TD BANK USA, N.A. vs WILLIAMS

23CV011038: TD BANK USA, N.A. vs WILLIAMS 07/08/2026 Hearing on Motion - Other to Enter Judgment Under Terms of Stipulated Settlement in Department 8D

Tentative Ruling

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 8D Zoom Link is https://saccourt-ca-gov.zoomgov.com/j/16113421868 and the Zoom Meeting ID is 161 1342 1868. To appear on Zoom telephonically, call (833) 568-8864 and enter the Zoom Meeting ID referenced above. NO COURTCALL APPEARANCES WILL BE ACCEPTED.

Parties requesting services of a court reporter will need to arrange for private court reporter 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 on the Court Reporter Services webpage available on the Sacramento Superior Court website at https://saccourt.ca.gov/general-information/court-reporter-services-transcripts. Parties may contact Court- Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore by utilizing the list of Court Approved Official Reporters Pro Tempore available at https://saccourt.ca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/227/639084034465370000.

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 Court’s 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

23CV011038: TD BANK USA, N.A. vs WILLIAMS 07/08/2026 Hearing on Motion - Other to Enter Judgment Under Terms of Stipulated Settlement in Department 8D

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 Reporter’s Office and an official reporter will be provided.

*** EFFECTIVE APRIL 13, 2026, THIS DEPARTMENT HAS MOVED TO THE TANI G. CANTIL-SAKAUYE COURTHOUSE LOCATED AT 500 G STREET IN SACRAMENTO, CA 95814. ALL HEARINGS NOTICED FOR DEPARTMENT 25 WILL BE HEARD IN DEPARTMENT 8D OF THE NEW COURTHOUSE. ***

Tentative Ruling:

Plaintiff TD Bank USA, N.A.’s (“Plaintiff”) motion to enter judgment under terms of stipulated settlement is UNOPPOSED and GRANTED.

Plaintiff’s unopposed request for judicial notice is also GRANTED for the limited purposes of judicial notice. (See Johnson & Johnson v. Superior Court (2011) 192 Cal.App.4th 757, 768 [court may take judicial notice of the existence of court documents but not to the truth of the statements contained therein].)

This is a debt collection action. Plaintiff and Defendant Doreen Williams (“Defendant”) executed a written stipulation agreement (“Stipulation Agreement”). (DiPiero Decl., ¶ 2; Request for Judicial Notice, Exhibit B.)

Under the terms of the Stipulation Agreement, the parties agreed that Defendant was indebted to Plaintiff in the amount of $3,958.39. (Stipulation Agreement, ¶ 2.) The Parties agreed that Defendant was to pay the settlement amount in monthly installment payments as follows: (1) one down payment of $66.00 due on or before June 25, 2024; (2) minimum monthly payments of $66 due on or before the 26th day of each and every month beginning in July 2024; and (3) a final payment of $64.39 due on or before May 26, 2029. (Id. at ¶ 4.)

Judgment would not be entered so long as Defendant did not default on the terms of the Stipulation Agreement. (Id. at ¶ 3.) If Defendant defaulted, Plaintiff would be entitled to file a motion to enter judgment in the full indebted amount of $3,958.39, plus court costs already incurred, plus additional court costs incurred in obtaining the judgment, less any payments made. (Ibid.) The parties jointly requested that the Court retain jurisdiction under Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6. (Stipulation Agreement, ¶ 7.)

“If parties to pending litigation stipulate, in a writing signed by the parties outside of the presence of the court or orally before the court, for settlement of the case, or part thereof, the court, upon motion, may enter judgment pursuant to the terms of the settlement.” (Code Civ.

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO

23CV011038: TD BANK USA, N.A. vs WILLIAMS 07/08/2026 Hearing on Motion - Other to Enter Judgment Under Terms of Stipulated Settlement in Department 8D

Proc., § 664.6, subd. (a).) The Court retains jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement pursuant to the settlement terms. (Wackeen v. Malis (2002) 97 Cal.App.4th 429, 439 [“[T]he court may...retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement, until such time as all of its terms have been performed by the parties, if the parties have requested this specific retention of jurisdiction.”].)

Under the terms of the Stipulation Agreement, Defendant has paid a total of $726. (DiPiero Decl., ¶ 5.) The last payment Plaintiff received from Defendant was on April 27, 2025; therefore, Defendant has defaulted. (Id. at ¶ 3.) Plaintiff provided Defendant with a 10-days written notice of the failure to make the agreed-upon payments and Plaintiff’s intention to request entry of judgment under the terms of the Settlement Agreement.

Defendant has filed no opposition, which the Court construes as a concession on the merits. (D.I. Chadbourne, Inc. v. Superior Court (1964) 60 Cal.2d 723, 728, fn. 4 [where nonmoving party fails to oppose a ground for a motion “it is assumed that [nonmoving party] concedes” that ground].)

The unopposed motion to enforce settlement agreement is therefore GRANTED. Judgment shall be entered in the amount of $3,605.89, representing the agreed-upon indebted amount of $3,958.39, less a credit for Defendant’s payments of $726, plus court costs of $373.50. (See DiPiero Decl., ¶ 6; Memorandum of Costs.)

The Court will sign the proposed order and proposed judgment submitted with the moving papers. Plaintiff shall provide notice of entry of the order and judgment.