PROCEEDINGS: REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT 

MOVING PARTY: California Automobile Insurance Company 

RESPONDING PARTY: Krenly Guzman 

BACKGROUND 

This is a negligence case.  Plaintiff California Automobile Insurance Company had a policy of condominium insurance covering the unit of Ione Soyango for loss by fire or other calamity.  Defendant Krenly Guzman lived in the adjoining unit.  Plaintiff claims Defendant caused a fire in his unit which caused damage to the insured unit.  Plaintiff paid to repair the insured unit in the amount of $84,467.16 and is subrogated to its insured’s rights against Defendant.   

On June 7, 2023, Plaintiff filed a Complaint against Defendant, alleging a single claim for negligence.  The Complaint seeks damages of $84,467.16 plus prejudgment interest at the rate of 10% per annum.   

Plaintiff filed a proof of service showing Defendant was served by substitute service on July 19, 2023.  Defendant was obligated to respond within 30 days.  Defendant did not do so.  Plaintiff successfully requested the entry of Defendant’s default, which was entered by the Clerk’s Office on December 5, 2023.  Plaintiff requested a default judgment on March 5, 2024.  Plaintiff served Defendant by mail with both the Request for Entry of Default and Request for Default Judgment.  Defendant has not appeared. 

RELIEF REQUESTED 

Default judgment against Defendants seeking (1) $84,467.16 in damages and (2) $519 in costs.  

ANALYSIS 

Code Civ. Proc. § 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 Code Civ. Proc. § 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 the requirements for a default judgment. Substantively, Plaintiff attests via declaration that Plaintiff has suffered damages in the amount of $84,467.16.  Plaintiff also provided a calculation of costs, in item 7 of the CIV 100 form.  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 dismissal of the fictitious defendants, 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 Defendant, default judgment is appropriate here.  

CONCLUSION AND ORDER  

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff California Automobile Insurance Company’s Request for Default Judgment against Defendant Krenly Guzman is GRANTED.  Judgment in the amount of $84,986.16 is awarded in favor of Plaintiff.