PROCEEDINGS: REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT 

MOVING PARTY: Christina Lamport 

RESPONDING PARTY: Primo’s Donuts, LLC and Ralph Primo, Jr. 

BACKGROUND 

This case arises from a breach of contract.  On April 26, 2023, Plaintiff Christina Lamport entered into a written promissory note (“Note”) with Defendants Primo’s Donuts, LLC and Ralph Primo, Jr. with a principal amount of $206,458 and interest accruing at a rate of 7.5% per annum until paid.  Under the terms of the Note, Defendants were obligated to make a balloon payment of $210,329 on July 31, 2023.  They failed to do so.   

As security for the Note, Defendants granted all of their right, interest and title to the following personal property for the use and benefit of the Lender: “all furniture, fixtures, and equipment in use or required for the operation of – including but not limited to, all baking equipment – for Primo’s Donuts’ Sawtelle location, with a common address of 2918 Sawtelle Blvd, Los Angeles California 90064, together with all products or proceeds of all of the foregoing in any form” (the “Collateral”). 

Plaintiff filed a UCC Financing Statement with the California Secretary of State thereby perfecting Plaintiff’s security interest in the Collateral.  The California Secretary of State issued a Lien Acknowledgement of Plaintiff against Defendant. 

The Note also provides that in the event Defendants default, they promise to pay Plaintiff “all collection and/or litigation costs incurred, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and court costs, whether judgment is rendered or not.” 

On August 22, 2023, Plaintiff filed a Complaint against Defendants.  The Complaint alleges three claims for (1) breach of contract, (2) unjust enrichment and (3) enforcement of security interest.  The Complaint seeks $206,458 in unpaid principal, prejudgment interest at the rate of 7.5%, post-judgment interest at the maximum lawful rate, and attorneys’ fees and costs. 

Plaintiff filed a proof of service showing Defendant Primo Donuts LLC was served by substitute service on August 28, 2023 and Defendant Ralph Primo Jr. was served by publication on December 9, 16, 23 and 30, 2023.  Defendants were obligated to respond.  Defendants did not do so.  Plaintiff successfully requested the entry of Defendants’ default, which was entered by the Clerk’s Office on November 3, 2023 and February 14, 2024.  Plaintiff then requested default judgment.  Plaintiff served Defendants by mail with both the Request for Entry of Default and Request for Default Judgment.  Defendants have not appeared. 

RELIEF REQUESTED 

Default judgment against Defendants for (1) $210,329 in damages, (2) $8,600.78 in prejudgment interest, (3) $8,109.76 in attorneys’ fees and (4) $4,277.25 in costs.  Plaintiff also seeks immediate possession of the Collateral as well as judgment for the sale of the Collateral and to foreclose Defendants’ rights therein and to apply proceeds in the following order: (1) to the costs of taking, holding and selling the Collateral, and to the extent provided by the Note and not prohibited by law, reasonable attorneys’ fees and legal expenses incurred by Plaintiff in doing so, (2) the costs of suit herein, (3) to the satisfaction of damages and interests under the Note, and (4) to the satisfaction of obligations secured by any subordinate security interest in, or other subordinate lien on, the Collateral, and to the satisfaction of any subordinate attachment lien or execution lien pursuant to Code Civ. Proc. section 701.040(b) if authenticated demand thereof or notice of the level of attachment or execution is received before distribution of the proceeds is completed.   

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 the requirements for a default judgment. Substantively, Plaintiff attests via declaration that Defendants have defaulted by failing to make payments due under the Note, and as security for the Note, Defendants granted Plaintiff the right, title and interest in the Collateral.  Plaintiff also provides a contractual basis for her request for attorneys’ fees, and a declaration stating that the amount of such fees total $4,079.30.  Plaintiff also provides via declaration a calculation of prejudgment and post-judgment interest.  Procedurally, Plaintiff properly served Defendants 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 Defendants, default judgment is appropriate here.  

CONCLUSION AND ORDER  

For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiff Christina Lamport’s Request for Default Judgment against Defendants Primo Donuts LLC and Ralph Primo, Jr. is GRANTED.   Default judgment in the total amount of $231,316.79 is awarded in favor of Plaintiff and against Defendants.  The Court also awards Plaintiff immediate possession of the Collateral as well as judgment for the sale of the Collateral.