DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
24NWLC16712·la·Civil·Contract
Hearing todayGRANTED

CITIBANK N.A. vs MELISSA ARREGUIN

Motion to set aside order of dismissal and enter judgment

Hearing date
Aug 20, 2026
Department
Y
Judge
Prevailing
Plaintiff

Motion type

Browse all Other rulings statewide →

Monetary amounts referenced

$500.25$2,166.83$603.61$2,545.44

Parties

PlaintiffCITIBANK N.A.
DefendantMELISSA ARREGUIN

Ruling

(Norwalk Courthouse: Dept. Y) August 20, 2026 DEPARTMENT Y LAW AND MOTION RULINGS

CHASE BANK, N.A. vs IDELFONSO GUTIERREZ, JR Tentative Ruling: The Court has read and reviewed the moving papers filed by Plaintiff JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. ("Plaintiff"), including the supporting declaration.

The Court takes judicial notice of the Stipulation Agreement; Jurisdiction Retained Under Code of Civil Procedure Section 664.6 signed by Defendant on July 2, 2024 and filed with the Court on July 15, 2024. The Court also takes judicial notice of the Order on Settlement Agreement and Stipulation for Judgment entered by the Court on July 17, 2024. The Court notes that Plaintiff has advised that Defendant has made payments totaling $9,337.33, leaving an outstanding amount of $12,792.00 due and owing.

Based on the Stipulation signed by the parties and the moving papers submitted by Plaintiff, Plaintiff's motion is GRANTED. The Order Dismissing this action pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6 is set aside. Judgment is hereby entered in favor of Plaintiff JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. and against Defendant Idelfonso Gutierrez, Jr. for the principal sum of $12,792.00 plus court costs of $0, for a total judgment of $12,792.00. The Proposed Judgment will be signed by the Court. Plaintiff to give notice. Case Number: 24NWLC07336 Hearing Date: August 20, 2026 Dept: Y

24NWLC07336: NCB MANAGEMENT SERVICES, INC. AS ASSIGNEE OF CROSS RIVER BANK, SERVICED BY UPGRADE, I vs EDUARDO CARRILLO Tentative Ruling: The Court has read and reviewed the moving papers filed by Plaintiff NCB Management Services, Inc. ("Plaintiff"), including the supporting declaration.

The Court takes judicial notice of the Stipulation for Entry of Judgment signed by Defendant on May 30, 2024 and filed with the Court on June 21, 2024. The Court also takes judicial notice of the Order of Dismissal Without Prejudice Pursuant to C.C.P. section 664.6 entered by the Court on July 2, 2024. The Court notes that Plaintiff has advised that Defendant has made payments totaling $1,000.00, leaving an outstanding amount of $4,288.14 due and owing.

Based on the Stipulation signed by the parties and the moving papers submitted by Plaintiff, Plaintiff's motion is GRANTED. The Order dismissing this action pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6 is set aside. Judgment is hereby entered in favor of Plaintiff NCB Management Services, Inc. and against Defendant Eduardo Carillo for the principal sum of $5,288.14, plus previous court costs of $319.89, $225.00 for Defendant's first appearance fee, $16.23 e-filing fee, $60.00 motion fee, less $1,000.00 for payments made to date, for a total judgment sum of $4,909.26. The Proposed Judgment will be signed by the Court. Plaintiff to give notice. Case Number: 24NWLC16712 Hearing Date: August 20, 2026 Dept: Y

24NWLC16712: CITIBANK N.A. vs MELISSA ARREGUIN Tentative Ruling: The Court has read and reviewed the moving papers filed by Plaintiff Citibank, N.A. ("Plaintiff"), including the supporting declaration.

The Court takes judicial notice of the Stipulation Agreement; Jurisdiction Retained Under Code of Civil Procedure Section 664.6 signed by Defendant on August 29, 2024 and filed with the Court on October 24, 2024. The Court also takes judicial notice of the Order on Settlement Agreement and Stipulation for Judgment entered by the Court on October 29, 2024. The Court notes that Plaintiff has advised that Defendant has made payments totaling $500.25, leaving an outstanding amount of $2,166.83 due and owing.

Based on the Stipulation signed by the parties and the moving papers submitted by Plaintiff, Plaintiff's motion is GRANTED. The Order Dismissing this action pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6 is set aside. Judgment is hereby entered in favor of Plaintiff Citibank, N.A. and against Defendant Melissa Arreguin for the principal sum of $2,166.83 plus court costs of $603.61, for a total judgment of $2,545.44. The Proposed Judgment will be signed by the Court. Plaintiff to give notice. Case Number: 24NWLC52157 Hearing Date: August 20, 2026 Dept: Y

24NWLC52157: CAPITAL ONE, N.A. vs STELLA M VORISE Tentative Ruling: The Court has read and reviewed the moving papers filed by Plaintiff Capital One, N.A. ("Plaintiff"), including the supporting declaration.

The Court takes judicial notice of the Stipulated Settlement Agreement signed by Defendant on April 28, 2025 and filed with the Court on May 1, 2025. The Court also takes judicial notice of the Order Dismissing Without Prejudice and Retaining Jurisdiction Pursuant To California Code of Civil Procedure 664.6 entered by the Court on May 5, 2025. The Court notes that Plaintiff has advised that Defendant has made payments totaling $1,172.00, leaving an outstanding amount of $1,765.41 due and owing.

Based on the Stipulation signed by the parties and the moving papers submitted by Plaintiff, Plaintiff's motion is GRANTED. The Order Dismissing this action pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 664.6 is set aside. Judgment is hereby entered in favor of Plaintiff Capital One, N.A. and against Defendant Stella M. Vorise for the principal sum of $2,937.41 plus court costs of $363.00, less credits of $1,172.00, for a total judgment of $2,128.41. The Proposed Judgment will be signed by the Court. Plaintiff to give notice. Case Number: 25NWLC58340 Hearing Date: August 20, 2026 Dept: Y

25NWLC58340: LVNV FUNDING LLC AS SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST TO CREDIT ONE BANK, N.A. vs RICHARD ESPINAL Tentative Ruling: The Court has read and considered the moving papers filed by Defendant Richard Espinal ("Defendant"), the opposing papers filed by Plaintiff LVNV Funding, LLC ("Plaintiff"), and Defendant's reply.

The Court takes judicial notice of the Complaint filed on October 3, 2025 and the attached Credit One Bank Card Agreement ("Agreement"). The Court notes that Defendant has elected to resolve Plaintiff's claims by binding arbitration and has sought such relief by this motion pursuant to the terms of the Agreement, which designates the American Arbitration Association ("AAA") as the forum for arbitration.

Under Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.2, a court shall order arbitration if it determines that an agreement to arbitrate exists and that a party to the agreement refuses to arbitrate. Plaintiff's opposition to Defendant's motion to compel arbitration constitutes a refusal to arbitrate within the meaning of the statute. Plaintiff's contention that Defendant failed to establish the existence of an agreement to arbitrate is not well taken, as the Agreement is attached to the Complaint and is the same Agreement Plaintiff seeks to enforce.

Once arbitration is compelled, the Court must stay the action pending the outcome of the arbitration pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1281.4. Accordingly, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 1281.2 and 1281.4, Defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay Proceedings is GRANTED.

The proceedings will be stayed for approximately 120 days pending arbitration with AAA as set forth in the Agreement. The Court advances and vacates the current trial date of October 9, 2026. The Court also sets a Status Conference Re: Arbitration on March 3, 2027 at 8:30 a.m. in Department Y. If the parties have not initiated Arbitration by the date of the Status Conference Re: Arbitration, the Court will reset the trial date at the request of either party and find that the right to arbitrate has been waived. Plaintiff to give notice. Case Number: 25NWLC66146 Hearing Date: August 20, 2026 Dept: Y 25NWLC66146: JPMORGAN CHASE

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