Navy Federal Credit Union v. Corona

13. Navy Federal Credit Union v. Corona, Case No. CIVSB2511311 Plaintiff’s Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings 8/25/26, 9:00 a.m., Dept. S-17

This matter was continued from its original hearing on June 11, 2026 The Court would GRANT this unopposed motion. As a preliminary matter, the Court considers the newly-filed Declaration submitted to satisfy the meet-and-confer requirement. Although the Court notes that no attempt to actually call the Plaintiff was made, the attached June 15th letter clearly requests dates for a phone call or video conference and that no response was received. (Kostelidis Decl., ¶3 & Exh. A.) Here, the JOP rests on the argument that the Answer does not state facts sufficient to constitute a defense to the Complaint.

Plaintiff notes that the Answer “admits that all statements of the Complaint are true.” (Motion, 2:10.) More specifically, the Answer by this self-represented Defendant simply provides a narrative indicating that “he never intended to reach this point” with Plaintiff. (Answer, ¶3.) The Answer goes on to discuss the circumstances that made it difficult to “keep up with Federal Navy Credit Union Payments.” (Answer, ¶4.) A party may bring a motion for judgment on the pleadings after filing an answer and the time to demurrer has expired. (Code Civ.

Proc., § 438(b)(1) & (f); Evans v. California Trailer Court, Inc. (1994) 28 Cal.App.4th 540, 548.) In this case, there are no denials or affirmative defenses provided by Defendant. For that reason, the Court would grant this motion.

*** *** ***

2