Judge: Gail Killefer, Case: 21STCV24731, Date: 2022-08-22 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV24731    Hearing Date: August 22, 2022    Dept: 37

HEARING DATE:                           August 22, 2022

CASE NUMBER:                             21STCV24731

CASE NAME:                                   Michael Auerbach, et al. v. Susan Zabala, et al.

DEFAULT ENTERED:                   September 28, 2021

PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT

TENTATIVE:                        Plaintiffs’ Application for Entry of Default Judgment is granted in part, for $58,370.02.

BACKGROUND

Summary of Complaint:

This is a breach of habitability action regarding a rental agreement which Michael Auerbach and Kristina Grosspietsch (“Plaintiffs”) entered into on October 1, 2019, to occupy the apartment located at 1636 ½ Mohawk Street, Los Angeles, CA 90026 (“Premises”) with Susan Zabala (“Defendant”).  Plaintiffs allege the Premises had habitability issues, including: accumulation of water throughout the home, earwig infestation, defective ventilation system, and a malfunctioning septic tank.

Plaintiffs’ operative Complaint alleges four causes of action: (1) Breach of Contract, (2) Tortious Breach of Implied Warranty of Habitability, (3) Negligence, and (4) Nuisance.

Service of Summons:

On July 23, 2021, Plaintiff submitted a proof of service showing that the summons, complaint, and supporting papers were served through personal service on Defendant.

This is sufficient to comply with the statutory requirements. (CCP § 415.20(a).)   

Entry of Default:

Default was entered against Defendants on September 28, 2021. Plaintiffs submitted declarations stating the request for entry of default was mailed to the Defendant. Plaintiffs further requested, and on June 1, 2022, this court granted the dismissal of Doe Defendants. This is sufficient to comply with the statutory requirements (See CCP §§ 585, 587.) 

SUBMITTED DOCUMENTS: (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1800):

1.     Dismissal or judgment of non-parties to the judgment                                               YES

2.     Use of JC Form CIV-100                                                                                            YES

3.     Memorandum of costs                                                                                                 YES

4.     Declaration of nonmilitary status for each defendant                                                YES

5.     Summary of the case                                                                                                   YES

6.     585(d) declarations/admissible evidence in support                                                   YES

7.     Interest computation (as necessary)                                                                            YES

8.     Request for attorney fees (Local Rule 3.214)                                                             YES

9.     Proposed judgment                                                                                                     YES

10. Exhibits (as necessary)                                                                                                YES

DEFAULT JUDGMENT REQUESTED:

•           Damages:                                $     277,800.00

Interest:                                  $      

•           Attorney fees:                        $      

•           Costs:                                      $      570.02

Total:                                      $   278,370.02

DISCUSSION

A.    Principal Damages

Plaintiffs requests an award of principal damages in the amount of $277,800.00, which includes $16,200.00 in paid rent, out of pocket damages totaling $41,600.00, emotional distress damages for $60,000.00, and $100,000.00 for punitive damages. (Amended Auerbach Decl. ¶¶9-12.) Plaintiffs’ Complaint prays for damages in “ a sum exceeding $25,000.00” only. (Complaint ¶ 27.) Well plead allegations of the complaint are admitted by Defendant in default. (Rose v. Lawton (1963) 215 Cal.App.2d 18, 20 [“the defendant who fails to answer admits only facts which are well pleaded . . .”])

Accordingly, Plaintiffs have only demonstrated their entitlement to principal damages for paid rent and out of pocket damages, in the amount of $57,800.00.

B.     Interest

Plaintiffs do not request interest.

C.    Attorney’s Fees

Plaintiffs do not request attorney fees. 

D.    Costs

Plaintiffs request an award of costs in the amount of $570.02 for filing fees with the court and process server’s fees.

Filing fees and process server fees are recoverable as costs. (CCP § 1033.5(a)(1), (a)(4).) As such, Plaintiffs have shown entitlement to recover $570.02 in costs.

Conclusion