SYNCHRONY BANK VS. TRICIA D. HAMERTON
MOTION FOR ENTERING JUDGMENT
Motion type
Parties
Ruling
August 7, 2026 Dept. 9 Civil Tentative Rulings
6. 23CV1955 SYNCHRONY BANK VS. TRICIA D. HAMERTON MOTION FOR ENTERING JUDGMENT
ON THE COURT'S OWN MOTION DUE TO LACK OF JUDICIAL COVERAGE, THE COURT WILL HEAR THIS MATTER ON SEPTEMBER 4, 2026, AT 8:30 A.M. IN DEPARTMENT NINE. THERE WILL BE NO HEARING ON AUGUST 7, 2026. SHOULD A PARTY WISH TO REQUEST ORAL ARGUMENT, THE BELOW PROCEDURES REMAIN IN EFFECT.
Plaintiff, Synchrony Bank, seeks an order to enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendant, Tricia Hamerton (“Defendant”), due to Defendant’s default of the settlement agreement. No opposition has been filed. An unsigned Proof of Service was filed by Plaintiff on June 10, 2026, rendering service defective.
TENTATIVE RULING #6: PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST IS DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE DUE TO DEFECTIVE SERVICE.
NO HEARING ON THIS MATTER WILL BE HELD UNLESS A REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT IS TRANSMITTED ELECTRONICALLY THROUGH THE COURT’S WEBSITE OR BY TELEPHONE TO THE COURT AT (530) 621-6551 BY 4:00 P.M. ON THE DAY THE TENTATIVE RULING IS ISSUED. CAL. RULE CT. 3.1308; LOCAL RULE 8.05.07; SEE ALSO LEWIS V. SUPERIOR COURT, 19 CAL.4TH 1232, 1247 (1999).
NOTICE TO ALL PARTIES OF A REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT AND THE GROUNDS UPON WHICH ARGUMENT IS BEING REQUESTED MUST BE MADE BY TELEPHONE OR IN PERSON BY 4:00 P.M. ON THE DAY THE TENTATIVE RULING IS ISSUED. CAL. RULE CT. 3.1308; EL DORADO COUNTY LOCAL RULE 8.05.07. PROOF OF SERVICE OF SAID NOTICE MUST BE FILED PRIOR TO OR AT THE HEARING.
LONG CAUSE HEARINGS MUST BE REQUESTED BY 4:00 P.M. ON THE DAY THE TENTATIVE RULING IS ISSUED AND THE PARTIES ARE TO PROVIDE THE COURT WITH THREE MUTUALLY AGREEABLE DATES ON FRIDAY AFTERNOONS AT 2:30 P.M. LONG CAUSE ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTS WILL BE SET FOR HEARING ON ONE OF THE THREE MUTUALLY AGREEABLE DATES ON FRIDAY AFTERNOONS AT 2:30 P.M. THE COURT WILL ADVISE THE PARTIES OF THE LONG CAUSE HEARING DATE AND TIME BY 5:00 P.M. ON THE DAY THE TENTATIVE RULING IS ISSUED. PARTIES MAY PERSONALLY APPEAR AT THE HEARING.
16
Cited authorities
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Ask about this ruling
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”