Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings
23CV003548: CAPITAL ONE, N.A. vs BAUTISTA 06/16/2026 Hearing on Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings in Department 16C
Tentative Ruling
NOTICE:
Please take notice, Department 54 has moved to Department 16C at the Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye Courthouse. The new courthouse is located at 500 G Street, Sacramento, CA 95814.
TENTATIVE RULING:
Plaintiff Capital One N.A.s (Plaintiff) motion for judgment on the pleadings is UNOPPOSED and GRANTED.
Plaintiffs request for judicial notice is granted.
A plaintiff may move for judgment on the pleadings on grounds that the complaint states facts sufficient to constitute a cause or causes of action against the defendant and the answer does not state facts sufficient to constitute a defense to the complaint. (Code Civ. Proc. § 438(c)(1)(A).) In ruling on a motion for judgment on the pleadings, the Court can properly take judicial notice of evidentiary admissions that cannot be reasonably controverted. (Pang v. Beverly Hospital, Inc. (2000) 79 Cal.App.4th 986, 989-990.) Thus, the Court may consider matters admitted in response to a request for admission because they have been conclusively established against the party making the admission (Code Civ. Proc. § 2033.410(a)) and cannot therefore be reasonably controverted.
The complaint alleges a single cause of action against pro per Defendant Alvin Bautista (Defendant) for common counts based on theories of open-book account, account stated, and money lent and paid.
Plaintiff argues judgment on the pleadings is proper because Defendant has been deemed to have admitted, in sum, that: (1) Defendant held the credit card account issued by Plaintiff, (2) Defendant was provided periodic statements for the account, (3) the statements showed a balance as of June 9, 2023 in the amount of $13,955.43, (4) no payments have been made since June 9, 2023, and (5) the last payment on the credit card was made within the 3 years immediately before June 9, 2023. (RJN, Ex. A.)
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
Although the Court grants Plaintiffs request for judicial notice, the order does not identify the actual requests for admission that Defendant has been deemed to admit. Nonetheless, on its own motion, the Court will exercise its discretion under Code of Civil Procedure § 452 to take judicial notice of the requests for admission that were previously submitted as part of the motion to deem matters admitted and are therefore already part of the Courts records in this action.
The effect of the deemed admitted order is that Defendant responded to the requests for
23CV003548: CAPITAL ONE, N.A. vs BAUTISTA 06/16/2026 Hearing on Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings in Department 16C
admission by admitting the truth of the matters. (Wilcox v. Birtwhistle (1999) 21 Cal.4th 973, 979.) Thus, the admitted facts cannot be reasonably controverted and may be considered by the Court in ruling on this motion.
Based on the allegations in the pleadings and the above admissions, the Court finds Plaintiff has met the burden to demonstrate the complaint states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The Court has also reviewed Defendants answer and notes that the affirmative defenses asserted are based entirely on conclusory allegations without any allegations of supporting facts. The Court finds the answer does not state facts sufficient to constitute a defense.
Finally, the Court notes that Defendant did not oppose the motion and does not explain how the answer could be amended to overcome the admitted facts and to state an affirmative defense.
Plaintiff shall prepare a proposed order and judgment pursuant to CRC Rule 3.1312. The Court declines to sign the current proposed judgment as it includes a specific amount for costs. Plaintiff may seek costs pursuant to CRC 3.1700 once judgment has been entered.
NOTICE:
Consistent with Local Rule 1.06(B), any party requesting oral argument on any matter on this calendar must comply with the following procedure:
To request limited oral argument, on any matter on this calendar, you must call the Law and Motion Oral Argument Request Line at (916) 874-2615 by 4:00 p.m. the Court day before the hearing and advise opposing counsel. At the time of requesting oral argument, the requesting party shall leave a voice mail message: a) identifying themselves as the party requesting oral argument; b) indicating the specific matter/motion for which they are requesting oral argument; and c) confirming that it has notified the opposing party of its intention to appear and that opposing party may appear via Zoom using the Zoom link and Meeting ID indicated below. If no request for oral argument is made, the tentative ruling becomes the final order of the Court.
Unless ordered to appear in person by the Court, parties may appear remotely either telephonically or by video conference via the Zoom video/audio conference platform with notice to the Court and all other parties in accordance with Code of Civil Procedure §367.75. Although remote participation is not required, the Court will presume all parties are appearing remotely for non-evidentiary civil hearings.
The Department 16C Zoom Link is https://saccourt-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/16030877014 To appear on Zoom telephonically, call (833) 568-8864 and enter the Zoom Meeting ID 16030877014. NO COURTCALL APPEARANCES WILL BE ACCEPTED.
Parties requesting services of a court reporter will need to arrange for private court reporter
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO
23CV003548: CAPITAL ONE, N.A. vs BAUTISTA 06/16/2026 Hearing on Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings in Department 16C
services at their own expense, pursuant to Government code §68086 and California Rules of Court, Rule 2.956. Requirements for requesting a court reporter are listed in the Policy for Official Reporter Pro Tempore available on the Sacramento Superior Court website at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/court-reporters/docs/crtrp-6a.pdf.
Parties may contact Court-Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore by utilizing the list of Court Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore available at https://www.saccourt.ca.gov/courtreporters/docs/crtrp-13.pdf.
A Stipulation and Appointment of Official Reporter Pro Tempore (CV/E-206) is required to be signed by each party, the private court reporter, and the Judge prior to the hearing, if not using a reporter from the Courts Approved Official Reporter Pro Tempore list.
Once the form is signed it must be filed with the clerk. If a litigant has been granted a fee waiver and requests a court reporter, the party must submit a Request for Court Reporter by a Party with a Fee Waiver (CV/E-211) and it must be filed with the clerk at least 10 days prior to the hearing or at the time the proceeding is scheduled if less than 10 days away. Once approved, the clerk will forward the form to the Court Reporters Office and an official reporter will be provided.