Page 1
Summary Judgment Can’t Be Granted With One Basis Unaddressed, C.A. Declares
Segal Says Court in Another County That Reserved Jurisdiction Over Settlement Does Not Have Exclusive Jurisdiction
By a MetNews Staff Writer
The Court of Appeal for this district held yesterday that summary judgment was erroneously granted in favor of the defendants in a foreclosure action where one basis for the motion—that a term of a settlement agreement, approved by a court in Butte County, had not been satisfied—was unaddressed, rejecting a Los Angeles Superior Court judge’s theory that any such breach “must be addressed in [a] County far north of Los Angeles.”
Jurisdiction does lie here, Justice John L. Segal of Div. Eight said in an unpublished opinion.
Sandra Norlund sued on two theories: that her brother-in-law, Richard L. Norlund, and his wife, Sharen K. Bacon, were cheating her by withholding part of the agreed-upon monthly payment for her share of real property in Baldwin Park, and that Richard Norland breached a term of the settlement agreement. The term was that he would execute a monthly deed of trust securing a promissory note for $1.47 million (payable to him but assigned to his sister, Nancy Hymas, and to Sandra Norlund, his brother’s widow).
He did execute a deed of trust, but altered it so that it bore a date differing from that of the promissory note, blocking her from obtaining title insurance, she claimed.
Deduction Found Proper
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge David Sotelo, in granting summary judgment on Aug. 26, 2021, determined that the amount withheld—about $40 a month by his reckoning, but approximately $60 according to yesterday’s opinion—was mandatorily deducted and paid over to the Franchise Tax Board under the Revenue and Taxation Code and a board regulation.
He did not address the other basis for the motion.
Segal wrote:
“You can’t do that: A party that does not address all claims in the complaint is not entitled to summary judgment. Therefore, we reverse.”
Jurisdiction Reserved
Sotelo said in the minute order granting summary judgment:
“Plaintiffs attempt to expand the nature of the case by arguing Defendants breached several provisions of a related settlement agreement….The history, in this case, is that the Note is part of a settlement in a trust action in Butte County….It is undisputed that the Butte County Superior Court reserved jurisdiction over the settlement agreement.”
He quoted the Butte Superior Court order as saying:
“The Court shall reserve jurisdiction under CCP Section 664.6 to enforce this Agreement, notwithstanding a dismissal of the outstanding petitions.”
Segal’s Response
Segal set forth:
“That a court retains jurisdiction to enforce a settlement under section 664.6 (assuming it does so properly) does not, however, deprive another court of jurisdiction to enforce a settlement agreement in a separate action…. Section 664.6 does not prevent Sandra from bringing claims for breach of the settlement agreement and breach of the promissory note in Los Angeles County.”
The jurist went on to say:
“Richard and Sharon contend that, even if they breached the settlement agreement, the breach does not entitle Sandra to bring an action for judicial foreclosure. They do not, however, cite any applicable authority governing when a party may obtain a judicial foreclosure (nor did they do so in the trial court). Moreover, while Sandra may have labeled her cause of action as one for ‘judicial foreclosure,’ the relief she requested was not limited to a court order directing the sale of the Property; she also sought damages for Richard’s alleged breach of the settlement agreement….In particular, Sandra alleged Richard’s alteration of the deed of trust ‘rendered [it] unenforceable and worthless as the security instrument that it was promised,’ and she sought monetary damages according to proof.”
He said in a footnote that no opinion was being expressed as to whether Sotelo was correct in determining that the deduction from the monthly payments was appropriately made.
The case is Norlund v. Norlund, B316527.
Copyright 2023, Metropolitan News Company