Department 58

Hearing Date: April 5, 2023

Case Name: Korea Trade Insurance Corporation v. Narin Corporation

Case No.: 22STCV21125

Matter: Default Judgment prove-up

Moving Party: Plaintiff Korea Trade Insurance Corporation

Responding Party: Unopposed

Tentative Ruling: The request for default judgment is denied.

Background and procedural history

This is a complaint alleging open book account, account stated, and goods sold or services rendered. Korea Trade Insurance Corporation (Plaintiff) alleges that it insures shipments of goods from Korean exporters. Plaintiff is the assignee of invoices due to assignors, Fine Fila Textile Co., Ltd. and Nanotextile Co., Ltd.

The Complaint alleges that Defendant Narin Corporation failed to pay its invoices due to the assignors, who then assigned their interests to Plaintiff. The Complaint seeks $68,101.51.

Default was entered against Defendant on December 7, 2022, and “DOES 1 to 100” have been dismissed. However, on January 30, 2023, the Court denied Plaintiff’s request for default judgment, finding that Plaintiff had not sufficiently authenticated its evidence. On March 1, 2023, Plaintiff filed this renewed request for default judgment against Defendant.

Discussion

“Plaintiffs in a default judgment proceeding must prove they are entitled to the damages claimed.” (Barragan v. Banco BCH (1986) 188 Cal.App.3d 283, 302, citing Code Civ. Proc., § 585 & Taliaferro v. Hoogs (1963) 219 Cal.App.2d 559, 560.) If evidence is presented by declaration, the facts must be shown to be “within the personal knowledge of the affiant and shall be set forth with particularity, and each affidavit shall show affirmatively that the affiant, if sworn as a witness, can testify competently thereto.” (Code Civ. Proc., § 585, subd. (d).)

On January 30, 2023, the Court denied Plaintiff’s previous request for default judgment. In doing so the Court stated the following: “Plaintiff has not sufficiently authenticated its evidence. It attaches numerous documents, such as Letters of Assignment and Commercial Invoices, but no supporting declaration.” (Order, 1/30/23.)

Plaintiff has subsequently filed a request for court judgment on Form Civ-100 and a proposed judgment on Form Jud-100. Plaintiff has not, however, filed a declaration authenticating the evidence it previously offered in support of its requested judgment. Plaintiff must authenticate its evidence through a declarant with personal knowledge of the various documents. (See Evid. Code § 1400 et seq.)

The Court will therefore continue this matter to a date agreeable for Plaintiff properly authenticate the evidence it has offered in support of its damages.