Judge: Elaine Lu, Case: 21STCV17267, Date: 2023-04-20 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV17267    Hearing Date: April 20, 2023    Dept: 26

21STCV17267

The Request for Entry of Default Judgment submitted on 3/1/2023 is rejected for the following reasons:

First, A verified complaint, even if made by the party, is not a substitute for the required affidavit establishing the existence of a cause of action. (Olvera v. Olvera (1991) 232 CA3d 32, 42.) Plaintiff has submitted only a declaration from its counsel. Plaintiff fails to submit an affidavit or declaration by any individual with percipient knowledge in support of the judgment, establishing liability and damages. The only declaration submitted is by Plaintiff’s Counsel, Andrew Yun, and the declaration does not set forth any basis for Counsel’s percipient knowledge of the events leading to the filing of this action or the damages suffered from the wrongful conduct alleged in the complaint.

-         

Second, Plaintiff has failed to provide the interest calculation required by CRC 3.1800(a)(3).

Three, Plaintiff’s request for attorney’s fees is not calculated in accordance with LASC Rule 3.214.  Nor is Plaintiff’s request for attorney’s fees supported by a declaration explaining why a greater amount should be awarded, including an itemized statement of the services rendered or to be rendered.

Within two weeks, Plaintiff must submit a new default judgment package correcting the defects identified above, together with a new proposed default judgment on Judicial Council form JUD-100.

The OSC re entry of default judgment is continued to May 18, 2023 at 8:30 am.

Court’s Judicial Assistant is to give notice.