Judge: Daniel M. Crowley, Case: 23STCV23617, Date: 2024-07-18 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV23617    Hearing Date: July 18, 2024    Dept: 71

Superior Court of California

County of Los Angeles

DEPARTMENT 71

TENTATIVE RULING

The Court denies Plaintiff’s default judgment packet. 

The Court sets a hearing on an order to show cause why the complaint should not be dismissed and/or Plaintiff’s counsel sanctioned $250 for failing to enter default judgment (California Rule of Court, rule 3.110(h)) on September 18, 2024, at 8:30 AM in Department 71 at Stanley Mosk Courthouse for the following reasons:

1.     The address for service currently does not reflect the apartment unit number that appears on a public records search for the defaulted defendant.  The address should be for 800 W 110th Street Apt. 108, Los Angeles, CA 90044.

2.     Complaint seeks punitive damages, but no statement of damages was served by personal service on Defendant.

3.     No signed cost memorandum on the back of the CIV-100 form for Court Judgment.

4.     No JUD-100 submitted to the Court.

5.     No foundation for the documents submitted to the Court, only a request to take judicial notice.

6.     No interest calculation provided to the Court, nor is there an indication on the CIV-100 request for Court judgment that interest is sought.  However, the proposed judgment indicates that interest is sought.

7.     The Complaint does not specify the damages claimed?  Punitive damages are sought, did the plaintiff personally serve the requisite statement of damages or notice of punitive damages (C.C.P. §425.11(c) and 425.115)? If Plaintiff seeks punitive damages, is there evidence of the defendant’s wealth? An award of punitive damages requires evidence as to the defendant’s wealth. (Devlin v. Kearny Mesa AMC (1984) 155 Cal.App.3d 381, 390; Adams v. Murakami (1991) 54 Cal.3d 105, 118.)

8.     The request for court judgment does not properly seek an amount that is equal to or less than the amount sought in the prayer of the complaint or C.C.P. §425.11 statement of damages.  (See, e.g., Falahati v. Kondo (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 823, 830-831 [stating court acts in excess of its jurisdiction and the resulting default judgment is void if the court awards default judgment in an amount greater than that demanded in the complaint, including if the complaint does not specify the amount demanded]).

9.     No declaration submitted by witness with percipient knowledge and with sufficient foundation to support the damages sought.