CAPITAL ONE N.A. vs LUISITO C VICTORINO

BANK, N.A. vs MARTINIANO D ALCANTAR, AN INDIVIDUAL Tentative Ruling: The Court has read and reviewed the moving papers filed by Plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. ("Plaintiff") in support of its Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, including the meet and confer letter dated July 10, 2026. No opposition has been filed by Defendant Martiniano D. Alcantar ("Defendant").

Pursuant to California Evidence Code sections 452 and 453, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's request for the Court to take judicial notice of: Plaintiff's Complaint filed on November 19, 2025; The Court's Order Deeming Plaintiff's Requests for Admission as Admitted entered on July 6, 2026; and Plaintiff's Motion to Deem Requests for Admission Admitted, and the Requests for Admission submitted in support of that motion, filed on April 8, 2026.

The Court finds the Request for Admissions admitted cannot reasonably be controverted at this stage of the proceedings. The Request for Admissions are tantamount to Defendant admitting the causes of action alleged by Plaintiff. Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings is GRANTED as the complaint states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action and the Answer in conjunction with the admissions deemed admitted does not state facts sufficient to constitute a defense.

The Court orders Judgment in favor of Plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. and against Defendant Martiniano D. Alcantar for the principal sum of $11,610.40 plus costs in the amount of $430.00 for a total Judgment of $12,040.40. The Proposed Judgment will be signed by the Court. Plaintiff to give notice. Case Number: 25NWLC74728 Hearing Date: September 9, 2026 Dept: Y 25NWLC74728: WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. vs KENNETH J LICATA Tentative Ruling: The Court has read and reviewed all moving documents filed by Plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. ("Plaintiff") in support of its motion for summary judgment, including the separate statement and supporting evidence. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment was filed on June 3, 2026 and set for hearing on September 9, 2026. No opposition has been filed by Defendant Kenneth J. Licata ("Defendant").

The Court finds that Plaintiff has met its initial burden of showing there are no triable issues of material fact as to Plaintiff's cause of action for breach of written contract by presenting evidence establishing each element of the cause of action thereby entitling Plaintiff to summary judgment. Plaintiff has shown, through admissible evidence, that Defendant was issued the subject credit card by Plaintiff; Defendant was the only person authorized to make charges on the account; Defendant received monthly statements for the account; and there is no record of any unresolved disputes on the account. (Plaintiff's Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Facts ("UMF") Nos. 1-9.)

The evidence further shows Defendant's last payment on the account was October 13, 2024, and Defendant owes Plaintiff an unpaid balance of $12,216.55 on the credit account. (Id., UMF Nos. 10-12.) The burden having shifted to Defendant, the Court finds Defendant has failed to set forth specific facts showing that a triable issue of material fact exists as to any of the elements of the causes of action for breach of contract or that there is any defense thereto required by Code of Civil Procedure section 437c(p)(1).

The Court finds that Plaintiff is entitled to judgment as a matter of law and GRANTS Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment as to its cause of action for breach of contract. Judgment is hereby entered in favor of Plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. and against Defendant Kenneth J. Licata in the principal sum of $12,216.55, plus reasonable attorney's fees and costs. The Proposed Order will be signed by the Court. Plaintiff must submit a Memorandum of Costs and a declaration in support of reasonable attorney's fees as well as a Proposed Judgment for the Court's review and signature. Plaintiff to give notice. Case Number: 25NWLC75031 Hearing Date: September 9, 2026 Dept: Y 25NWLC75031: CAPITAL ONE

N.A. vs LUISITO C VICTORINO 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 Stipulation Agreement; Jurisdiction Retained Under Code of Civil Procedure Section 664.6 signed by Defendant on April 2, 2026 and filed with the Court on April 10, 2026. The Court also takes judicial notice of the Order on Settlement Agreement and Stipulation for Judgment entered by the Court on May 20, 2026.

The Court notes that Plaintiff has advised that Defendant has made payments totaling $288.00, leaving an outstanding amount of $3,785.91 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 Luisito C. Victorino for the principal sum of $3,785.91 plus court costs of $378.61, for a total judgment of $4,164.52.

The Proposed Judgment will be signed by the Court. Plaintiff to give notice. Case Number: 26NWLC28453 Hearing Date: September 9, 2026 Dept: Y 26NWLC28453: TOYOTA MOTOR CREDIT CORPORATION vs KIMBERLY CRUZVILLEGAS Tentative Ruling: The Court has read and considered the moving papers filed by Plaintiff Toyota Motor Credit Corporation ("Plaintiff"), and the supporting attorney declaration. Plaintiff's Motion to Set Aside and Vacate Dismissal("Motion") has been served on Defendant Kimberly CruzVillegas and no opposition has been filed.

In its Motion, Plaintiff requests to vacate and set aside the dismissal entered on May 28, 2026 and restore the case to active status. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Sec. 473(b), the Court has authority to relieve, on such terms as are just, a party or party's legal representative from a judgment taken against the party because of mistake, inadvertence, surprise and/or excusable neglect. Here, Plaintiff's counsel has presented evidence that the dismissal was entered through Plaintiff's counsel's mistake.

Based on the declaration submitted by Plaintiff, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff's Motion to Set Aside and Vacate Dismissal. This case is returned to active status. Plaintiff to give notice. | Home -->)" -->