Motion for Summary Judgment
May 13, 2026, Law and Motion Calendar Judge Nicole S. Healy Department 28 ________________________________________________________________________
02:00 PM LINE 10 24-CLJ-06449 WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. VS. ERICKSON A ROBINSON
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. EDGAR B LOPEZ ERICKSON A ROBINSON PRO SE
Motion for Summary Judgment
TENTATIVE RULING:
Plaintiff Wells Fargo, N.A.’s Unopposed Motion for Summary Judgment Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure, section 437c is GRANTED.
Plaintiff Wells Fargo, N.A. moves for summary judgment on the complaint and its causes of action for breach of a written contract and breach of an implied-in-fact contract. Though Wells Fargo never explicitly says so in its pleadings or in its motion, the two counts are clearly made in the alternative and based on a single credit card account, a single balance due, and the same material facts. Thus, if there is no triable issue of material fact as to either theory, whether the agreement between Wells Fargo and defendant Erickson A Robinson was written or not, summary judgment is proper.
“To prevail on a cause of action for breach of contract, the plaintiff must prove (1) the contract, (2) the plaintiff’s performance of the contract or excuse for nonperformance, (3) the defendant’s breach, and (4) the resulting damage to the plaintiff.” (Richman v. Hartley (2014) 224 Cal.App.4th 1182, 1186.)
The evidence submitted — in the form of the declaration of Wells Fargo’s employee and business records demonstrating that Robinson has been deemed to have admitted he owes the debt — establishes each of these elements. A contract was created between Wells Fargo and Robinson when he applied for a credit card and accepted the written terms accompanying the card by using the card. (Dec. 29, 2025 Separate Statement of Undisputed Material Fact (SSUMF), nos. 1–3, 15.) Wells Fargo did everything required of it under the contract by extending credit to be used for purchases or cash advances. (Id., at nos. 4, 15.) Robinson breached the contract by failing to make payments on the account as required. (Id., at nos. 5, 11– 13, 15.) Wells Fargo has been damaged as a result of the breach in the amount of $11,493.16, the amount due on the unpaid account. (Id., at nos. 14–15.)
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
Because the motion is unopposed and these facts are undisputed, Wells Fargo has carried its ultimate burden of persuasion that there are no triable issues of material fact and it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Accordingly, the motion is GRANTED.
May 13, 2026, Law and Motion Calendar Judge Nicole S. Healy Department 28 ________________________________________________________________________ The request for inclusion of costs in the judgment is denied without prejudice to an award of costs pursuant to rule 3.1700 of the California Rules of Court by filing and serving a second memorandum of costs after entry of judgment.
If the tentative ruling is uncontested, it shall become the order of the court. Thereafter, plaintiff’s counsel shall prepare a written order consistent with the court’s ruling for the court’s signature, pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1312 and Local Rule 3.403(b)(iv), and provide written notice of the ruling to all parties who have appeared in this action. The order should be e-filed only, do not email or mail a hard copy to the court.