DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
19STCV21218·la·Civil·Settlement Enforcement
Hearing in about 3 hoursGRANTED

Andrew Kern v. John Gold and Diesel One

Motion for entry of judgment pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6

Hearing date
Aug 20, 2026
Department
507
Judge
Prevailing
Plaintiff

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Monetary amounts referenced

$7,500.00$10,000.00

Parties

PlaintiffAndrew Kern
DefendantJohn Gold
DefendantDiesel One

Ruling

(Stanley Mosk Courthouse: Dept. 507) August 20, 2026 DEPARTMENT 507 LAW AND MOTION RULINGS

Plaintiff Andrew Kern's motion for entry of judgment pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6 is GRANTED.

DISCUSSION: Motion for Entry of Judgment Pursuant to CCP Sec. 664.6 Plaintiff moves the Court for an order, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6, entering judgment against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the amount of $7,500.00.

On October 27, 2023, Plaintiff and Defendants John Gold and Diesel One (collectively, "Defendants") executed a Settlement and Release Agreement, in which Robert Kern agreed to release his claims against Defendants in exchange for a total payment of $10,000.00. (Mot., p. 3.)

Plaintiff later moved to enforce the settlement under Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6. (Mot., p. 3.) The Court granted Plaintiff's motion and ordered Defendants to pay Plaintiff the remaining settlement balance of $7,500.00 within 10 calendar days of service of the order on August 27, 2025. (Mot., p. 3; see also 8/27/25 Minute Order.) Defendants have failed to pay. (Mot., p. 3.) Plaintiff now seeks judgment entered against Defendants.

Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6, subdivision (a), gives a court the authority upon motion of a party to enter judgment pursuant to the terms of the written, signed settlement.¿¿If the parties agree, the court may dismiss the case without prejudice and retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement until full performance is made. (Ibid.) The court need not vacate the dismissal if the parties requested retention of jurisdiction before the dismissal. (Madrigal v. Hyundai Motor America ¿(2025) 17 Cal.5th 592, 719, fn. 3;¿ Hines v. Lukes ¿(2008) 167 Cal.App.4th 1174, 1182.)

The Court retained jurisdiction following dismissal to enforce the Settlement Agreement in its entirety. (See Joint Stipulation and Order for the Court to Dismiss Case and Retain Jurisdiction, 7/30/24.) The Court further finds the $7,500.00 requested proper and justified.

Accordingly, Plaintiff Andrew Kern's motion for entry of judgment pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6 is GRANTED. Judgment is entered pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6 against Defendants, jointly and severally, in the principal amount of $7,500.00, plus post-judgment interest.

Any party may submit on the tentative ruling by contacting the courtroom via email at [email protected] by no later than 4:00 p.m. the day before the hearing. All interested parties must be copied on the email. It should be noted that if you submit on a tentative ruling the court will still conduct a hearing if any party appears. By submitting on the tentative you have, in essence, waived your right to be present at the hearing, and you should be aware that the court may not adopt the tentative, and may issue an order which modifies the tentative ruling in whole or in part. | Home -->)" -->

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

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?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share