Judge: Elaine Lu, Case: 24STCV27567, Date: 2025-02-21 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV27567    Hearing Date: February 21, 2025    Dept: 9

Plaintiff has filed proof of service of the Summons and Complaint as to certain defendants who have not responded.

No later than April 15, 2025, Plaintiff’s Counsel must file either a request for entry of BODY VISION JEWELRY, INC. and NICHOLAS MARTIN’s defaults or a declaration explaining the failure to seek and obtain BODY VISION JEWELRY, INC. and NICHOLAS MARTIN’s defaults, setting forth any and all efforts undertaken to obtain BODY VISION JEWELRY, INC. and NICHOLAS MARTIN’s defaults, and explaining why sanctions (including monetary sanctions of at least $1,000) should not be imposed for failure to timely seek BODY VISION JEWELRY, INC. and NICHOLAS MARTIN’s defaults, in compliance with California Rules of Court, Rule 3.720.

Failure to timely obtain BODY VISION JEWELRY, INC. and NICHOLAS MARTIN’s defaults by April 15, 2025 may result in the Court setting an OSC re sanctions.

The Court reminds the parties that ultimately, the Court may not enter judgment in an amount exceeding the amount demanded in the Complaint.  (CCP 585(b).)  The Court may not grant relief not demanded in the complaint by default judgment even though that relief otherwise would have been proper. (CCP § 580(a); Airs Aromatics, LLC v. CBL Data Recovery Technologies, Inc. (2018) 23 Cal.App.5th 1013, 1018 (default judgment for sum in excess of that demanded in complaint is void).  “It is fundamental to the concept of due process that a defendant be given notice of the existence of a lawsuit and notice of the specific relief which is sought in the complaint served upon him.” (Marriage of Lippel (1990) 51 Cal.3d 1160, 1166 [emphasis added].)  Thus, for example, where the complaint does not request attorney fees, the court cannot award fees against a defaulting defendant. It makes no difference that the fees are awardable by statute. (Feminist Women's Health Ctr. v. Blythe (1995) 32 Cal.App.4th 1641, 1675).  Accordingly, prior to seeking any Defendant’s default, Plaintiff may wish to review the operative Complaint for whether the operative Complaint fails to give notice of the amount of damages that Plaintiff seeks to recover; if so, it may be futile for Plaintiff to seek entry of Defendant’s default without first amending the Complaint to clearly state and give notice of the amount of damages that Plaintiff is seeking to recover.  In the event that Plaintiff wishes to amend the Complaint for this purpose, the Court hereby lifts the stay to grant leave to amend the operative complaint.  If Defendant again fails to respond upon being served with the amended complaint, a request for entry of Defendant’s default on the Amended Complaint may lead to a request for entry of default judgment in an amount equal to or less than that stated in the Amended Complaint.

A non-appearance case review is set for April 22, 2025 at 8:30 am in Department 9 re entry of BODY VISION JEWELRY, INC. and NICHOLAS MARTIN’s defaults.

The previously imposed stay on discovery remains in effect.

The initial status conference is taken off calendar at this time and will be re-calendared upon Defendant’s filing of a notice of appearance.

The Court Clerk shall give notice of this order to Plaintiff.  Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of this minute order as well as the Initial Status Conference order to all other parties and file proof of service of such.