Judge: Christian R. Gullon, Case: 23PSCV00937, Date: 2023-11-16 Tentative Ruling

The Court may change tentative rulings at any time. Therefore, attorneys are advised to check this website to determine if any changes or updates have been made to the tentative ruling.

Counsel may submit on the tentative rulings by calling the clerk in Dept. O at 909-802-1126 before 8:30 the morning of the hearing. Submission on the tentative does not bind the court to adopt the tentative ruling at the hearing should the opposing party appear and convince the court of further modification during oral argument.

The Tentative Ruling is not an invitation, nor an opportunity, to file any further documents relative to the hearing in question. No such filing will be considered by the Court in the absence of permission first obtained following ex-parte application therefore.

Case Number: 23PSCV00937    Hearing Date: November 16, 2023    Dept: O

Tentative Ruling

Plaintiff’s Application for Default Judgment is DENIED without prejudice. 

Background

This case arises from a motor vehicle accident.

On April 3, 2023, Plaintiff Joshua Anthony Sotelo filed suit against Defendants Kevin Barragan and Iridian G Magallon Quintero for:[1]

On August 16, 2023, default was entered against Barragan. That same day, Plaintiff filed the instant application.

Discussion

Plaintiff seeks judgment against Defendant Barragan in the amount of $194,599.00, which is broken down as follows: $194, 123.00 in damages, $475.00 in costs, and $1.00 in punitive damages.

The court directs Plaintiff to Code of Civil Procedure section 585 as most if not all of the requirements for entry of default judgment have not been satisfied. The statute permits entry of a judgment after a Defendant has failed to timely answer after being properly served. A party seeking judgment on the default by the Court must file a Request for Court Judgment, and: (1) a brief summary of the case; (2) declarations or other admissible evidence in support of the judgment requested; (3) interest computations as necessary; (4) a memorandum of costs and disbursements; (5) a proposed form of judgment; (6) a dismissal of all parties against whom judgment is not sought; (7) a dismissal of all parties against whom judgment is not sought or an application for separate judgment under CCP § 579, supported by a showing of grounds for each judgment; (8) exhibits as necessary; and (9) a request for attorneys’ fees if allowed by statute or by the agreement of the parties. (Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1800.)

Here, notably, Plaintiff has (i) offered no evidence in support of damages and (ii) not dismissed Doe Defendants and Magallon. Additionally, as this is a personal injury case, Plaintiff has not complied with CCP section 425.11 (regarding statement of damages).

Conclusion

While Defendant Barragan’s failure to respond to the complaint has proved liability, Plaintiff has failed to prove damages, which is Plaintiff’s burden is seeking default judgment. Based on the foregoing, the application for default judgment is denied without prejudice.