Judge: Armen Tamzarian, Case: 24STCV15474, Date: 2025-04-25 Tentative Ruling

Please notify Department 52 via email at smcdept52@lacourt.org and indicate that the parties are submitting on the tentative ruling. Please provide the attorney's name and represented party. Please notify the opposing side via email if submitting on the Court's tentative ruling.

Case Number: 24STCV15474    Hearing Date: April 25, 2025    Dept: 52

Order to Show Cause Re: Entry of Default Judgment

Plaintiff Booma Looma, LLC requests court judgment by default against defendants Time Zone Ent.Properties LLC and Farshad Rabbani aka Shad Rabbani.  Plaintiff’s request for default judgment has three defects.

First, plaintiff did not request dismissal of defendants Does 1-10 as required.  (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1800(a)(7).)

Second, plaintiff requests damages exceeding the amount demanded by the complaint.  “A default judgment greater than the amount specifically demanded in the complaint is void as beyond the court’s jurisdiction.”  (Airs Aromatics, LLC v. CBL Data Recovery Technologies, Inc. (2018) 23 Cal.App.5th 1013, 1018 (Airs Aromatics).)  “Where no amount of damages is demanded any amount awarded is by definition greater than the amount demanded.”  (Falahati v. Kondo (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 823, 830–831.)  The complaint’s prayer for relief does not specify the amount sought.  It instead prays for “damages according to proof as alleged above.”  (Comp., prayer ¶ 1.) 

Allegations in the body of a complaint “may cure a defective prayer for damages.”  (Greenup v. Rodman (1986) 42 Cal.3d 822, 829; accord Hearn v. Howard (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 1193, 1209.)  When the complaint seeks damages “in excess” of a specified amount, a default judgment cannot exceed the amount specified as minimum damages.  (Behm v. Clear View Technologies (2015) 241 Cal.App.4th 1, 13; Electronic Funds Solutions, LLC v. Murphy (2005) 134 Cal.App.4th 1161, 1167.)

The complaint alleges plaintiff has suffered “damages in excess of $496,928.00 through June 30, 2024; plus interest to the fullest extent permitted by law; plus damages that continue to accrue each month, future base rent and additional rent through the end of the Lease term, damages to the Premises, unamortized commissions and tenant improvement costs, and such other damages as may be shown from the breach of the Lease, all according to proof.”  (Comp., ¶¶ 19, 25.)  The court therefore cannot award more than the amount specifically alleged, $496,928, in a default judgment.

To recover greater damages, plaintiff must amend the complaint to specifically demand the amount of damages sought.  Doing so would vacate defendants’ defaults.  After a plaintiff “file[s] an amended complaint praying for a different amount of damages and/or other appropriate relief… she must serve her amended complaint on defendants, who will be entitled to file a new answer; all issues will then be at large, including liability.”  (Greenup v. Rodman (1986) 42 Cal.3d 822, 830; accord Airs Aromatics, supra, 23 Cal.App.5th at p. 1025 [filing amended complaint vacates default].)  Any amended complaint must be served in the manner of a summons.  (Engebretson & Co. v. Harrison (1981) 125 Cal.App.3d 436, 444.)

  Third, plaintiff requests excessive attorney fees.  Attorney fees for a default judgment are generally limited to a specified schedule based on the amount of the judgment.  (Local Rules 3.207(a), 3.214(a).)  A plaintiff may recover “a fee greater than listed in the [default] schedule because of extraordinary services.”  (Local Rule 3.214(d).)  Plaintiff seeks $18,090 in attorney fees.  That is greater than the schedule, which provides for attorney fees of “$2,890 plus 1% of the excess over $100,000.”  (Rule 3.214(a).)  Based on the damages requested (which, as discussed above, exceed the demand of the complaint), plaintiff may recover attorney fees of $15,786.98.  Plaintiff has not shown extraordinary services to justify greater fees.

The court hereby continues the order to show cause re: default judgment to June 17, 2025, at 8:30 a.m. 

Under Code of Civil Procedure section 473, subdivision (a)(1), the court hereby grants plaintiff leave to file a first amended complaint to specifically demand a greater amount of damages.