Judge: Armen Tamzarian, Case: 24STCV07651, Date: 2025-01-24 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV07651    Hearing Date: January 24, 2025    Dept: 52

Non-Appearance Case Review Re: Default Judgment

Plaintiff Lisbeth Rodriguez requests court judgment by default against defendant Rendon Renovation, aka Renovation Home Improvement.  Plaintiff’s application for default judgment has two defects.

First, plaintiff did not use mandatory Judicial Council form CIV-100 to request court judgment by default.  (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1800(a).) 

Second, plaintiff requested default judgment against only one of the remaining defendants.  An application for default judgment must include “[a] dismissal of all parties against whom judgment is not sought or an application for separate judgment against specified parties under Code of Civil Procedure section 579, supported by a showing of grounds for each judgment.”  (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1800(a)(7).)  A court cannot enter default judgment against only one defendant when it is allegedly jointly liable with a co-defendant who may later prevail under a defense applicable to all defendants.  (Adams Mfg. & Engineering Co. v. Coast Centerless Grinding Co. (1960) 184 Cal.App.2d 649, 655; Mirabile v. Smith (1953) 119 Cal.App.2d 685, 689.)  Liability is generally presumed to be joint, not several.  (Civ. Code, § 1431.)

Plaintiff has not dismissed defendants Luiz Paz Del La Vega or fictitiously named defendants Does 1-20.  Plaintiff served Del La Vega but did not request entry of his default. 

Plaintiff’s case management statement says, “Plaintiff filed an Application for Entry of Default Judgment against Rendon Renovation.  After entry of judgment, Plaintiff intends to amend complaint and re-serve Luis Paz De La Vega.”  (CM statement, § 18.)  If the court entered judgment, plaintiff could not amend the complaint without first moving to vacate the judgment.  (Issa v. Alzammar (1995) 38 Cal.App.4th Supp. 1, 4 [“ ‘Once judgment has been rendered, amendment of a pleading is only possible if the judgment is first vacated’ ”]; Capitain v. L.A. Wrecking Co. (1950) 96 Cal.App.2d 465, 466 [“the court was without power to permit the filing of the second amended complaint without first vacating the judgment”].)

Disposition

Plaintiff Lisbeth Rodriguez’s request for default judgment is denied without prejudice.  The court hereby sets an order to show cause re: default judgment for March 14, 2025, at 8:30 a.m.