PROCEEDINGS: REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT 

MOVING PARTY: Firmtech, Inc.  

RESPONDING PARTY: Digital Mind State 

BACKGROUND 

This is a breach of contract case.  Plaintiff Firmtech, Inc. is a startup company focusing on products for “male sexual wellness.” Plaintiff entered into a consulting agreement with Defendant Digital Mind State to assist in Plaintiff’s capitalization, growth and fundraising efforts.  Defendant was also to provide “social media management” to help grow Plaintiff’s internet presence.  In consideration for Defendant’s services, Plaintiff paid $25,000.   

Plaintiff alleges Defendant failed to perform under the terms of the consulting agreement.    Plaintiff terminated the consulting agreement for cause and demanded that Defendant return its payments.  Defendant refused.  This lawsuit followed.    

On July 18, 2023, Plaintiff filed a Complaint against Defendant.  The Complaint alleges three claims for (1) breach of contract, (2) promissory estoppel and (3) unjust enrichment.  The Complaint seeks (1) $25,000 in damages plus pre- and post-judgment interest, and (2) attorneys’ fees and costs.   

Plaintiff filed a proof of service showing Defendant was served by substitute service on August 10, 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 February 23, 2024.  Plaintiff requested a default judgment on February 23, 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 Defendant for a total of $26,844.49, which is comprised of: (1) $25,000 for damages, (2) $1,140 for attorneys’ fees, and (2) $704.49, for 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 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 not properly complied with all the procedural requirements for a default judgment.  Plaintiff has not filed a summary of the case.  A summary of the case is mandatory.  (CRC 3.1800(a)(1).)  Plaintiff has also not filed a form of proposed judgment, preferably on a JUD 100 form.  A moving party must submit a proposed form of judgment.  (CRC 3.1800(a)(6).)  Plaintiff is also seeking conflicting amounts of costs.  Plaintiff’s CIV 100 form seeks $704.49 in costs.  But Plaintiff has also filed a separate memorandum of costs on an MC-010 form seeking $1,844.49 in costs.    

CONCLUSION AND ORDER  

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff Firmtech, Inc.’s Default Judgment is DENIED as to Defendant Digital State Media.