Judge: Bruce G. Iwasaki, Case: 21STCV32295, Date: 2022-10-11 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV32295    Hearing Date: October 11, 2022    Dept: 58

Judge Bruce G. Iwasaki

Department 58

Hearing Date:             October 11, 2022

Case Name:                 Allen Esfahani v. Farshad Asgharloo

Case No.:                    21STCV32295

Matter:                        Default Judgment Application

Moving Party:             Plaintiff Allen Esfahani

TENTATIVE RULING

            The Court continues the matter to a later date to be decided at the hearing for Plaintiff to submit proper declarations and appropriate supporting evidence.

STATEMENT OF CASE

This is a complaint alleging breach of contract, intentional/negligent misrepresentation, breach of fiduciary duty, conversion, and accounting.  Allen Esfahani (Plaintiff) alleges that he and Farshad Asgharloo (Defendant) were partners in a car service business.  The Complaint avers that the contract was initially oral.  After Defendant returned from abroad, the parties memorialized the agreement in writing.  Defendant failed to perform his obligations under the contract and abandoned the business.  Plaintiff alleges that he invested $250,000.00 into the partnership and that Defendant also transferred $10,000.00 from the partnership into his personal bank account. 

Defendant filed an Answer, but this was stricken in August 2022 because he failed to appear at two subsequent hearings.

Default was entered against Defendant, but “DOES 1 to 100” have not been dismissed.  Plaintiff now seeks a default judgment against Defendant.

SUMMARY OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT REQUEST

Compensatory Damages:                             $260,000.00

Prejudgment Interest (10% per year):  $0

Costs:                                                             $0

Attorney’s Fees:                                            $0

Total:                                                              $260,000.00

SUBMITTED DOCUMENTS (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1800)

Use of JC Form CIV-100                                                                                           YES

Dismissal or judgment of non-parties to the judgment                                             NO

Declaration of non-military status for each defendant                                            YES

Summary of the case                                                                                                  YES

585(d) declarations/admissible evidence in support                                                            YES

Exhibits (as necessary)                                                                                               YES

Interest computation (as necessary)                                                                           N/A

Cost memorandum                                                                                                     N/A

Request for attorney fees (Local Rule 3.214)                                                              NO

Proposed judgment (JUD-100)                                                                                   YES

DISCUSSION

Plaintiff does not sufficiently authenticate the partnership agreement, aside from offering his own testimony.  He provides a translated copy of the partnership agreement, but the agreement does not state how much money Plaintiff invested into the business.  There are no documentary details on the $250,000.00 that he allegedly invested, such as account ledgers, receipts, or bank statements.  Plaintiff should offer such evidence or be prepared to testify as to the amounts of these damages.