“A district court’s award of pre- and post-judgment interest is reviewed for 21 abuse of discretion.”
How later courts described this case
- “A district court’s award of pre- and post-judgment interest is reviewed for 21 abuse of discretion.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11 TRINITY FRUIT COMPANY, INC., a No. 1:19-cv-00095-DAD-EPG
California Corporation,
12
Plaintiff,
13 ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION FOR
v. ENTRY OF JUDGMENT AGAINST
14 DEFENDANT LORA VILLARREAL
LA ROSA & SONS DISTRIBUTING
15 LLC, a California Limited Liability (Doc. No. 29)
Company, et al.,
16
Defendants.
17
18
19 Plaintiff Trinity Fruit Company, Inc.’s first amended complaint, which was filed on
20 February 8, 2019, alleges that plaintiff brings this action to enforce the trust provisions of section
21 5(c)(5) of the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act (“PACA”), 7 U.S.C. § 499e(c)(5) against
22 represented defendants La Rosa & Sons Distributing LLC, Michael J. La Rosa, and Noel La
23 Rosa, as well as pro se defendant Lora Villarreal. (Doc. No. 7 at 2.)
24 On May 21, 2019, plaintiff and defendant Villarreal filed a stipulation and application for
25 a final order and judgment. (Doc. No. 22.) The stipulation provided that plaintiff’s claims
26 against defendant Villarreal would be satisfied pursuant to a payment of $13,506.35 in monthly
27 installments of $100.00, commencing on May 30, 2019 and ending when the payment is made in
28 full. (See Doc. No. 22 at 1–2.) The stipulation also provided the following in relevant part:
1 In the event that Villarreal defaults in her payment obligations as set
forth in Paragraph 2 above, and Villarreal either fails to cure such
2 default or is not allowed to cure such default pursuant to Paragraph
3 above, then upon the filing with the Court of a declaration as to
3 such default by Plaintiff’s attorney, with a copy to Villarreal via
email at jazantonalex@gmail.com, this Court shall immediately
4 enter a Final Order and Judgment in a form substantially similar to
the one attached hereto as Exhibit A. The judgment amount
5 prescribed in the Final Order and Judgment in favor of Plaintiff and
against Villarreal shall be the amount of the PACA Trust Debt
6 prescribed in Paragraph 1 above plus any additional attorneys’ fees
and costs incurred by Plaintiff as a result of Villarreal’s default, plus
7 all interest accrued at the rate of 18% per annum, less any payments
made to Plaintiff pursuant to this Stipulation and Order.
8
9 (Id. at ¶ 4.) The parties requested that the court retain jurisdiction over this action to enforce the
10 terms and conditions of the final judgment against defendant Villareal. (Id. at ¶ 9.) On June 12,
11 2019, the court issued an order giving effect to the parties’ stipulation, dismissing defendant
12 Villareal, and retaining jurisdiction over enforcement of the settlement agreement. (Doc. No. 25.)
13 Following defendant Villareal’s dismissal, the remaining parties filed a stipulation and proposed
14 order for dismissal without prejudice on June 14, 2019. (Doc. No. 26.) The court gave effect to
15 that stipulation on June 25, 2019, and the action was administratively closed. (Doc. No. 27.)
16 On March 2, 2020, plaintiff filed an application for entry of final order and judgment
17 against defendant Villareal. (Doc. No. 29.) Attached to plaintiff’s filing is the declaration of
18 plaintiff’s counsel C. Russell Georgeson (Doc. No. 31), which states the following. Defendant
19 Villarreal made payments to plaintiff in July, August, September, and October 2019 totaling
20 $400.00. (Id. at ¶ 8; see also Doc. No. 31, Ex. B.) Defendant Villarreal then failed to make the
21 payments due in November 2019 through January 2020. (Doc. No. 31 at ¶ 8.) On January 24,
22 2020, plaintiff’s PACA counsel sent a notice of default to defendant Villareal as contemplated by
23 the parties’ stipulated resolution of this action. (Id. at ¶ 9; Doc. No. 31, Ex. C.) The default
24 notice requested that defendant Villarreal pay the overdue sum within three days of the date of the
25 demand and reminded defendant that a failure to cure would result in plaintiff immediately
26 seeking entry of judgment against her. (Doc. Nos. 31 at ¶ 9; 31, Ex. C.) Defendant Villareal
27 responded stating that she would mail a check numbered “436” for $300.00 to plaintiff by the
28 following Monday. (Doc. Nos. 31 at ¶ 9; 31, Ex. C.) Subsequently, defendant Villarreal’s check
1 was returned by her bank for insufficient funds. (Doc. No. 31 at ¶ 10; see also Doc. No. 31, Ex.
2 D.) Plaintiff advised defendant Villarreal of the returned check and, on February 7, 2020, asked
3 if it could redeposit the check. (Doc. No. 31 at ¶ 10.) Defendant Villarreal stated she would send
4 a money order on February 19, 2020. (Id.) The promised money order never arrived, and as of
5 March 2, 2020, defendant Villarreal remained in default. (Id.; see also Doc. No. 31, Ex. E.)
6 On January 15, 2021, the court directed the parties to submit supplemental briefing
7 providing additional information regarding service of the Georgeson Declaration (Doc. No. 31)
8 on defendant Villareal, an updated amount of the judgment sought with supporting
9 documentation, and an updated status of defendant Villareal’s default since plaintiff had filed the
10 application for entry of final order and judgment on March 2, 2020. (Doc. No. 32.) On January
11 25, 2021, plaintiff’s counsel attorney Gregory Brown submitted a supplemental declaration and
12 exhibits. (Doc. No. 33.) To date, defendant Villareal has not responded to the application for
13 entry of final order and judgment or to the court’s request for supplemental briefing, or otherwise
14 communicated with the court in any way whatsoever.1
15 In attorney Gregory Brown’s declaration, he states that due to a clerical error, plaintiff
16 mistakenly served defendant Villarreal by United States mail, rather than electronic email as
17 required by the parties’ May 21, 2019 stipulation. (Id. at ¶ 3; see also Doc. No. 22 at ¶ 4.)
18 Plaintiff submits that this error should not be fatal to their application to enter judgment because
19 defendant Villarreal confirmed receiving the application by email on March 5, 2020. (Doc. No.
20 33 at ¶ 3; Doc. No. 33, Ex. A.) Therein, defendant Villarreal stated that she would be seeking an
21 attorney for further assistance and would forward attorney Brown’s information accordingly.
22 (Doc. No. 33, Ex. A.) Attorney Brown states that as of January 25, 2021, he has not heard any
23 further from defendant Villarreal or from any representative on her behalf. (Doc. No. 33 at ¶ 3.)
24 Additionally, attorney Brown states that plaintiff mistakenly included lead counsel’s total
25 fees in the case when filing the application for entry of final order and judgment. (Id. at ¶ 4.) In
26
1 On January 25, 2021, attorney Georgeson filed a certificate of service, in which he certifies that
27 the Brown Declaration and exhibits thereto were served on counsel for defendants Michael J. La
Rosa and Noel La Rose by email and on defendant Villarreal by email and United States mail.
28 (Doc. No. 34.)
1 the May 21, 2019 stipulation, however, the parties had stipulated that the judgment amount would
2 include “any additional attorneys’ fees and costs incurred by Plaintiff as a result of Villarreal’s
3 default.” (See Doc. No. 22 ¶ 4) (emphasis added). Attorney Brown states that since the filing of
4 the May 21, 2019 stipulation, plaintiff has incurred de minimis additional attorneys’ fees
5 expenses, which plaintiff will waive. (Doc. No. 33 at ¶ 4.) Nonetheless, since plaintiff filed the
6 application for entry of final order and judgment on March 2, 2020, additional interest has
7 accrued at a daily rate of approximately $13.32, for a total additional interest of $4,382.72. (Id. at
8 ¶ 5.) Attached to the Brown Declaration is an updated damages calculation reflecting the updated
9 interest calculation. (Id., Ex. B.) Attorney Brown states that defendant Villarreal has not paid
10 any portion of the debt except as credited in plaintiff’s prior application, nor any further sums
11 pursuant to the May 21, 2019 stipulation. (Id. at ¶ 6.) Plaintiff therefore requests that the court
12 enter judgment against defendant Villarreal in the amount of $23,990.42 under the trust
13 provisions of PACA. (Id. at ¶ 7.) Attorney Brown states that this total judgment amount includes
14 the principal amount of $13,506.35, less the $400.00 defendant Villarreal paid pursuant to the
15 May 21, 2019 stipulation, plus accrued interest through January 22, 2021 in the aggregate amount
16 of $10,884.07. (Id.)
17 The court will grant plaintiff’s application for entry of judgment, but subject to a
18 modification of plaintiff’s requested judgment amount. The district court is afforded discretion in
19 its calculation of prejudgment interest. See Citicorp Real Estate, Inc. v. Smith, 155 F.3d 1097,
20 1107 (9th Cir. 1998) (“A district court’s award of pre- and post-judgment interest is reviewed for
21 abuse of discretion.”). Here, the May 21, 2019 stipulation stated that the judgment amount would
22 include “all interest accrued at the rate of 18% per annum.” (Doc. No. 22 at ¶ 4.) The updated
23 damages calculation attached to the Brown Declaration calculates interested accrued as interest
24 on the entire debt to be collected from all defendants—not just defendant Villarreal’s portion of
25 the debt. (See Doc. No. 33, Ex. B.) Considering defendant Villarreal’s pro se litigant status, the
26 court finds that an interest calculation based upon plaintiff’s reading of the May 21, 2019
27 stipulation would not comport with principles of fairness. Rather, the court finds that a
28 calculation of interest accrued solely on defendant Villarreal’s portion of the debt embodies a
1 fairer reading of the parties’ stipulation. As such, the court will enter judgment against defendant
2 Villarreal in the amount of $18,548.38: the principal amount ($13,506.35) plus interest
3 ($5,442.03), less what defendant has already paid ($400.00).
4 Accordingly,
5 1. Plaintiff Trinity Fruit Company, Inc.’s application for entry of final order and
6 judgment against defendant Lora Villarreal (Doc. No. 29) is granted;
7 2. Plaintiff is a qualified trust creditor and beneficiary, under the provisions of
8 PACA, of defendant Lora Villarreal for a debt in the principal amount of
9 $13,506.35, plus interest at the rate of 18 percent per annum in the amount of
10 $5,442.03, less the $400.00 she has paid, for a total judgment amount of
11 $18,548.38 under the trust provisions of PACA, 7 U.S.C. § 499e(c);
12 3. Defendant Villarreal shall within five (5) business days of service of this order,
13 turnover any and all funds realized from the sale of produce or products derived
14 from produce in their possession to McCarron & Diess, attorneys for plaintiff,
15 located at 576 Broadhollow Road, Suite 105, Melville, New York, 11747, for
16 distribution to plaintiff;
17 4. Any and all funds belonging to defendant Villarreal in the possession of third
18 parties shall be immediately turned over to McCarron & Diess, attorneys for
19 plaintiff, located at 576 Broadhollow Road, Suite 105, Melville, New York, 11747,
20 for distribution to plaintiff;
21 5. Defendant Villarreal shall supply to plaintiff’s attorney, within five (5) days of the
22 date of this order, any and all documents in her possession, custody or control with
23 reflect or relate to her assets and liabilities, including but not limited to her most
24 recent income tax returns, pay stubs and checking and savings account statements;
25 and
26 /////
27 /////
28
1 6. The Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case which was previously
2 administratively closed.
3 | IT IS SO ORDERED. a 7.
Dated: _ February 20, 2021 VL AL oye
5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28