Bergstrom v. Lobherr
Filed 9/5/06 Bergstrom v. Lobherr CA4/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
| CRYSTAL BERGSTROM, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JOHN LOBHERR, Defendant and Appellant. | G035801 (Super. Ct. No. 04CC01999) O P I N I O N |
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Dennis S. Choate, Judge. Affirmed.
Heston & Heston and Richard G. Heston for Defendant and Appellant.
The Law Office of Richard L. Enkelis and Richard L. Enkelis for Plaintiff and Respondent.
* * *
In 1987, Robert W. Mobarry, Elaine L. Mobarry, Robert G. Mobarry, and Mary D. Mobarry obtained a judgment against defendant John Lobherr. Thereafter, defendant filed for bankruptcy, a proceeding which remained pending for nearly 11 years. During this time, the Mobarrys assigned the judgment to Plaintiff Crystal Bergstrom, doing business as Judicial Judgment Enforcement Services. In 2004, she successfully sued defendant to enforce the Mobarry judgment.
Defendant appeals, claiming the lawsuit is untimely because plaintiff failed to file it within 30 days after the bankruptcy court issued notice of his discharge. We affirm. Since this case involves an independent action to enforce a judgment rather than an application to renew the original judgment, both state and federal law permit a tolling of the 10-year statute of limitations on plaintiff's action during the pendency of defendant's bankruptcy.
FACTS
In July 1987, the Mobarrys obtained a judgment for $251,453.02 against defendant in the Riverside County Superior Court. Defendant appealed the judgment, but the Court of Appeal affirmed the decision and issued its remittitur on May 25, 1989.
In February 1988, defendant filed a petition in bankruptcy. The Mobarrys appeared in that proceeding and challenged the dischargeability of their judgment. The bankruptcy court issued a decision declaring the judgment non-dischargeable and its ruling was subsequently affirmed on appeal. In May 1997, the Mobarrys also filed an application in state court to renew the original judgment. Subsequently, the Mobarrys assigned their judgment to plaintiff.
On December 23, 1999, the bankruptcy court issued a notice of discharge in defendant's case and closed the case a month later. However, in 2001, the bankruptcy court reopened defendant's case to consider his claim that the Mobarrys' 1997 renewal of their state court judgment violated the automatic stay imposed by 11 United States Code section 362(a) (hereafter section 362(a)). The bankruptcy court agreed with defendant, declaring â€
