Department 58

Hearing Date: December 3, 2024

Case Name: Commonwealth Business Bank v. Chen

Case No.: 24STCV01019

Matter: Default Judgment prove-up

Moving Party: Plaintiff Commonwealth Business Bank

Responding Party: Unopposed

Tentative Ruling: The request for default judgment is granted.

This action arises out of a breach of two loan agreements and their respective notes. On January 16, 2024, Plaintiff Commonwealth Business Bank (Plaintiff) filed its Complaint against Defendant Cheng Chuwen Chen (Defendant) for (1.) Breach of Contract, (2.) Recovery of Personal Property, (3.) Specific Performance for Appointment of Receiver and Injunctive Relief, (4.) Breach of Contract, (5.) Recovery of Personal Property, (6.) Specific Performance for Appointment of Receiver and Injunctive Relief, (7.) Money Lent, and (8.) Money Lent against Defendant.

The Request for Entry of Default against Defendant Cheng Chuwen Chen was entered on June 11, 2024. Plaintiff has dismissed DOES 1-200. (CRC 3.1800, subd. (a)(7).) Plaintiff also dismissed the third and sixth causes of action.

The request for entry of default judgment is granted.

DISCUSSION

Plaintiff requests entry of default judgment in the amount of $421,498.88, which includes interest, costs, and attorney fees.

According to Plaintiff’s evidence, Defendant defaulted on the Note One Obligations to Plaintiff by, among other things, failing to make the monthly payment due on October 1, 2022, and each payment due thereafter; as a consequence of Defendant’s defaults on the Note One Obligations, Plaintiff accelerated the entire outstanding balance due under the Note One Documents as immediately due, owing and payable. (Kim Decl., ¶ 27.) Despite demand by Plaintiff upon Defendant for the repayment of the unpaid balance due under the Note One Documents, in accordance with the terms of said Note One Documents, Defendant has failed, refused and neglected to pay any sum pursuant thereto. (Kim Decl., ¶ 28.)

On the Note One Obligations and Note One Documents, Plaintiff requests the sum of $213,770.31, consisting of the principal sum of $174,282.50, accrued unpaid interest in the sum of $28,244.51, and accrued late charges in the sum of $6,608.54, and attorneys’ fees and costs in the sum of $4,634.76. (Kim Decl., ¶¶ 34-40.)

According to Plaintiff’s evidence, Defendant also defaulted on the Note Two Obligations to Plaintiff by, among other things, failing to make the monthly payment due on October 1, 2022, and each payment due thereafter; as a consequence of Defendant’s defaults on the Note Two Obligations, Plaintiff accelerated the entire outstanding balance due under the Note Two Documents as immediately due, owing and payable. (Kim Decl., ¶ 29.) Despite demand by Plaintiff upon Defendant for the repayment of the unpaid balance due under the Note Two Documents, in accordance with the terms of said Note Two Documents, Defendant has failed, refused and neglected to pay any sum pursuant thereto. (Kim Decl., ¶ 30.)

On the Note Two Obligations and Note Two Documents, the sum of $207,728.57, consisting of the principal sum of $170,252.17, accrued unpaid interest in the sum of $27,591.35, and accrued late charges in the sum of $5,957.05, and attorneys’ fees in the sum of $3,928.00. (Kim Decl., ¶¶ 44-50.)

Plaintiff’s evidence supports its request for damages. (Kim v. Westmoore Partners, Inc. (2011) 201 Cal.App.4th 267, 288 [“ ‘[p]laintiffs in a default judgment proceeding must prove they are entitled to the damages claimed’ ”].)

Additionally, the loan agreements contain attorney fee provisions. Further, Plaintiff’s request for attorney fees complies with LASC 3.214. (Kim Decl., ¶¶ 39, 49.)

Finally, Plaintiff has lodged the original exhibits in compliance with California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1806.

Based on the foregoing, the request for default judgment is granted.