McCoy Electric v. Anette Rubin and Stuart Rubin

Case Number

16CV03591

Case Type

Hearing Date / Time

Mon, 12/08/2025 - 10:00

Nature of Proceedings

1) Mtn for Order to Charge Judgment Debtor ASR Development Co.’s Interest in Rubin-Pachulski Props, LP; 2) Mtn for Order to Charge Judgment Debtor ASR Development Co.’s Interest in Rubin-Pachulski Props, LP; 3) Mtn for Order to Charge Judgment Debtor ASR

Tentative Ruling

McCoy Electric v. Anette Rubin and Stuart Rubin  

Case No. 16CV03591

           

Hearing Date: December 8, 2025                                           

HEARING:              1. Judgment Creditor McCoy Electric Corporation’s Motion for Order to Charge Judgment Debtor ASR Development Co.’s  Interest in Rubin-Pachulski Properties, LP

                                    2. Judgment Creditor James Davis dba Wade Davis Design’s Motion for Order to Charge Judgment Debtor ASR Development Co.’s Interest in Rubin-Pachulski Properties, LP

                                    3. Judgment Creditor The Las Canoas Co. dba Construction Plumbing’s Motion for Order to Charge Judgment Debtor ASR Development Co.’s Interest in Rubin-Pachulski Properties, LP

                                                             

ATTORNEYS:        For Plaintiff McCoy Electric.: Daniel E. Engel

                                    For Defendants Annette Rubin and A. Stuart Rubin: Self- Represented

                                    For Cross Defendant/Cross Complainant The Los Canoas Co.      dba Construction Plumbing: Daniel E. Engel

                                    For Cross Defendant/Cross Complainant James Davis dba           Wade Davis Design: Daniel E. Engel

                                    For Intervening Party U.S. Real Estate Credit Holdings III-A,

                                                LP: Marsha A. Houston, Christopher O. Rivas

                                    [For additional appearances see list.]

                                   

TENTATIVE RULING:

The motions of judgment creditors McCoy Electric Corporation, James Davis dba Wade Davis Design, and The Las Canoas Co., for orders charging judgment debtor ASR Development Co.’s interest in Rubin-Pachulski Properties, LP are granted.

Background:

This action arises out of a remodeling project at residential property located at 4347 Marina Drive, Santa Barbara, California 93110. The Property was owned by defendants and cross-complainants Annette Rubin and A. Stuart Rubin (“Rubins”).

Plaintiff and cross-defendant McCoy Electric Corporation (“McCoy”), an electrical contractor, commenced the action on August 15, 2016, claiming that it was still owed sums for labor and materials furnished at the Property. In response, the Rubins cross-complained against McCoy and its principal, Richard McCoy, for breach of contract, negligent construction, overcharging, conversion of materials, and accounting.

The Rubins cross-complained against James Davis dba Wade Davis Design (“WDD”), The Las Canoas Co. dba Construction Plumbing (“CP”), as well as several other parties, on September 19, 2019, asserting causes of action for negligence, products liability, and breach of contract. On October 25, 2019, CP cross-complained against the Rubins, alleging a claim for breach of written settlement agreement. The Rubins dismissed their cross-complaint against CP on March 11, 2022.

After the Rubins dismissed their cross-complaint against CP, CP moved for an award of contractual fees against the Rubins. Its motion sought a lodestar amount of $574,777.75, to which it sought a multiplier of 1.4, for a total of 731,237.15. While the court awarded CP its lodestar amount, it declined to apply a multiplier. Judgment was entered on the fee award on November 23, 2022, including previously awarded costs of $2,625, for a total judgment amount of $577,424.75.

WDD filed an answer to the Rubin’s cross-complaint on October 30, 2019, asserting a general denial and 20 affirmative defenses. On April 1, 2020, WDD  cross-complained against the Rubins, alleging a claim for breach of written contract.

On August 15, 2022, following a court trial, Judgment was entered in favor of WDD, and against the Rubins, for costs in the amount of $435.00. Since that time, the amount has increased substantially.

On November 2, 2022, following a court trial, Judgment was entered in favor of McCoy, and against the Rubins, for $355,279.10 in damages plus $65,878.70 in attorney fees and costs. Since that time, the amount owed by the Rubins to McCoy has increased substantially.

McCoy, WDD, and CP will be referred to collectively as the Judgment Creditors.

On July 18, 2024, U.S. Real Estate Credit Holdings III-A, LP (“USRECH”) filed a complaint in intervention for declaratory relief.

On August 8, 2024, McCoy and CP filed a cross-complaint against USRECH for declaratory relief, and on November 13, 2024, filed a first amended cross-complaint adding WDD as a cross-complainant.

The principal dispute between USRECH and Judgment Creditors relates to the priority of liens against the Rubins and various entities in which the Rubins hold an interest.

On September 8, 2025, the court granted Judgment Creditors’ motion to amend the judgments adding ASR Development Co. (“ASR”) as an additional debtor.

On September 16 and September 17, 2025, a bench trial was conducted regarding the priority of lien dispute between Judgment Creditors and USRECH. At the conclusion of the bench trial, the court requested that the parties submit their closing briefs within two weeks from the date that the trial transcripts are provided to the parties. On October 8, 2025, Judgment Creditors and USRECH each submitted their closing briefs.

On September 22, 2025, Judgment Creditors filed the present motions for orders charging judgment debtor ASR’s interest in Rubin-Pachulski Properties, LP (“RPPLP”).

On November 21, 2025, USRECH filed their opposition to the motions for charging orders, arguing that ASR has no claim against RPPLP funds, which are actually the funds of A. Stuart Rubin and therefore subject to USRECH’s writs of attachment.

On November 25, 2025, the court issued its statement of decision (“SOD”) for the September 16 and September 17, 2025, bench trial. By way of the SOD, the court concluded, and ordered, that Judgment Creditors possess first-place priority liens against disputed property, including ASR’s interest in RPPLP, entitling Judgment Creditors to have the property applied to satisfy their respective judgments.

Analysis:

“If a money judgment is rendered against a partner or member but not against the partnership or limited liability company, the judgment debtor’s interest in the partnership or limited liability company may be applied toward the satisfaction of the judgment by an order charging the judgment debtor’s interest pursuant to Section 15907.03, 16504, or 17705.03 of the Corporations Code.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 708.310.)

“On application to a court of competent jurisdiction by any judgment creditor of a partner or transferee, the court may charge the transferable interest of the judgment debtor with payment of the unsatisfied amount of the judgment with interest. To the extent so charged, the judgment creditor has only the rights of a transferee. The court may appoint a receiver of the share of the distributions due or to become due to the judgment debtor in respect of the limited partnership and make all other orders, directions, accounts, and inquiries the judgment debtor might have made or which the circumstances of the case may require to give effect to the charging order.” (Corp. Code, § 15907.03, subd. (a).)

As noted above, because of ASR being added to the judgment as a judgment debtor on September 8, 2025, Judgment Creditors hold a money judgment against ASR. Evidence established at the September 2025 trial established that ASR owns an interest in RPPLP.

The arguments made by USRECH in opposition have all been addressed, and ruled against, by way of the September 8, 2025 trial.

The motions will be granted.