PROCEEDINGS: REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT 

MOVING PARTY: AIMCO Venezia LLC   

RESPONDING PARTY: Christian Villar and The Villar Group 

BACKGROUND 

This case arises from a landlord tenant dispute.  Plaintiff AIMCO Venezia LLC owns and operates a large residential apartment complex commonly known as “Lincoln Place,” located at 1050 Frederick Street, Venice California.  Defendant Kevin Dalit leased an apartment at Lincoln Place (the “Apartment”).  An addendum to the Lease prohibits Dalit from using the Apartment for anything other than a private residence and explicitly prohibits subletting the Apartment as vacation rentals.  (Ex. 3 to Levix Decl.)  The Addendum provides for liquidated damages of $250 for each day the apartment is sublet.  (Id.)   

Despite the clear prohibitions on subletting, Dalit gave possession and control of the Apartment to Christian Villar and The Villar Group (the “Villar Defendants”) and conspired with them to sublease and host a number of unauthorized short-term renters in the Apartment.  Defendants later surrendered possession of the Apartment after Plaintiff discovered their unlawful use of the property as an Airbnb vacation rental.     

On February 7, 2022, Plaintiff filed a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) against Defendants.  The FAC alleges ten claims for (1) fraud, (2) concealment, (3) aiding and abetting fraud, (4) aiding and abetting concealment, (5) breach of contract, (6) intentional interference with contractual relations, (7) trespass, (8) aiding and abetting trespass, (9) conspiracy and (10) unjust enrichment.  The FAC seeks actual damages “presently estimated to be $100,000,” punitive and exemplary damages, restitution of Defendants’ unjust enrichment and attorneys’ fees and costs. 

On July 20, 2022, Plaintiff and Dalit entered into a settlement agreement.  Dalit agreed to pay $8,000 in installment payments.  Dalit has since completed all payments and has been dismissed from the case with prejudice.  The only remaining Defendants are the Villar Defendants. 

Plaintiff filed a proof of service showing The Villar Group was personally served on May 12, 2022 and Christian Villar by publication on December 2, 9, 16 and 23, 2022.  The Villar Defendants were obligated to respond within 30 days.  They did not do so.  Default was entered against The Villar Group on August 24, 2022 and against Christian Villar on February 10, 2023.  Plaintiff requested a default judgment on July 31, 2023.  

RELIEF REQUESTED 

Default judgment against the Villar Defendants for a total of $34,535.94, which is comprised of: (1) $20,250, for damages, (2) $5,000, for attorneys’ fees and (2) $9,285.94, for costs.  

ANALYSIS 

Code of Civil Procedure section 585 sets forth the two options for obtaining a default judgment. First, where the plaintiff’s complaint¿seeks compensatory damages only, in a sum certain which is readily ascertainable from the allegations of the complaint or statement of damages, the clerk may enter the default judgment for that amount. However, if the relief requested in the complaint is more complicated, consisting of either nonmonetary relief, or monetary relief in amounts which require either an accounting, additional evidence, or the exercise of judgment to ascertain, the plaintiff must request entry of judgment by the court. In such cases, the plaintiff must affirmatively establish his entitlement to the specific judgment requested.¿ (Kim v. Westmoore Partners, Inc. (2011) 201 Cal.App.4th 267, 287.) Section 585 also allows for interest, costs and attorney fees, where otherwise allowed by law. (Code of Civ. Proc.  585(a).) 

Multiple specific documents are required, such as: (1) form CIV 100, (2) a brief summary of the case; (3) declarations or other admissible evidence in support of the judgment requested; (4) interest computations as necessary; (5) a memorandum of costs and disbursements; (6) a proposed form of judgment; (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.  (CRC Rule 3.1800.)  

Here, Plaintiff has properly complied with all the substantive and procedural requirements for a default judgment. Substantively, Plaintiff declares via declaration that there have been damages in the amount of $20,250 as liquidated damages allowed under the Addendum to the Lease.  Plaintiff also declares via declaration that it is entitled to $5,000 attorneys’ fees pursuant to the Lease.  Plaintiff incurred $26,118.50 in attorneys’ fees but the Lease caps the award of attorneys’ fees at $5,000.  A memorandum of costs in the amount of $9,285.94 is set forth in Item 7 of the CIV-100 form and is supported by invoices.  The evidence submitted (the rental application, the Lease, the addendum, an activity log, invoices, and Airbnb records) is authenticated by further declaration.  Procedurally, Plaintiff properly served Defendant more than 30 days prior to requesting entry of default and default judgment, correctly completed JC Form CIV-100 in a manner that would not void or put at issue the entry of default, provided a declaration of non-military status, requested damages in amounts supported by the filings and not in excess of the amount stated in the Complaint, and filed a proposed judgment (JUD-100).   As default has already been entered and there has been no appearance or filing whatsoever from the Villar Defendants, default judgment is appropriate here.  

CONCLUSION AND ORDER  

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff AIMCO Venezia LLC’s Request for Default Judgment is GRANTED as to Defendants Christian Villar and The Villar Group.  Default judgment in the amount of $34,535.94 is awarded in favor of Plaintiff.