PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOCIATES, LLC VS. ARTURO RODRIGUEZ

Proc. § 437c, subd. (c).) “The court’s sole function on a motion for summary judgment is issue-finding, not issue-determination. The judge must simply determine from the evidence submitted whether there is a “triable issue as to any material

September 10, 2026, Law and Motion Calendar Judge Nicole S. Healy Department 28 ________________________________________________________________________ fact.” [CCP § 437c(c) (emphasis added).” (Weil & Brown, Cal. Practice Guide: Civil Procedure Before Trial (The Rutter Group June 2026 Update) ¶ 10:270.)

“On a motion for summary judgment, the initial burden is always on the moving party to make a prima facie showing that there are no triable issues of material fact.” (Scalf v. D.B. Log Homes, Inc. (2005) 128 Cal.App.4th 1510, 1519 (Scalf).) “[F]rom commencement to conclusion, the party moving for summary judgment bears the burden of persuasion that there is no triable issue of material fact and that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” (Aguilar, supra, 25 Cal.4th at p. 850.) The movant “has met his or her burden of showing that a cause of action has no merit if that party has shown that one or more elements of the cause of action, even if not separately pleaded, cannot be established...” (Scalf, supra, at p. 1520.)

Once defendant has met their burden, the burden shifts to the plaintiff “to show that a triable issue of one or more material facts exists as to the cause of action or a defense thereto.” (Code Civ. Proc, § 437c, subd. (p)(2).) To establish a triable issue of material fact, plaintiff “shall set forth the specific facts showing that a triable issue of material fact exists as to the cause of action or a defense thereto.” (Ibid.) Courts “liberally construe the evidence in support of the party opposing summary judgment and resolve doubts concerning the evidence in favor of that party.” (Dore v. Arnold Worldwide, Inc. (2006) 39 Cal.4th 384, 389.)

A “book account” is “a detailed statement which constitutes the principal record of one or more transactions between a debtor and a creditor arising out of a contract or some fiduciary relation, and shows the debits and credits in connection therewith, and against whom and in favor of whom entries are made, is entered in the regular course of business as conducted by such creditor or fiduciary, and is kept in a reasonably permanent form and manner and is (1) in a bound book, or (2) on a sheet or sheets fastened in a book or to backing but detachable therefrom, or (3) on a card or cards of a permanent character, or is kept in any other reasonably permanent form and manner.” (Code Civ.

Proc., § 337a.) A book account is “open” where a balance remains due on the account. (Professional Collection Consultants v. Lauron (2017) 8 Cal.App.5th 958, 969 (Lauron), citing Interstate Group Administrators, Inc. v. Cravens, Dargan & Co. (1985) 174 Cal.App.3d 700, 708.) “The essential elements of an account stated are: (1) previous transactions between the parties establishing the relationship of debtor and creditor; (2) an agreement between the parties, express or implied, on the amount due from the debtor to the creditor; (3) a promise by the debtor, express or implied, to pay the amount due.” (Zinn v.

Fred R. Bright Co. (1969) 271 Cal.App.2d 597, 600; see also Maggio, Inc. v. Neal (1987) 196 Cal.App.3d 745, 752.)

C.

Discussion

Under both causes of action pled in the complaint, the statute of limitations begins to run from the date of the last item entered in the book account. (Lauron, supra, 8 Cal.App.5th at p. 966.) The statute of limitations for each cause of action is four years. (Code Civ. Proc., § 337, subd. (b).)

September 10, 2026, Law and Motion Calendar Judge Nicole S. Healy Department 28 ________________________________________________________________________ “When a creditor charges off a debt, the creditor declares the debt is unlikely to be collected and takes a tax deduction on the debt. [citation] This typically occurs after six months of nonpayment by the debtor. [citation] Although it has been deemed uncollectible by the original creditor, the debt remains legally valid after a charge-off.” (Cavalry SPV I, LLC v. Watkins (2019) 36 Cal.App.5th 1070, 1075, fn. 1, citations omitted.)

Defendant contends that he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law because his credit account was charged off on February 6, 2019, yet plaintiff did not file its complaint until February 28, 2024. (Deft. Sep. Statement Undisputed Material Facts [SSUMF], ¶¶ 1, 2 & 6.) Because the motion is unopposed, if defendant meets his burden to show that the statutory period in which plaintiff had to file his action has expired, he meets his initial burden.

The complaint alleges the date of the last payment on the credit account was March 22, 2022. (SSUMF No. 7.) In his declaration, defendant asserts that he neither made a payment in or around March of 2022 nor directed anyone else to make such a payment. (Declaration of Arturo Rodriguez iso MSJ, ¶ 2.) Furthermore, defendant had no knowledge of any such payment being made. (Ibid.)

Exhibit A to the declaration of defense counsel Scott Maurer filed in support of this motion, a letter from plaintiff’s counsel dated September 14, 2023, indicates that at some point between February 6, 2019 (the date of the charge off) and the date of the letter, September 14, 2023, either a payment or a credit toward the debt of $595.88 was made.

An account stated and an open book account exist between a creditor and a debtor. The original creditor on this account was Synchrony Bank. The account stated and open book account were with Synchrony Bank. (See RJN, exh. C [Decl. iso Default Judgment], ¶¶ 8.b & h.1, and exhs. B & C thereto.) Accordingly, the “last item” in the account between creditor and debtor was in January 2019. (See id., exh. C.)

Plaintiff Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC is a debt buyer. As such, it did not extend credit to defendant. Any credits or payments made after the account was charged off and sold by the original creditor were made to plaintiff Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC and not to the original creditor. The last item in the account was entered in or about January 2019 and the complaint was filed more than four years later, on February 28, 2024. Accordingly, the complaint is time-barred. The case is therefore dismissed with prejudice.

If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the court. Thereafter, defendant’s counsel shall prepare a written order consistent with the court’s ruling for the court’s signature, pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1312 and Local Rule 3.403(b)(iv), and provide written notice of the ruling to all parties who have appeared in this action. The order should be e-filed only, do not email or mail a hard copy to the court.