Lesser v. Vaya Telecom CA4/1

Filed 10/18/24 Lesser v. Vaya Telecom CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

TODD LESSER, D082332

Plaintiff and Appellant,

v. (Super. Ct. No. 37-2011- 00083845-CU-BC-CTL) VAYA TELECOM, INC.,

Defendant;

PAMELA A. PHILLIPS,

Claimant and Respondent.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Richard S. Whitney, Judge. Affirmed. Law Offices of Michael H. Weiner and Michael H. Weiner for Plaintiff and Appellant. Epps & Coulson, Dawn M. Coulson and Gabriel M. Courey for Claimant and Respondent. Eight years after the original judgment, the trial court granted judgment creditor Pamela A. Phillips’ motion to appoint a receiver. During that time, the total amount owed nearly tripled in size from steadily growing

interest, costs of enforcement, and sanctions, and judgment debtor Todd Lessor avoided a debtor examination for over three years. Lesser appeals, arguing (1) the underlying amended judgment is “void on its face,” rendering the receivership invalid, and (2) substantial evidence did not support the order appointing the receiver. But Lesser has not met his burden to prove voidness based on the judgment roll. And the evidence of Lesser frustrating collection efforts supported the trial court’s decision. We thus affirm. I. This case started with a lawsuit filed in 2011 by a company owned and led by Lesser. (North County Communications Corporation v. Vaya Telecom, Inc. (Dec. 8, 2015, D066629) [nonpub. opn.].) By 2015, the trial court had entered sanctions and judgment against Lesser’s company totaling $597,474.38. The court later amended the judgment to add alter egos, including Lesser, as judgment debtors. Those actions generated four appeals. We affirmed three, and Lesser and the other judgment debtors abandoned the fourth. (Ibid.; North County Communications Corporation v. Vaya Telecom, Inc. (July 26, 2016, D068170) [nonpub. opn.]; North County Communications Corporation of California v. Vaya Telecom, Inc. (Nov. 30, 2016, D069954) [nonpub. opn.].) When the trial court entered a third amended judgment in 2022 to add the “costs of enforcing judgment,” the total amount owed had ballooned to $1,788,279.14. Phillips finally asked the court to appoint a receiver because the judgment debtors had “never paid any amount towards the satisfaction of the judgment” and Lesser had “thwart[ed]” Phillips’ collection efforts. The trial court granted Phillip’s motion, prompting the fifth appeal in this matter.