Legal Question in Civil Litigation in California
What does it mean that the judge stated that it was outside his jurisdiction to grant the Defendant�s motion to vacate the judgment?
I am the Plaintiff in a small claims court case. The judge in the Small Claims Court denied the Defendant�s motion to vacate the judgment that he had given in my favor over 45 days ago. The judgment is for $7,000.00.
The reason that the judge provided was that since the Defendant did not file her motion appeal 30 days after the entry of judgment, it was outside his jurisdiction to grant the Defendant�s motion to vacate the judgment. The Defendant has the financial means of paying the judgment.
Can I do the following actions?
Garnish her wages?
Freeze her bank accounts and stocks?
Seize her car?
Thank you for clarification.
1 Answer from Attorneys
The judge lost jurisdiction to rule on a motion to vacate after the 30 days had run. I believe I posted on this before. A small claims judge only has authority under the statute to rule on a timely motion. Once the time has run, it is out of the judge's hands. If that statute did not exist, we would have all kinds of motions to vacate judgments, and the thing would run on ad infinitum.
You can exercise all types of collection actions that you mention. You may be able to find an attorney to assist you, or if you have a law library near you, you can look at books on collecting your judgment. I believe that Nolo has a few out on collecting on a money judgment.
Related Questions & Answers
Looking for something else?
10,200 active attorneys ready to answer your legal questions today.
Featured Attorneys
Earn additional revenue and grow your business.
