DecisionDepot
California legal research
All cases
25NNCV07413·la·Civil·Contract
Hearing todayCONTINUED

MERCEDES-BENZ VEHICLE TRUST, AS SERVICED BY ITS ATTORNEY IN FACT, MERCEDES-BENZ FINANCIAL SERVICES USA, LLC, et al.

Order to Show Cause

Hearing date
Sep 1, 2026
Department
X
Judge
Prevailing
N/A
Next hearing
Nov 10, 2026

Motion type

Browse all Motion for Sanctions rulings statewide →

Monetary amounts referenced

$250.00

Parties

PlaintiffMERCEDES-BENZ VEHICLE TRUST
PlaintiffMERCEDES-BENZ FINANCIAL SERVICES USA, LLC

Attorneys

Motaz M Gergesfor Cross-Complainant

Ruling

The Agreement requires payment of all charges and makes the Basic Cardmember and Company jointly and severally liable. Plaintiff's records establish that Defendants used the account, failed to make the required payments, and defaulted. Those records further establish that, after all payments and credits were applied, $247,539.84 remained due as of May 15, 2026.

Plaintiff has therefore established the contract, its performance, Defendants' breach, and resulting damages. Plaintiff has met its initial burden. There is no opposition filed. No evidence presented raises a triable issue concerning those elements.

Judgment shall be entered against Defendants Aida Shorvoghlian and Double ARSV LLC, jointly and severally, for $247,539.84, plus recoverable court costs. The Court will sign the proposed judgment submitted with the moving papers. On its own motion, the trial and FSC dates are advanced and vacated. Moving Party is to give notice.

TRUST, AS SERVICED BY ITS ATTORNEY IN FACT, MERCEDES-BENZ FINANCIAL SERVICES USA, LLC, et al. Service remains outstanding on the cross-complaint. The Order to Show Cause hearing is discharged.

The Court sets an Order to Show Cause re: Sanctions up to $250.00 against Cross-Complainant's Counsel, Motaz M Gerges, for the failure to serve the Cross-Complaint (Cal. Rules of Ct., rule 3.110). The Order to Show Cause hearing is set for November 10, 2026 at 8:30 a.m. in Department X of the Alhambra Courthouse.

On its own motion, the Case Management Conference is continued to November 10, 2026 at 8:30 a.m. in Department X. Court is to give notice. Case Number: 25NNCV08714 Hearing Date: September 1, 2026 Dept: X #7 - MANDY LEONNA SEATON vs ALYSSA RUNYEON, et al.

The Court has reviewed the Case Management Statements filed by the parties. The Court issues the following Case Management Order: Plaintiff's medical damages currently do not exceed $50,000.

The parties in the above-captioned case are ordered to the Mediation Volunteer Panel (MVP), a court-connected program administered by the Los Angeles Superior Court's Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Office. Cases referred to the MVP program will be eligible for three hours of virtual mediation at no cost with a qualified and impartial mediator who volunteers preparation time and the first three hours of the virtual mediation session. Thereafter, if the parties wish to continue the mediation, the mediator may charge the hourly rate as listed in their MVP profile listed on the Court's website at www.lacourt.org/ADR.

The ADR Office will email a detailed Notice of Referral to Mediation (Notice) to all parties and their attorneys of record. The Notice directs the parties or their attorneys to meet and confer regarding the selection of a mediator and submit an online Response to the Notice. Parties may select a mediator from the MVP profiles or request the ADR Office to assign a mediator. Mediator profiles, including contact information, areas of expertise, and hourly rates, are available on the Court's ADR webpage.

Regardless of the method of mediator selection, the plaintiff or plaintiff's counsel must submit an online Response within 15 calendar days of the date on the Notice. A link to the Response Form is available on the Court's ADR webpage and on the Notice of Referral to Mediation. The ADR Office will email a Notice of Mediator Assignment to the mediator and the parties in all MVP cases once the Response Form is received and processed. If an MVP mediator is not available, the ADR Office may refer cases to other no-cost or low-cost mediation resources when necessary (e.g. Mediation Center of Los Angeles or the Civil Mediation Vendor Resource List).

Cited authorities

Extracting citations from the ruling text…
Verify against the source PDF — LLM extraction may miss or mis-normalize citations.

Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities

Ask about this ruling

Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”

Answers reference only this ruling's text. Not legal advice — always verify against the source PDF.

Find similar rulings

Source

Share