding $143,595.96. (See Comp., Docket Entry No. 1, p. 9.) Beginning shortly after the lawsuit was filed and continuing until shortly before trial, Defendant made a series of fictional settlement offers, in which Defendant offered to settle the case by “repurchasing” Plaintiff’s lemon vehicle without saying how much money it would actually pay. (Declaration of Martin W. Anderson, attached (“Anderson Decl.”), § 4.) In response to each of these fictional settlement offers, Plaintiff replied by asking Defendant to make an offer that included a dollar amount and by making his own offer that included a specific dollar amount that would settle the entire case with finality. (Anderson Decl., 4.) Unfortunately, until only a few weeks before trial, Defendant stalwartly refused to make a meaningful settlement offer that could be accepted and terminate the litigation once and for all. On August 23, 2016, and August 24, 2016, the parties held a number of telephone discussions in an effort to settle the case. Because the matter was so close to trial, Plaintiff’s counsel advised Defendant’s counsel that Plaintiff was only willing to settle the case if the settlement ensured that a Judgment was entered and that payment would be due immediately. (Anderson Decl., § 5.) To that end, on August 23, 2016, Plaintiff served an Offer of Judgment -1- NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR A TURNOVER ORDER AND AN ASSIGNMENT ORDER A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 20 70 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 ( 7 1 4 ) 5 1 6 - 2 7 0 0 T E L E P H O N E : B L N Oo 0 J O N Wn 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 that Defendant could accept and terminate the litigation immediately. (Anderson Decl., § 5, Ex. 1, pp. 3-4.) After more than a year of litigation and only three weeks prior to trial, on August 24, 2016, Defendant finally relented and accepted Plaintiff’s Offer of Judgment pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 998. (Anderson Decl., § 6, Ex. 1.) The offer provided that Judgment would be entered in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant “in the amount of $117,161.58.” (Id., p. 4.) And “within 14 days after [Defendant] fully satisfies the judgment, Plaintiff Loc Pham shall return the [vehicle] to Defendant . . . with clear title.” (Id.) That same day, Plaintiff notified the Court of Defendant’s agreement and requested that the Court enter judgment accordingly. (Id, p. 1.) On September 1, 2016, the Court entered the Judgment as requested. (Anderson Decl., § 7, Ex. 2.) In relevant part, the Judgment provides that “the Court grants this JUDGMENT in favor of Plaintiff LOC PHAM and against Defendant JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH AMERICA, LLC in the amount of $117,161.58, which amount includes reasonable attorney fees and court costs incurred to the date of the offer.” (Anderson Decl., Ex. 2, p. 1.) Because the Judgment specifies a specific amount of money and did not allow Defendant a certain number of days to make payment, payment was due immediately. (Civ. Code, § 1657 [“If no time is specified for the performance of an act required to be performed, a reasonable time is allowed. If the act is in its nature capable of being done instantly--as, for example, if it consists in the payment of money only--it must be performed immediately upon the thing to be done being exactly ascertained.”].) Unfortunately, Defendant did not comply with its obligations to make payment immediately. Twenty-one days after Defendant had accepted Plaintiff’s offer, Defendant still had not paid the Judgment. (Anderson Decl., 9.) On September 14, 2016, Plaintiff’s counsel wrote to Defendant’s counsel reminding Defendant’s counsel that “[t]his matter was settled in Mid-August of 2016. . . . When can I expect to receive payment of the judgment?” (Anderson Decl., 99, Ex. 3.) Plaintiff also reminded Defendant’s counsel that “the Judgment bears interest at the legal rate of 10%.” (Id.) -3 NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR A TURNOVER ORDER AND AN ASSIGNMENT ORDER A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 20 70 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 ( 7 1 4 ) 5 1 6 - 2 7 0 0 T E L E P H O N E : B L N Oo 0 J O N Wn 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Defendant’s counsel responded by falsely claiming that it had “ordered the check.” (Anderson Decl., 19, Ex. 3, p. 1.) In fact, however, that claim was totally false: No check had been ordered, and no check has ever been delivered.! (Anderson Decl., 9 10.) Defendant’s counsel, who had previously assured Plaintiff’s counsel that payment would be made immediately after the settlement was entered, also unilaterally announced that “it takes at least 30 days to process.” (Anderson Decl., § 10.) As noted above, that statement was directly contrary to the terms of the Judgment, which requires that payment be made immediately. (Anderson Decl., Ex. 2; Civ. Code, § 1657.) On September 22, 2016, Plaintiff's counsel wrote to Defendant’s counsel again, explaining that “[m]y client has another payment due on October 2, 2016. If payment is not received by Monday of next week, including accrued interest, we will have no choice but to commence enforcement of the Judgment.” (Anderson Decl., Ex. 3, p. 2.) Defendant’s counsel never responded to that email. (Anderson Decl, § 11.) Forty days after Defendant accepted Plaintiff’s 998 Offer, Defendant still had not paid a single penny of what was owed. (Anderson Decl., § 11.) On October 4, 2016, Plaintiff requested that the Court issue a writ of execution directed to the Orange County Sheriff. (Anderson Decl., q 11, Ex. 4.) Plaintiff also filed a Memorandum of Costs After Judgment” seeking to recover three hours of attorney fees for the work performed on the case from September 1, 2016, to October 4, 2016. (Anderson Decl., § 11.) On October 5, 2016, Plaintiff requested that the Court issue an Order for examination requiring Defendant to appear and answer questions about its assets so that Plaintiff could collect the Judgment. (Anderson Decl., § 12, Ex. 5.) Judge Timothy Stafford issued the Order on October 6, 2016. (Id.) The order is directed to “Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC.” (Anderson Decl., Ex. 5, p. 3.) Pursuant to “this Court’s policy requiring that Orders to Appear ! After Plaintiff commenced enforcement proceedings, Defendant’s counsel promised to wire the funds, then falsely claimed that Plaintiff had supplied the wrong account number, and then wired only a partial payment. ? Post-Judgment Fees may be claimed on a Memorandum of Costs pursuant to York v. Strong (2015) 234 Cal. App.4™ 1471. _3- NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR A TURNOVER ORDER AND AN ASSIGNMENT ORDER A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 20 70 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 ( 7 1 4 ) 5 1 6 - 2 7 0 0 T E L E P H O N E : B L N Oo 0 J O N Wn 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 for Examination directed to an entity also name an individual to appear,” the Order designated an officer of Defendant by name. (Id.) However, the Order also provides that “the entity named above may designate to appear and be examined one or more officer, directors, managing agents, or other persons who are familiar with its property and debts in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure section 708.150(a).” (Id.) The examination was set to occur on November 3, 2016. Id.) Apparently, the order for examination finally spurred Defendant to action. Fifty-five days after Defendant had agreed to settle the case, on October 18, 2016, Defendant’s counsel faxed Plaintiff’s counsel a letter falsely claiming that “a wire-transfer has been set up to go to [Attorney Martin Anderson’s] trust account” to resolve the matter mentioned above.” (Anderson Decl., 9 14, Ex. 6.) On October 19, 2016, Plaintiff’s counsel found that no wire transfer had been received, and wrote to Defendant’s counsel requesting the date and amount of the wire, and the transaction number. (Anderson Decl., 9 15, Ex. 7.) That same day, Defendant’s counsel replied by email admitting that the earlier claim had been false, and that “[t]here are a few more steps in the payment process” (Anderson Decl., § 16, Ex. 8) and that “we expect that it will be today or tomorrow” (Anderson Decl., q 16, Ex. 9). On October 20, 2016, Defendant’s counsel falsely claimed that the wire had failed because they had the wrong account number for Mr. Anderson’s trust account. (Anderson Decl., § 16.) Defendant apparently found the correct number without any assistance from Plaintiff’s counsel, and on October 21, 2016, Plaintiff’s counsel found a “pending wire” on his trust account for $86,996.09, which was far less than what was actually owed. (Anderson Decl, 9 16.) Sixty days after Defendant had accepted Plaintiff’s Offer of Judgment, on October 24, 2016, a wire transfer reflecting a partial payment of the amount due settled in Plaintiff’s counsel’s trust account. (Anderson Decl., § 17.) The information accompanying the wire transfer indicates that the wire transfer came from an out-of-state account at Comerica Bank which Defendant has used to satisfy legal claims in other cases. (Anderson Decl., § 17.) That same day, Plaintiff’s counsel emailed a letter to Defendant’s counsel advising that $34,594.10 remained due on the principal, with $9.47 in interest accruing per day. (Anderson _4- NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR A TURNOVER ORDER AND AN ASSIGNMENT ORDER A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 20 70 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 ( 7 1 4 ) 5 1 6 - 2 7 0 0 T E L E P H O N E : B L N Oo 0 J O N Wn 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Decl., q 18, Ex. 10.) Defendant’s counsel has never responded to that letter. (Anderson Decl., 18.) Plaintiff also filed a Memorandum of Costs After Judgment seeking to recover two hours of attorney time for the work performed on the case from October 4, 2016, to October 21, 2016. (Anderson Decl., 9 19.) Sixty-two days after Defendant accepted Plaintiff’s offer, on October 26, 2016, Plaintiffs lender received a payment in the amount of $30,165.49 on Plaintiff’s loan. (Anderson Decl., 20, Ex. 11.) Even though that payment should have been sent to Plaintiff, Plaintiff agreed to apply the payment to the Judgment in order to expedite the resolution of the case. On November 1, 2016, Plaintiff’s counsel emailed Defendant’s counsel another letter explaining that $5,430.04 principal remains due, and that $1.49 in interest is accruing as each day passes. (Anderson Decl., § 21, Ex. 11.) The letter included a table explaining the manner in which the amount due was calculated and concluded by asking that “[i]f you disagree with my computations, please let me know the amounts you dispute and the legal and factual basis for your dispute as soon as possible.” (Anderson Decl., § 21, Ex. 11, pp. 1-3.) Defendant’s counsel has not responded to that letter. (Anderson Decl., 421.) Plaintiff also filed a Memorandum of Costs After Judgment seeking to recover two hours of attorney time for the work performed on the case from October 22, 2016, to November 1, 2016. (Anderson Decl., 22.) On November 3, 2016, Plaintiff’s counsel, Mr. Jeffrey Kane, appeared in Department C66 to conduct the Judgment Debtor Examination that had been ordered by Judge Stafford. (Anderson Decl., Ex. 5.) While Defendant sent counsel to appear, Defendant did not produce any witness to testify, and instead incorrectly claimed that its pending motion for protective order excused its obligation to comply with Judge Stafford’s order. (Declaration of Jeffrey Kane, attached (“Kane Decl.”), 4 3.) In addition, Defendant’s counsel claimed that Defendant has the funds available to pay the amounts due, but would not explain why it had not done so. (Kane Decl., § 3.) Ultimately, Judge Stafford continued the hearing to December 15, 2016. (Kane Decl., § 3.) As we will explain, Defendant’s payments have not satisfied the amounts due under the Judgment. Accordingly, the Court should issue an order requiring Defendant to turn-over -5- NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR A TURNOVER ORDER AND AN ASSIGNMENT ORDER A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 20 70 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 ( 7 1 4 ) 5 1 6 - 2 7 0 0 T E L E P H O N E : B L N Oo 0 J O N Wn 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 whatever amounts the Court determines are presently due and issue an assignment order requiring others that owe money to the Defendant to do so as well. MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES L THE JUDGMENT HAS NOT BEEN SATISFIED Satisfaction of a judgment is governed by Code of Civil Procedure section 695.210: The amount required to satisfy a money judgment is the total amount of the judgment as entered or renewed with the following additions and subtractions: (a) The addition of costs added to the judgment pursuant to Section 685.090. (b) The addition of interest added to the, judgment as it accrues pursuant to Sections 685.010 to 685.030, inclusive. (c¢) The subtraction of the amount of any partial satisfactions of the judgment.” (d) The subtraction of the amount of any portion of the judgment that is no longer enforceable. (Code Civ. Proc., § 695.210.) As explained Exhibit 11 to the attached Declaration of Martin W. Anderson, as of November 1, 2016: $5,422.78 was due and payable as principal, $7.26 was due as accrued interest, and interest continues to accrue at the rate of $1.49 per day. (Anderson Decl., q 21, Ex. 11.) A total of $5,747.30 combined principal and interest will be due on December 1, 2016, when this motion is scheduled to be heard. In addition, because Defendant continues to refuse to pay what it owes, Plaintiff was forced to attend the Judgment Debtor Examination and to file this motion. As a result, Plaintiff’s counsel has spent an additional seven hours working on this matter, resulting in an additional $3,500 in attorney fees claimed using a Memorandum of Costs After Judgment. (Anderson Decl., 4 23; Kane Decl., 4 5.) By the time that this motion is heard, that amount will have accrued $28.76 in daily interest. 3 A money judgment accrues interest at the rate of 10% per annum. (Code Civ. Proc., § 685.010, subd. (a).) * Payments received are first credited to accrued interest, and then towards principal. (Big Bear Properties, Inc. v. Gherman (1979) 95 CalApp.3d 908, 915.) -6- NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR A TURNOVER ORDER AND AN ASSIGNMENT ORDER A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 20 70 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 ( 7 1 4 ) 5 1 6 - 2 7 0 0 T E L E P H O N E : B L N Oo 0 J O N Wn 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Accordingly, the Judgment has not been satisfied, and at least $9,276.06 remains due and payable under the Judgment. II. THE COURT SHOULD ISSUE A TURNOVER ORDER Code of Civil Procedure section 699.040 permits the Court to issue what is colloquially referred to as a “turnover over.” “If a writ of execution is issued, the judgment creditor may apply to the court . . .” for an order directing the judgment debtor to transfer to the levying officer .. . [pJossession of the property sought to be levied upon if the property is sought to be levied upon by taking it into custody.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 699.040, subd. (a)(1).) Here, a writ of execution was issued on October 24, 2016. (Anderson Decl., Ex. 4.) Defendant’s ability to pay the amount due is obvious given the payments it has made thus far, its continued operations in California, its continued employment of attorneys to defend this and other lawsuits, and the admission made by its lawyer at the recent Judgment Debtor Examination that it has the ability to pay what it owes. (Kane Decl., § 3.) Unfortunately, Defendant’s bank account is located outside of California and is thus not subject to levy, and Defendant believes that it is immune from the Court’s examination orders for the reasons stated in its pending motion for protective order. Accordingly, the Court should issue an order requiring Defendant to deliver the money it still owes to the Orange County Sheriff’s Department so that it can be applied to the Judgment. IIL. THE COURT SHOULD ISSUE AN ASSIGNMENT ORDER Code of Civil Procedure section 708.510 permits the Court to issue an “assignment 29 C6 order.” “[U]pon application of the judgment creditor on noticed motion, the court may order the judgment debtor to assign to the judgment creditor or to a receiver appointed pursuant to Article 7 (commencing with Section 708.610) all or part of a right to payment due or to become due, > The Code of Civil Procedure permits such orders to be made ex parte, but Plaintiff suspects that the Court would prefer a noticed motion. -7- NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR A TURNOVER ORDER AND AN ASSIGNMENT ORDER A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 20 70 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 ( 7 1 4 ) 5 1 6 - 2 7 0 0 T E L E P H O N E : B L N Oo 0 J O N Wn 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 whether or not the right is conditioned on future developments . ...” (Code Civ. Proc., § 708.510.) In addition, the Court also has the power to order an assignment outright. “[CJonstruing all the applicable statutes together, it seems clear that the ‘assignment order’ contemplated by CCP § 708.510 et seq. must include a court order that assigns a right to payment outright (not simply an order directing the judgment debtor to do so).” (Cal. Prac. Guide, Enf. J. & Debt, § 6:1422 [The Rutter Group 2016].) As explained in Part I of this brief, above, Defendant has not satisfied the Judgment. Accordingly, the Court should issue an assignment order, which Plaintiff may use in order to collect payment of the Judgment by serving it upon any party who owes Defendant money. CONCLUSION For all of the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff’s motion should be granted. DATED: November 4, 2016 ANDERSON LAW FIRM MARTIN W. ANDERSON JEFFREY KANE s/ Martin W. Anderson By: MARTIN W. ANDERSON Attorney for Plaintiff Loc Pham -8- NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR A TURNOVER ORDER AND AN ASSIGNMENT ORDER A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 20 70 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 ( 7 1 4 ) 5 1 6 - 2 7 0 0 T E L E P H O N E : B L N Oo 0 J O N Wn 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DECLARATION OF MARTIN W. ANDERSON I, MARTIN W. ANDERSON, hereby declare as follows: I. I am one of the attorneys for Plaintiff in this action. 2. I make this Declaration in support of our motion for a turnover order and an assignment order. 3. On August 4, 2015, Plaintiff Loc Pham filed this automobile lemon law action against Defendant Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC (“JLRNA”). The Complaint alleges six causes of action and seeks damages and civil penalties exceeding $143,595.96. 4. Beginning shortly after the lawsuit was filed and continuing until shortly before trial, Defendant’s counsel made a series of settlement offers in which Defendant offered to settle the case by “repurchasing” Plaintiff’s lemon vehicle without saying how much money it would actually pay. In response to each of these fictional settlement offers, Plaintiff replied by asking Defendant to make an offer that included a dollar amount and by making his own offer that included a specific dollar amount that would settle the entire case with finality. Unfortunately, until only a few weeks before trial, Defendant stalwartly refused to make a meaningful settlement offer that could be accepted and terminate the litigation. 5. On August 23, 2016, and August 24, 2016, the parties held a number of telephone discussions in an effort to settle the case. Because the matter was so close to trial, I advised Defendant’s counsel that Plaintiff was only willing to settle the case if the settlement ensured that a Judgment was entered and that payment would be due immediately. To that end, on August 23, 2016, Plaintiff served an Offer of Judgment that Defendant could accept and terminate the litigation immediately. A true copy of that Offer of Judgment is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 1. 6. After more than a year of litigation and only three weeks prior to trial, on August 24,2016, Defendant finally relented and accepted Plaintiff’s Offer of Judgment pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 998. The offer provided that Judgment would be entered in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant “in the amount of $117,161.58.” And “within 14 days after [Defendant] fully satisfies the judgment, Plaintiff Loc Pham shall return the [vehicle] to -9. NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR A TURNOVER ORDER AND AN ASSIGNMENT ORDER A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 20 70 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 ( 7 1 4 ) 5 1 6 - 2 7 0 0 T E L E P H O N E : B L N Oo 0 J O N Wn 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Defendant . . . with clear title.” That same day, Plaintiff notified the Court of Defendant’s agreement and requested that the Court enter judgment accordingly. T+ On September 1, 2016, the Court entered the Judgment as requested. A true copy of the Judgment is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 2. In relevant part, the Judgment provides that “the Court grants this JUDGMENT in favor of Plaintiff LOC PHAM and against Defendant JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH AMERICA, LLC in the amount of $117,161.58, which amount includes reasonable attorney fees and court costs incurred to the date of the offer.” 8. Because the Judgment specifies a specific amount of money and did not allow Defendant a certain number of days to make payment, payment was due immediately. (Civ. Code, § 1657 [“If no time is specified for the performance of an act required to be performed, a reasonable time is allowed. If the act is in its nature capable of being done instantly--as, for example, if it consists in the payment of money only--it must be performed immediately upon the thing to be done being exactly ascertained.”].) 4 Unfortunately, Defendant did not comply with its obligations to make payment immediately. Twenty-one days after Defendant had accepted Plaintiff's offer, Defendant still had not paid the Judgment. On September 14, 2016, I wrote to Defendant’s counsel reminding Defendant’s counsel that “[t]his matter was settled in Mid-August of 2016. . . . When can I expect to receive payment of the judgment?” I also reminded Defendant’s counsel that “the Judgment bears interest at the legal rate of 10%.” A true copy of that email, along with Defendant’s response, is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 3. 10. Defendant’s counsel responded by falsely claiming that it had “ordered the check.” (See Ex. 3.) In fact, however, that claim was totally false: No check had been ordered, and no check has ever been delivered. Defendant’s counsel, who had previously assured me that payment would be made immediately after the settlement was entered, also unilaterally announced that “it takes at least 30 days to process.” As noted above, that statement was directly contrary to the terms of the Judgment, which (as noted above) requires that payment be made immediately. -10- NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR A TURNOVER ORDER AND AN ASSIGNMENT ORDER A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 20 70 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 ( 7 1 4 ) 5 1 6 - 2 7 0 0 T E L E P H O N E : B L N Oo 0 J O N Wn 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 11. On September 22, 2016, I wrote to Defendant’s counsel again, explaining that “[m]y client has another payment due on October 2, 2016. If payment is not received by Monday of next week, including accrued interest, we will have no choice but to commence enforcement of the Judgment.” (See Ex. 3, p. 2.) Defendant’s counsel never responded to that email. Forty days after Defendant accepted Plaintiff’s 998 Offer, Defendant still had not paid a single penny of what was owed. On October 4, 2016, Plaintiff requested that the Court issue a writ of execution directed to the Orange County Sheriff. A true copy of the Writ is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 4. As required by the Clerk’s practice, Plaintiff also filed a Memorandum of Costs After Judgment seeking to recover for three hours of attorney time for the work performed on the case from September 1, 2016, to October 4, 2016. 12. On October 5, 2016, Plaintiff requested that the Court issue an Order for examination requiring Defendant to appear and answer questions about its assets so that Plaintiff could collect the Judgment. A true copy of that Order is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 5. 13. Judge Timothy Stafford issued the Order on October 6, 2016. The order is directed to “Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC.” Pursuant to “this Court’s policy requiring that Orders to Appear for Examination directed to an entity also name an individual to appear,” the Order designated an officer of Defendant by name. However, the order also provides that “the entity named above may designate to appear and be examined one or more officer, directors, managing agents, or other persons who are familiar with its property and debts in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure section 708.150(a).” The examination was set to occur on November 3, 2016. 14. Fifty-five days after Defendant had agreed to settle the case, on October 18, 2016, Defendant’s counsel faxed me a letter falsely claiming that “a wire-transfer has been set up to go to [Attorney Martin Anderson’s trust account” to resolve the matter mentioned above.” A true copy of that letter is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 6. 15. On October 19, 2016, I found that no wire transfer had been received, and I wrote to Defendant’s counsel requesting the date and amount of the wire, and the transaction number. S11 - NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR A TURNOVER ORDER AND AN ASSIGNMENT ORDER A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 20 70 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 ( 7 1 4 ) 5 1 6 - 2 7 0 0 T E L E P H O N E : B L N Oo 0 J O N Wn 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 A true copy of that email is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 7. That same day, Defendant’s counsel replied by email admitting that the earlier claim had been false, and that “[t]here are a few more steps in the payment process” and that “we expect that it will be today or tomorrow.” A true copy Defendant’s response emails are attached hereto and marked as Exhibits 8 and 9. 16. On October 20, 2016, Defendant’s counsel falsely claimed that the wire had failed because they had the wrong account number for Mr. Anderson’s trust account. Yet, on October 21,2016, I found a “pending wire” on his trust account for $86,996.09, which was far less than what was actually owed. In the interim, my partner, Jeff Kane, had called Defendant’s counsel and provided his trust account number, and yet somehow the wire managed to make it to my account despite Defendant’s claim that it had the wrong account number. 17. Sixty days after Defendant had accepted Plaintiff’s Offer of Judgment, on October 24,2016, a wire transfer reflecting a partial payment of the amount due settled in my trust account. The information accompanying the wire transfer indicates that the wire transfer came from an out-of-state account at Comerica Bank which Defendant has used to satisfy legal claims in other cases. 18. That same day, I emailed a letter to Defendant’s counsel advising that $34,594.10 remained due on the principal, with $9.47 in interest accruing per day. A true copy of that letter is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 10. Defendant’s counsel has never responded to that letter. 19. Talso filed a Memorandum of Costs After Judgment seeking to recover two hours of attorney fees for the work performed on the case from October 4, 2016, to October 21, 2016. 20. Sixty-two days after Plaintiff accepted Defendant’s offer, on October 26, 2016, Plaintiff’s lender received a payment in the amount of $30,165.49 on Plaintiff’s loan. 21. On November 1, 2016, I emailed Defendant’s counsel another letter explaining that $5,430.04 principal remains due, and that $1.49 in interest is accruing as each day passes. A true copy of that letter is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 11. The letter included a table explaining the manner in which the amount due was calculated and concluded by asking that =12 = NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR A TURNOVER ORDER AND AN ASSIGNMENT ORDER A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 20 70 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 ( 7 1 4 ) 5 1 6 - 2 7 0 0 T E L E P H O N E : B L N Oo 0 J O N Wn 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 “[i]f you disagree with my computations, please let me know the amounts you dispute and the legal and factual basis for your dispute as soon as possible.” Defendant’s counsel has not responded to that letter. 22. Plaintiff also filed a Memorandum of Costs After Judgment seeking to recover two hours of attorney fees for the work performed on the case from October 22, 2016, to November 1, 2016. 23. I spent four hours preparing this motion. My reasonable hourly rate is currently $525.00 per hour, but it was $500 per hour when I took this case and so I have billed the lower rate for all work performed on this matter. I have claimed that time in a Memorandum of Costs After Judgment that will be filed and served concurrently with this motion. 24. I anticipate spending between two and four hours on the reply brief and between two and four hours preparing for and appearing at the hearing on this motion and will filed a Memorandum of Costs After Judgment to claim those amounts at the appropriate time. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. DATED: November 4, 2016 s/ Martin W. Anderson MARTIN W. ANDERSON -13- NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR A TURNOVER ORDER AND AN ASSIGNMENT ORDER A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 20 70 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 ( 7 1 4 ) 5 1 6 - 2 7 0 0 T E L E P H O N E : B L N Oo 0 J O N Wn 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DECLARATION OF JEFFREY KANE I, JEFFREY KANE, hereby declare as follows: I. I am one of the attorneys for Plaintiff in this action. 2. I make this Declaration in support of our motion for a turnover order and an assignment order. 3. On November 3, 2016, I appeared to conduct the Judgment Debtor Examination that had been ordered by Judge Stafford. While Defendant sent counsel to appear, Defendant did not produce any witness to testify, and instead incorrectly claimed that its pending motion for protective order excused its obligation to appear. In addition, Defendant’s counsel claimed that Defendant has the funds available to pay the amounts due, but would not explain why it had not done so. Ultimately, Judge Stafford continued the examination to December 15, 2016. 4. Given that Defendant had advised us that it would not appear, I suspected that a continuance might be the outcome of the hearing. To that end, I called the Court to request a continuance orally the day before the hearing. However, the Clerk advised me that Judge Stafford will not continue an examination without a personal appearance by counsel. 5. I spent 3 hours traveling to/from and appearing at the Judgment Debtor Examination. My reasonable hourly rate is $500.00 per hour. 6. I am informed and believe that those hours have been claimed in a Memorandum of Costs After Judgment that will be filed and served concurrently with this motion. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. DATED: November 4, 2016 See next page for signature JEFFREY KANE -14- NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR A TURNOVER ORDER AND AN ASSIGNMENT ORDER A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 20 70 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 ( 7 1 4 ) 5 1 6 - 2 7 0 0 T E L E P H O N E : OO 00 NN O N wn hr W N = NO N N N N N N N N m e e m e R e e e e ee e s 00 ~ ) Oh LA BR ee s U D K E S T O D S E E N a s od a A T R ee D DECLARATION OF JEFFREY KANE I, JEFFREY KANE, hereby declare as follows: 1. I am one of the attorneys for Plaintiff in this action. 2. I make this Declaration in support of our motion for a turnover order and an assignment order. 3, On November 3, 2016, I appeared to conduct the Judgment Debtor Examination that had been ordered by Judge Stafford. While Defendant sent counsel to appear, Defendant did not produce any witness to testify, and instead incorrectly claimed that its pending motion for protective order excused its obligation to appear. In addition, Defendant’s counsel claimed that Defendant has the funds available to pay the amounts due, but would not explain why it had not done so. Ultimately, Judge Stafford continued the examination to December 15, 2016. 4. Given that Defendant had advised us that it would not appear, I suspected that a continuance might be the outcome of the hearing. To that end, I called the Court to request a continuance orally the day before the hearing. However, the Clerk advised me that Judge Stafford will not continue an examination without a personal appearance by counsel. 5. I spent 3 hours traveling to/from and appearing at the Judgment Debtor Examination. My reasonable hourly rate is $500.00 per hour. 6. I am informed and believe that those hours have been claimed in a Memorandum of Costs After Judgment that will be filed and served concurrently with this motion. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. DATED: November 4, 2016 J EFFREY KANE) Sk NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR A TURNOVER ORDER AND AN ASSIGNMENT ORDER A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 2 0 7 0 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 (7 14 ) 5 1 6 - 2 7 0 0 T E L E P H O N E : B L N Oo 0 3 O N Wn 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ANDERSON LAW FIRM MARTIN W. ANDERSON, State Bar No. 178422 2070 North Tustin Avenue Santa Ana, California 92705 Tel: (714) 516-2700 = Fax: (714) 532-4700 LAW OFFICE OF JEFFREY KANE JEFFREY KANE, State Bar No. 183974 20902 Brookhurst Street, Suite 210 Huntington Beach, California 92646 Tel: (714) 964-6900 = Fax: (714) 964-6944 Attorneys for Plaintiff Loc Pham SUPERIOR COURT OF THE COUNTY OF ELECTRONICALLY FILED Superior Court of California, County of Orange 08/24/2016 at 05:07:00 FM Clerk of the Superior Court By Enrique “weloz, Deputy Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ORANGE CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER LOC PHAM, Plaintiff, JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH AMERICA, LLC et al. Defendants. TO THE COURT: Case Number 30-2015-00802473 HON. THEODORE HOWARD DEPARTMENT C18 NOTICE OF ACCEPTANCE OF STATUTORY OFFER OF JUDGMENT [CODE CIV. PROC. § 998]; APPLICATION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT Complaint Filed: August 4, 2015 Trial Date: September 19, 2016 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT Defendant Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC has accepted the offer of judgment issued by Plaintiff Loc Pham (hereafter “Plaintiff”’) pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 998. A copy of the offer, with the signed acceptance by Defendant’s counsel, is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 1. Code of Civil Procedure § 998(b)(1) provides that “[i]f [a § 998 offer] is accepted, the offer with proof of acceptance shall be filed and the clerk or the judge shall enter judgment accordingly.” (Emphasis added.) “The entry of judgment pursuant to section 998 is merely a -1- NOTICE OF ACCEPTANCE OF STATUTORY OFFER OF JUDGMENT [CODE CIV. PROC. § 998]; APPLICATION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT Exhibit 1, p. 1 A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 20 70 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 (7 14 ) 5 1 6 - 2 7 0 0 T E L E P H O N E : B L N Oo 0 3 O N Wn 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ministerial act which may be performed by the clerk of the court.” (Saba v. Crater (1998) 62 Cal.App.4th 150, 152-153.) “[A] section 998 judgment has unique characteristics. After a party signs the offer to compromise, the signed agreement may be presented to the superior court clerk who may enter judgment.” (Pazderka v. Caballeros Dimas Alang, Inc. (1998) 62 Cal.App.4th 658, 667.) “At no time during the entire process leading to entry of a section 998 judgment does a judge or jury ever consider the validity of the agreement.” (/bid.) “Neither the clerk nor the court is authorized to adjudicate a dispute over the terms of section 998 agreements before entering judgment.” (Berg v. Darden (2004) 120 Cal. App.4"™ 721, 727.) Accordingly, Plaintiff hereby applies for the entry of judgment. A proposed form of judgment is submitted herewith for the Court’s convenience. If the Court finds this form improper for any reason, Plaintiff will modify it accordingly upon receiving notice from the Court or the Court may prepare and enter its own judgment. DATED: August 24, 2016 ANDERSON LAW FIRM MARTIN W. ANDERSON JEFFREY KANE 7, By: MARTIN W. ANDERSON Attorney for Plaintiff Loc Pham _0- NOTICE OF ACCEPTANCE OF STATUTORY OFFER OF JUDGMENT [CODE CIV. PROC, § 998]; APPLICATION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT Exhibit 1, Pp. 2 A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 20 70 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 ( 7 1 4 ) 5 1 6 - 2 7 0 0 T E L E P H O N E : S H O W N Oo 0 3 O N Ww 10 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ANDERSON LAW FIRM MARTIN W. ANDERSON, State Bar No. 178422 2070 North Tustin Avenue Santa Ana, California 92705 Tel: (714) 516-2700 = Fax: (714) 532-4700 LAW OFFICE OF JEFFREY KANE JEFFREY KANE, State Bar No. 183974 20902 Brookhurst Street, Suite 210 Huntington Beach, California 92646 Tel: (714) 964-6900 = Fax: (714) 964-6944 Attorneys for Plaintiff Loc Pham SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER LOC PHAM, Plaintiff, JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH AMERICA, LLC et al. Defendants. Case Number 30-2015-00802473 HON. THEODORE HOWARD DEPARTMENT C18 OFFER OF JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE § 998 Complaint Filed: August 4, 2015 Trial Date: September 19, 2016 TO DEFENDANT JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH AMERICA, LLC AND ITS ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 998, judgment to be entered as follows: 1 I alll Plaintiff Loc Pham hereby offers to allow OFFER OF JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE § 998 Exhibit 1, p. 3 A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 20 70 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 (7 14 ) 51 6- 27 00 T E L E P H O N E : wn hs W N © 0 9 AN 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Judgment shall be entered in favor of Plaintiff Loc Pham and against Defendant Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC in the amount of $117,161.58, which amount includes reasonable attorney fees and court costs incurred to the date of this offer. Within 14 days after Defendant Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC fully satisfies the judgment, Plaintiff Loc Pham shall return the 2014 Jaguar XF 2.0, VIN # SAJWAOES1EPUI15734 that is the subject of this action to Defendant Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC with clear title. DATED: August 23, 2016 ANDERSON LAW FIRM MARTIN W. ANDERSON JEFFREY KANE PAE MARTIN W. ANDERSON Attorney for Plaintiff Loc Pham Acceptance The Offer of Judgment stated above is accepted. DATED: —24-20/4 ya Co Sign Here: Print Name Here: Po v ul Ly =o.) Print Title Here: Ee REY = DEE \V: Rv =D a OFFER OF JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE § 998 Exhibit 1, p. 4 A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 2 0 7 0 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 (7 14 ) 5 1 6 - 2 7 0 0 T E L E P H O N E : B L N Oo 0 3 O N Wn 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PROOF OF SERVICE I, Martin W. Anderson, am employed in the County of Orange, State of California. I am over the age of 18, and not a party to this action. My business address is 2070 North Tustin Avenue, Santa Ana, California 92705. My electronic service address is firm@andersonlaw.net. ELECTRONICALLY: On the date and time indicated below, I served the document electronically by sending it by electronic mail to the email address indicated below. The transmission was reported complete and without error by my e-mail provider. Pursuant to Rules of Court, rule 2.251(b)(1)(B), a party consents to electronic service when that party electronically files any documents with the Court. Document(s) Served: NOTICE OF ACCEPTANCE OF STATUTORY OFFER OF JUDGMENT [CODE CIV. PROC. § 998]; APPLICATION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT Person(s) served, address(es), and fax number(s): Ms. Kate Lehrman Lehrman Law Group 12121 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 1300 Los Angeles, CA 90025 Email Address: Klehrman@lehrmanlawgroup.com Date of Service: August 24,2016 Time of Service: _ 5:03 p.m Date Proof of Service Signed: August 24, 2016 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California and of my own personal knowledge that the above is true and correct. Signature: s/ Martin W. Anderson _3 - NOTICE OF ACCEPTANCE OF STATUTORY OFFER OF JUDGMENT [CODE CIV. PROC, § 998]; APPLICATION FOR ENTRY OF JUDGMENT Exhibit 1, p-5 A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 20 70 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 (7 14 ) 51 6- 27 00 T E L E P H O N E " DO © ~~ Ah t h bs Ww N e [ S E e r ee ee E S S S c o ~ 1 O N WU Rk W N ~~ OD W e N I YN t n B W ee © ELECTROMICALLY RECEIVED Supener Court of Califomia, County of Orange 08/24/2016 at D5 07.36 PM Clerk of the Superior Court By Enngue \tloz.Deputy Clerk m= SUPERIOR COURT OF 8 ANDERSON LAW FIRM ce SOUNTY OF ORANGE MARTIN W. ANDERSON, State Bar No. 178422 CENTER 2070 North Tustin Avenue SEP - 1.2016 Santa Ana, California 92705 l Tel: (714) 516-2700 = Fax: (714) 532-4700 LAW OFFICE OF JEFFREY KANE JEFFREY KANE, State Bar No. 183974 20902 Brookhurst Street, Suite 210 Huntington Beach, California 92646 Tel: (714) 964-6900 « Fax: (714) 964-6944 ALAN Hiasng Clerk » aia Guuii A Ptpze ne Attorneys for Plaintiff Loc Pham SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER LOC PHAM, Case Number 30-2015-00802473 HON. THEODORE HOWARD Plaintiff, DEPARTMENT C18 v. BROPOSED] JUDGMENT Complaint Filed: August 4, 2015 JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH Trial Date: September 19, 2016 AMERICA, LLC et al. Defendants. The Court has received Plaintiff’s notice that Defendant has accepted Plaintiff’s offer of judgment pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 998. Accordingly, the Court grants this JUDGMENT in favor of Plaintiff LOC PHAM and against Defendant JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH AMERICA, LLC in the amount of $117,161.58, which amount includes reasonable attorney fees and court costs incurred to the date of the offer. mm H H EE Ta Exhibit 2, p. 1 A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 2 0 7 0 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 (7 14 ) 5 1 6 - 2 7 0 0 T E L E P H O N E , 0 0 ~~ O N U r he W N 2 N R N N N N R ) = s e ee ee e d ee ee e e 0 N h hh RA W N = o O e N S N R A W NN = O Within 14 days after Defendant Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC fully satisfies the judgment, Plaintiff shall return the 2014 Jaguar XF 2.0, VIN # SAJWAOES1EPU15734 that is the subject of this action to Defendant Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC with clear title. DATED: SEP =1 92015 /DGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT oR Exhibit 2, p. 2 Loc Pham v. Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC- Judgment 3 messages Martin W. Anderson Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 8:56 AM To: Kate lehrman , Jacqueline Chinery Cc: Jeff Kane Hi Kate, This matter was settled in mid-August of 2016. Judgment was entered on September 1, 2016. When can | expect to receive payment of the judgment? Please be advised that the Judgment bears interest at the legal rate of 10%. Martin W. Anderson | Attorney | The Anderson Law Firm Tel: (714) 516-2700 | Fax: (714) 532-4700 2070 N. Tustin Ave., Santa Ana, CA 92705 gr Pham 160901 FILED Judgment.pdf 54K Jacqueline Chinery Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 9:46 AM To: "Martin W. Anderson" , Kate lehrman Cc: Jeff Kane We've ordered the check. It takes at least 30 days to process. Thanks Jacqueline Bruce Chinery Lehrman Law Group 12121 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 1300 Los Angeles, CA 90025 (424) 208-8411 (310) 917-5677 (FAX) jchinery @lehrmanlawgroup.com =H Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. The information transmitted through this e-mail is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named herein. This message may be an attorney-client communication and as such is privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete the original. Exhibit 3, p. 1 From: Martin W. Anderson [mailto: martin@andersonlaw.net] Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2016 8:56 AM To: Kate lehrman; Jacqueline Chinery Cc: Jeff Kane Subject: Loc Pham v. Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC- Judgment [Quoted text hidden] Martin W. Anderson Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 10:41 AM To: Jacqueline Chinery Cc: Kate lehrman , Jeff Kane My client has another payment due on October 2, 2016. If payment is not received by Monday of next week, including accrued interest, we will have no choice but to commence enforcement of the Judgment. Martin W. Anderson | Attorney | The Anderson Law Firm Tel: (714) 516-2700 | Fax: (714) 532-4700 2070 N. Tustin Ave., Santa Ana, CA 92705 [Quoted text hidden] Exhibit 3, p. 2_ EJ -130 ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar number and address): FOR COURT USE ONLY MARTIN W. ANDERSON State Bar No. 178422 ANDERSON LAW FIRM 2070 N. TUSTIN AVE. SANTA ANA, CA 92705 TELEPHONE NO: 714-516-2700 Faxno.: 714-532-4700 E-MAIL ADDRESS: firm@andersonlaw.net ATTORNEY FOR (Name): Plaintiff LOC PHAM X ATTORNEY FOR X JUDGMENT CREDITOR UU] ASSIGNEE OF RECORD SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE Ee E——. streeTapbbress: 700 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE WEST Courthereby certifies this document MAILING ADDRESS: accurately reflects the official court cyano zie coe: SANTA ANA, CA 92701 lo a Sigachwe sm seal on this document have the srancH Nave: CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER same validity and legal force and PLAINTIFF: LOC PHAM effect as an original clerk's signature and court seal. California DEFENDANT: JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH AMERICA, LLC Government Code § 68150(g). CASE NUMBER: XI EXECUTION (Money J udgment) 30-2015-00802473 WRIT [] POSSESSION OF [| Personal Property OF [] Real Property [J Limited CivilCase ~~ [| Small Claims Case [] SALE [J Unlimited Civil Case [| Other 1. To the Sheriff or Marshal of the County of: ORANGE You are directed to enforce the judgment described below with daily interest and your costs as provided by law. 2. To any registered process server: You are authorized to serve this writ only in accord with CCP 699.080 or CCP 715.040. 3. (Name): LOC PHAM isthe [X judgment creditor Ol assignee of record whose address is shown on this form above the court's name. 4. Judgment debtor (name, type of legal entity stated in ~~ 9. [_] See next page for information on real or personal property to be judgment if not a natural person, and last known delivered under a writ of possession or sold under a writ of sale. address): 10. [[] This writ is issued on a sister-state judgment. JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH 11. Total judgment........cccoooeeeiieeiiiee e $ 117,161.58 12. Costs after judgment (per filed order or AT memo CCP 685.090).......c.ccceevveeeeireeineannnas $ 1,590.90 Mahwah NJ 07430 13. Subtotal (add 11 and 12) Peers $ 118,752.48 14. Credits ..o.ovueeeeeeceeee cesses eee $ 0.00 15. Subtotal (subtract 14 from 13) ......cc.cccceee.. $ 118,752.48 I” : 16. Interest after judgment (per filed affidavit [J Additional judgment debtors on next page CCP 685.050) (not on GC 6103.5 fees). ..... $ 1,091.36 5. J udgment entered on (date): 09/01/2016 17. Fee for issuance of Writ ............coccoeveeeeenenn.. $ 25.00 6. [] Judgment renewed on (dates): 18. Total (add 15, 16, and 17)........ccccovevrerennnn. $ 119,868.84 19. Levying officer: 7. Notice of sale under this writ (a) Add daily interest from date of writ a, [Ties rot been; Equssed (at the legal rate on 15) (not on : a : GC 6103.5 f€€S) Of ..ooveeereeeereererre $ 32.84 b. [1 has been requested (see next page). (b) Pay directly to court costs included in 11 and 17 (GC 6103.5, 68637; CCP 699.520(1)) ..ccesissivemssnvmsassssssvemvunansns $ 20. [] The amounts called for in items 11-19 are different for each debtor. Alan carlson, clerk of the court 1h€Se amounts are stated for each debtor on Attachment 20. 8. [] Joint debtor information on next page. | Issued on (date): 10/24/2016 | Clerk, by Moy Gfhnanr Deputy hiary hd Johnson NOTICE TO PERSON SERVED: SEE NEXT PAGE FOR IMPORTANT INFORMATION. | Page 1 of 2 Form Approved for Optional Use Code of Civil Procedure, §§ 699.520, 712.010, 715.010 Judicial Council of California WRIT OF EXEC UTION ergment Code, § 6103, EJ-130 [Rev. January 1, 2012] Exhi itd 4 PLAINTIFF: LOC PHAM CASE NUMBER: 30-2015-00802473 | DEFENDANT: JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH AMERICA, LLC — Items continued from page 1— 21. [] Additional judgment debtor (name, type of legal entity stated in judgment if not a natural person, and last known address): oo oo 22. [_] Notice of sale has been requested by (name and address): E i | J L oo oo 23. []]) oint debtor was declared bound by the judgment (CCP 989-994) a.on (date): a.on (date): b. name, type of legal entity stated in judgment if not a b. name, type of legal entity stated in judgment if not natural person, and last known address of joint debtor: a natural person, and last known address of joint debtor: - oo oo oo c. [] additional costs against certain joint debtors (itemize): 24. [] (Writ of Possession or Writ of Sale) ) udgment was entered for the following: a. [] Possession of real property: The complaint was filed on (date): (Check (1) or (2)): 1) [] The Prejudgment Claim of Right to Possession was served in compliance with CCP 415.46. The judgment includes all tenants, subtenants, named claimants, and other occupants of the premises. 2) [J The Prejudgment Claim of Right to Possession was NOT served in compliance with CCP 415.46. (a) $ was the daily rental value on the date the complaint was filed. (b) The court will hear objections to enforcement of the judgment under CCP 1174.3 on the following dates (specify): b.[] Possession of personal property. [] If delivery cannot be had, then for the value (itemize in 24e) specified in the judgment or supplemental order. c. [] Sale of personal property. d.[] Sale of real property. e. Description of property: NOTICE TO PERSON SERVED WRIT OF EXECUTION OR SALE. Your rights and duties are indicated on the accompanying Notice of Levy (Form EJ-150). WRIT OF POSSESSION OF PERSONAL PROPERTY. If the levying officer is not able to take custody of the property, the levying officer will make a demand upon you for the property. If custody is not obtained following demand, the judgment may be enforced as a money judgment for the value of the property specified in the judgment or in a supplemental order. WRIT OF POSSESSION OF REAL PROPERTY. If the premises are not vacated within five days after the date of service on the occupant or, if service is by posting, within five days after service on you, the levying officer will remove the occupants from the real property and place the judgment creditor in possession of the property. Except for a mobile home, personal property remaining on the premises will be sold or otherwise disposed of in accordance with CCP 1174 unless you or the owner of the property pays the judgment creditor the reasonable cost of storage and takes possession of the personal property not later than 15 days after the time the judgment creditor takes possession of the premises. » A Claim of Right to Possession form accompanies this writ (unless the Summons was served in compliance with CCP 415.46). EJ-130 [Rev. January 1, 2012] WRIT OF EXECUTION Page 2 of 2 : i» ‘ ELECTRONICALLY RECEIVED | Sort of Orange AT-138, EJ-125 ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHQUT ATTORNEY (Name, state bar number, and address). 10/05/2016 at 00:42:00 Ad FOR COURT USE ONLY : MARTIN W. ANDERSON State Bar No. 178422 Clerk of the Superior Court | 2070 N. TUSTIN AVE. By Daven ‘elasquez, Deputy Clerk SANTA ANA, CA 92705 FI | TELEPHONE NO. 714-516-2700 FAXNO.: SUPERIOR FEL i ATTORNEY FOR (Name): Plaintiff CENTRAL JUSTICE CEN ‘ Namie oF cour: SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA T 6 street ApoRess: 700 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE WEST OCT 06 200 | MAILING ADDRESS: ; city an zip cone: SANTA ANA, CA 92701 BRANCH NAME: CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER “PLAINTIFF: LOC PHAM DEFENDANT: JAGUAR LAND ROVER NORTH AMERICA, LLC et al. ALAN CARLSON, Clerk of the Court ut — = TBY-S. VALENCIA | APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR APPEARANCE AND EXAMINATION ip pn 30-2015-00802473 X ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENT O ATTACHMENT (Third Person) ! Judgment Debtor J Third Person ! ORDER TO APPEAR FOR EXAMINATION 1. TO (name): SEE ATTACHMENT 1 2. YOU ARE ORDERED TO APPEAR personally before this court, or before a referee appointed by the court, to a. [X] furnish information to aid in enforcement of a money judgment against you. b. [1 answer concerning property of the judgment debtor in your possession or control or concerning a debt you owe the judgment debtor. c. [] answer concerning property of the defendant in your possession or control or concerning a debt you owe the defendant that is subject to attachment. Date: November 3, 2016 Time: 9:00 a.m. Dept. or Div.: C66 Rm. Address of court shown above []is: 3. This order may be served by a sheriff, marsha, registered process server, or the following specially appointed person (name): Martin W. Anderson or Jeffrey Kane "Date: October & , 2016 This order must be served not less than 10 days before IMPORTANT NOTICES ON APPLICATION FOR ORDER TO APPEAR FOR EXAMINATION 4. [X] Judgment creditor [1 Assignee of record [T] Plaintiff who has a right to attach order t applies for an order requiring (name): the Judgment Debtor named in Attachment 1 to appear and furnish information to aid in enforcement of the money judgment or to answer concerning property or debt. 5. The person to be examined is a. [X] the judgment debtor, b. [] athird person (1) who has possession or control of property belonging to the judgment debtor or the defendant or {2) who owes the judgment debtor or the defendant more than $250. An affidavit supporting this application under Code of Civil Procedure section 491.110 or 708.120 is attached. 6. The person to be examined resides or has a place of business in this county or within 150 miles of the place of examination. 7. [] This court is not the court in which the money judgment is entered or (attachment only) the court that issued the writ of attachment. An affidavit supporting an application under Code of Civil Procedure section 491.150 or 708.160 is attached. 8. [1 The judgment debtor has been examined within the past 120 days. An affidavit showing good cause for another examination is attached. | declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Date: October 5, 2016 MARTIN W. ANDERSON > AE {TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF DECLARANT) ) (Continued on reverse) form Adopled for Mandatory Use . Code of Civil Procadure, Judiclal Council of California APPLICATION AND ORDER §§491.110, 708.110, 708.120 AT-138, £125 Rev. July 1, 2000] FOR APPEARANCE AND EXAMINATION — erican LegalNst, Inc, (Attachment—Enforcement of Judgment} www.FormsWorkflow.com Exhibit 5, p. 1 APPEARANCE OF JUDGMENT DEBTOR (ENFORCEMENT OF JUDGMENT) NOTICE TO JUDGMENT DEBTOR If you fail to appear at the time and place specified in this order, you may be subject to arrest and punishment for contempt of court, and the court may make an order requiring you to pay the reasonable attorney fees incurred by the judgment creditor in this proceeding. APPEARANCE OF A THIRD PERSON — (ENFORCEMENT OF- JUDGMENT) (1) NOTICE TO PERSON SERVED If you fail to appear at the time and place specified in this order, you may be subject to arrest and punishment for contempt of court, and the court may make an order requiring you to pay the reasonable attorney fees incurred by the judgment creditor in this proceeding. (2) NOTICE TO JUDGMENT DEBTOR The person in whose favor the judgment was entered in this action claims that the person to be examined pursuant to this order has possession or control of property which is yours or owes you a debt. This property or debt is as follows (Describe the property or debt using typewritten capital letters): If you claim that all or any portion of this property or debt is exempt from enforcement of the money judgment, you must file your exemption claim in writing with the court and have a copy personally served on the judgment creditor not later than three days before the date set for the examination. You must appear at the time and place set for the examination to establish your claim of exemption or your exemption may be waived. APPEARANCE OF A THIRD PERSON (ATTACHMENT) NOTICE TO PERSON SERVED If you fail to appear at the time and place specified in this order, you may be subject to arrest and punishment for contempt of court, and the court may make an order requiring you to pay the reasonable attorney fees incurred by the plaintiff in this proceeding. APPEARANCE OF A CORPORATION, PARTNERSHIP, ASSOCIATION, TRUST, OR OTHER ORGANIZATION It is your duty to designate one or more of the following to appear and be examined: officers, directors, managing agents, or other persons who are familiar with your property and debts. AT-138, E25 [Rov. Jy 1, 2000] APPLICATION AND ORDER Pago wo FOR APPEARANCE AND EXAMINATION oie Lain (Attachment—Enforcement of Judgment) we FormeWorkfow-gorn Exhibit 5, p. 2 Attachment 1 Order to Appear for Examination 1. To (name): Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC Pursuant to this Court’s policy of requiring that Orders to Appear for Examination directed to an entity also name an individual to appear pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 708.150(b), the following individual is designated to appear on behalf of the entity above: Christopher Marchand, its Executive Vice President. As an alternative to the individual named above appearing, the entity named above may designate to appear and be examined one or more officers, directors, managing agents, or other persons who are familiar with its property and debts in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure section 708.150(a). Application for Order to Appear for Examination Plaintiff believes that this Court’s policy of requiring that an order for examination name a specific individual to appear is unnecessary in this case. Accordingly, Plaintiff names the above individual solely in order to accommodate the Court’s requirement, and urges the Court to issue the order with the language contained above allowing Defendant to designate any suitable individual to appear in the designated person’s stead. Exhibit 5, p. 3 18/18/2816 18:15 31889174586 LEHRMAN Lal GROUP PAGE B1/82 Lehrman Law Gro 12121 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1300 Los Angeles, CA 90025 Telephone: (310) 917-4500 Facsimile: (310) 917-5677 FACSIMILE COVER SHEET DATE: Qctober 18, 2016 Please deliver the following pages to: NAME: Martin Anderson, Esq. FIRM: ANDERSON LAW FIRM FAX NO.: (714) 532-4700 TELEPHONE: (714) 516-2700 FROM: Jacqueline Bruce Chinery, Esq. SUBJECT: Loc Pham v. Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC, et al. NO. OF PAGES (including cover sheet): ~~ 2 DOCUMENT(S) ATTACHED: = Letter dated October 18, 2016 If you do not receive all of the pages, please call Theresa at (424) 208-8422 as soon as possible, APPLICABLE LAW. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE 18 NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT OR THE EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING THE MESSAGE TQ THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE MEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY TELEPHONE AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO US AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS VIA THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE, THANK YOU. 590.548.1BC - 00149389. WPD Exhibit 6, p. 1 18/18/2816 18:15 318689174586 LEHRMAN Lal GROUP PAGE B2/82 Lehrman Law brop ~~ oo a 12121 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD = SUITE 1300 . LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90025 DIRECT (424) 208-8411 TELEPHONE (310) 917-4500 FACSIMILE (310) 917-5677 EMAIL jchinery@Ilehrmaniawgroup.com www. [chmanlawgratip. cotn October 18, 2016 VIA: FACSIMILE ONLY Martin W. Anderson ANDERSON LAW FIRM 2070 N. Tustin Avenue Santa Ana, CA 92705 Re: Loc Pham v. Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC Qrange County Superior Court Case No. 30-2015-00802473 Dear Mr. Anderson, We write to confirm that a wire-transfer has been set up to go to your Wells Fargo account ending in 2294 to resolve the matter mentioned above. Please let us know if you have any questions. Very truly yours, 1 = Kjrstin , Paralegal JBC/kb:tn 590.548,JBC « 00204049. DOCX Exhibit 6, p. 2 , p. Loc Pham v. Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC- Order for Examination Martin W. Anderson Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 9:18 AM To: Kate lehrman Cc: Jeff Kane , Jacqueline Chinery , Robert Philipson Kate, | received a fax from your office last night indicating that a wire transfer had been sent to satisfy the judgment. However, my trust account has not received any wire transfers from anyone in the past 24 hours. Please advise of the following so that my bank may investigate: 1. The date of the wire. 2. The amount of the wire. 3. The transaction number. Thank you. Martin W. Anderson | Attorney | The Anderson Law Firm Tel: (714) 516-2700 | Fax: (714) 532-4700 2070 N. Tustin Ave., Santa Ana, CA 92705 On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 1:04 PM, Kate lehrman wrote: [Quoted text hidden] Exhibit 7, p. 1 Loc Pham v. Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC- Order for Examination Jacqueline Chinery Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 9:38 AM To: "Martin W. Anderson" , Kate lehrman Cc: Jeff Kane , Robert Philipson , Kjrstin Berg , Debbie Dahlen Mr. Anderson, per the fax to your office, the wire has been set up. There are a few more steps in the payment process. We will confirm when the transaction has been finalized. Thank you. Jacqueline Bruce Chinery Lehrman Law Group 12121 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 1300 Los Angeles, CA 90025 (424) 208-8411 (310) 917-5677 (FAX) jchinery@lehrmanlawgroup.com = Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. The information transmitted through this e-mail is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named herein. This message may be an attorney-client communication and as such is privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete the original. From: Martin W. Anderson [mailto: martin@andersonlaw.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2016 9:19 AM To: Kate lehrman Cc: Jeff Kane; Jacqueline Chinery; Robert Philipson Subject: Re: Loc Pham v. Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC- Order for Examination [Quoted text hidden] Exhibit 8, p. 1 Loc Pham v. Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC- Order for Examination Jacqueline Chinery Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 9:43 AM To: "Martin W. Anderson" Cc: Kate lehrman , Jeff Kane , Robert Philipson , Kjrstin Berg , Debbie Dahlen Thanks Mr. Anderson. We expect it will be today or tomorrow. We will let you know when it is finalized. Jacqueline Bruce Chinery Lehrman Law Group 12121 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 1300 Los Angeles, CA 90025 (424) 208-8411 (310) 917-5677 (FAX) jchinery@lehrmanlawgroup.com = Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. The information transmitted through this e-mail is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named herein. This message may be an attorney-client communication and as such is privileged and confidential. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this communication in error and that any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete the original. From: Martin W. Anderson [mailto: martin@andersonlaw.net] Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2016 9:41 AM To: Jacqueline Chinery Cc: Kate lehrman; Jeff Kane; Robert Philipson; Kjrstin Berg; Debbie Dahlen [Quoted text hidden] [Quoted text hidden] Exhibit 9, p. 1 ANDERSON LAW FIRM ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2070 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92705 || MARTIN W. ANDERSON TELEPHONE: (714) 516-2700 DIRECT DIAL: (714) 516-2700 FACSIMILE: (714) 532-4700 INTERNET: martin@andersonlaw.net October 24, 2016 VIA E-MAIL ONLY TO Klehrman@lehrmanlawgroup.com Ms. Kate Lehrman LEHRMAN LAW GROUP 12121 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 1300 Los Angeles, CA 90025 Re: Loc Pham v. Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC et al. Superior Court of the State of California, County of Orange Case Number 30-2015-00802473 Dear Ms. Lehrman: The Judgment entered against your client on September 1, 2016, remains unsatisfied. The amount presently due has been computed as follows: Date Description Principal Due | Interest Due 09/01/2016 | Judgment entered on September 1, 2016 +$117,161.58 | +$0.00 =$117,161.58 09/01/2016 | Memorandum of Costs filed on 10/4/2016 =$117,161.58 | +$0.00 +$1,590.00 Note: Interest runs from date of the Judgment | =$118,751.58 pursuant to Lucky United Properties Inv., Inc. v. Lee (2010) 185 Cal.App.4th 125 09/01/2016 | Memorandum of Costs After Judgment signed =$118,751.58 | +$0.00 on 10/21/2016 +$1,062.95 =$119,814.53 09/01/2016 | Interest Accrued on Balance Due: =$119,814.53 | +$1,772.60 to $119,814.53 Balance Due times .10 divided by = $1,772.60 Exhibit 10, p. 1 ANDERSON LAW FIRM Page 2 of 2 October 24, 2016 10/24/2016 | 365 x 54 days between 09/01/2016 and 10/24/2016 = $1,772.60 10/24/2016 | Payment Received in the amount of $86,996.09. | =$119,814.53 | = $1,772.60 $1,772.60 applied to accrued interest. -$85,223.49 | - $1,772.60 $85,223.49 applied to principal balance =$34,591.04 | =3$0.00 All payments are applied to interest first pursuant to Big Bear Properties, Inc. v. Gherman (1979) 95 CA3d 908, 915, 157 CR 443, 447. Balance Due as of 10/24/2016 $34,594.10 $9.47 per day Please note that the principal balance due continues to accrue interest at the rate of $9.47 per day starting on 10/24/2016. If we are required to file additional Memoranda of Costs After Judgment, the principal balance due as of 09/01/2016 will increase, and all of the computations stated above will adjust accordingly. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (714) 516-2700. Very truly yours, ANDERSON LAW FIRM MARTIN W. ANDERSON Exhibit 10, p. 2 ANDERSON LAW FIRM ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2070 NORTH TUSTIN AVENUE SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA 92705 n MARTIN W. ANDERSON TELEPHONE: (714) 516-2700 FACSIMILE: (714) 532-4700 DIRECT DIAL: (714) 516-2700 INTERNET: martin@andersonlaw.net November 1, 2016 VIA E-MAIL ONLY TO Klehrman@lehrmanlawgroup.com Ms. Kate Lehrman LEHRMAN LAW GROUP 12121 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 1300 Los Angeles, CA 90025 Re: Loc Pham v. Jaguar Land Rover North America, LLC et al. Superior Court of the State of California, County of Orange Case Number 30-2015-00802473 Dear Ms. Lehrman: Attached, please find our Acknowledgement of Partial Satisfaction of Judgment and our third Memorandum of Costs After Judgment. The Judgment entered against your client on September 1, 2016, remains unsatisfied. The amount presently due is $5,430.04, plus $1.49 per day. The amount due has been computed as stated in the attached table. If you disagree with my computations, please let me know the amounts you dispute and the legal and factual basis for your dispute as soon as possible. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (714) 516-2700. Very truly yours, ANDERSON LAW FIRM MARTIN W. ANDERSON Exhibit 11, p. 1 ANDERSON LAW FIRM Page 2 of 3 November 1, 2016 Loc Pham v. Jaguar Land Rover Computation of Balance Due as of 11/1/2016 Date Description Principal Due | Interest Due 09/01/2016 | Judgment entered on September 1, 2016 +$117,161.58 | =$0.00 =$117,161.58 09/01/2016 | Interest Accrued on Balance Due: =$117,161.58 | =$0.00 to $117,161.58 Balance Due times .10 divided by +$1,091.37 10/4/2016 | 365 x 34 days = $1,091.37 = $1,091.37 10/4/2016 | Memorandum of Costs After Judgment =$117,161.58 | =$1,091.37 +$1,590.00 =$118,751.58 10/4/2016 | Interest Accrued on Balance Due: =$118,751.58 | =$1,091.37 to $118,751.58 Balance Due times .10 divided by +$553.09 10/21/2016 | 365 x 17 days = $553.09 = $1,644.46 10/21/2016 | Memorandum of Costs After Judgment =$118,751.58 | = $1,644.46 +$1,062.95 =$119,814.53 10/21/2016 | Interest Accrued on Balance Due: =$119,814.53 | =$1,644.46 to $119,814.53 Balance Due times .10 divided by +$98.48 10/24/2016 | 365 x 3 days = $98.48 = $1,742.94 10/24/2016 | Payment Received in the amount of $86,996.09. | =$119,814.53 | = $1,742.94 $1,742.94 applied to accrued interest. -$85,253.15 | - $1,742.94 $85,253.15 applied to principal balance =$34,561.38 | = $0.00 All payments are applied to interest first pursuant to Big Bear Properties, Inc. v. Gherman (1979) 95 CA3d 908, 915, 157 CR 443, 447. 10/24/2016 | Interest Accrued on Balance Due: =$34,561.38 | =$0.00 to $34,561.38 Balance Due times .10 divided by +$18.94 10/26/2016 | 365 x 2 days = $18.94 = $18.94 10/26/2016 | Payment Received in the amount of $30,165.49 | =$34,561.38 | =$18.94 $18.94 applied to accrued interest. -$30,146.55 | -$18.94 $30,146.55 applied to principal balance =$4,414.83 = $0.00 10/26/2016 | Interest Accrued on Balance Due: =$4,414.83 =$0.00 to $4,414.83 Balance Due times .10 divided by 365 +$7.26 11/1/2016 | x 6 days = $7.26 =$7.26 Exhibit 11, p. 2 ANDERSON LAW FIRM Page 3 of 3 November 1, 2016 11/1/2016 | Memorandum of Costs After Judgment =$4,414.83 =$7.26 +$1,007.95 =$5,422.78 Balance Due as of 10/24/2016 $5,422.78 $7.26, plus $1.49 per day from 11/1/16 Exhibit 11, p. 3 A N D E R S O N L A W F I R M 20 70 N O R T H T U S T I N A V E N U E S A N T A A N A , C A L I F O R N I A 9 2 7 0 5 ( 7 1 4 ) 5 1 6 - 2 7 0 0 T E L E P H O N E : B L N Oo 0 J O N Wn 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PROOF OF SERVICE I, Martin W. Anderson, am employed in the County of Orange, State of California. I am over the age of 18, and not a party to this action. My business address is 2070 North Tustin Avenue, Santa Ana, California 92705. My electronic service address is firm@andersonlaw.net. ELECTRONICALLY: On the date and time indicated below, I served the document electronically by sending it by electronic mail to the email address indicated below. The transmission was reported complete and without error by my e-mail provider. Pursuant to Rules of Court, rule 2.251(b)(1)(B), a party consents to electronic service when that party electronically files any documents with the Court. Document(s) Served: NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR A TURNOVER ORDER AND AN ASSIGNMENT ORDER; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES; SUPPORTING DECLARATION Person(s) served, address(es), and fax number(s): Ms. Kate Lehrman Lehrman Law Group 12121 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 1300 Los Angeles, CA 90025 Email Address: Klehrman@lehrmanlawgroup.com Date of Service: November 4, 2016 Time of Service: __1:40 p.m Date Proof of Service Signed: November 4, 2016 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California and of my own personal knowledge that the above is true and correct. Signature: s/ Martin W. Anderson -15- NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR A TURNOVER ORDER AND AN ASSIGNMENT ORDER