Judge: Holly J. Fujie, Case: 24STCV29007, Date: 2025-05-14 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV29007    Hearing Date: May 14, 2025    Dept: 56

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

MOVING PARTY: Plaintiff Monica Sanchez (“Plaintiff”)  

RESPONDING PARTY: None

            The Court has considered the default judgment application. No opposition has been filed.

BACKGROUND

             Plaintiff sues Venturebeat, Inc. d/b/a www.venturebeat.com (“Defendant”) pursuant to a November 5, 2024 complaint (“Complaint”) alleging causes of action for: (1) California Invasion of Privacy Act Penal Code Section 638.51 subd. (a); and (2) California Invasion of Privacy Act Penal Code Section 631 subd. (a). Plaintiff alleges that Defendant uses illegal tracking software on its webpage.

            On May 7, 2025, Plaintiff submitted the instant default judgment package.

DISCUSSION

            Code of Civil Procedure (“CCP”) section 585 permits entry of a default judgment after a party has failed to timely respond or appear. A party seeking judgment on the default by the court must file a Request for Court Judgment (form CIV-100) and the following documents: (1) a brief summary of the case; (2) declarations or other admissible evidence in support of the judgment requested; (3) interest computations as necessary; (4) a memorandum of costs and disbursements; (5) a proposed form of judgment; (6) a dismissal of all parties against whom judgment is not sought or an application for separate judgment under Code of Civil Procedure section 579, supported by a showing of grounds for each judgment; (7) exhibits as necessary; and (8) a request for attorneys’ fees if allowed by statute or by the agreement of the parties. (California Rules of Court (“CRC”), Rule 3.1800.)

Pursuant to CRC Rule 3.110, subdivision (h), “[w]hen a default is entered, the party who requested the entry of default must obtain a default judgment against the defaulting party within 45 days after the default was entered, unless the court has granted an extension of time.” (CRC Rule 3.110, subd. (h).)

The court cannot award a default judgment greater than the amount pleaded in the complaint, including if the complaint does not specify the amount. (CCP § 580(a); Falahati v. Kondo (2005) 127 Cal.App.4th 823, 830-831.) Statements of damages are used in personal injury and wrongful death cases in which plaintiff may not allege damages in the complaint. (CCP § 425.11.) In all other cases, plaintiff is limited to the damages specified in the complaint because a statement of damages only satisfies section 580 “when the law prevents a plaintiff from stating an amount of damages in the body of the complaint.” (Dhawan v. Biring (2015) 241 Cal.App.4th 963, 968, see also Levine v. Smith (2006) 145 Cal.App.4th 1131, 1137.)

Plaintiff requests default judgment in the total amount of $52,562.83 consisting of: (1) $50,000.00 demand of Complaint; (2) $672.83 in costs; and (3) $1,890 in attorney fees.

Upon review of the default judgment application, the Court finds that the following defects preclude granting default judgment at this time:

(1)  The request for court judgment seeks a dollar amount that is more than the dollar amount sought in the Complaint. (see CCP §§ 580(a).) The Complaint “seeks statutory damages of $5,000” however the request for court judgment seeks $50,000.00. (Compare Compl. ¶ 125 and CIV-100 § 2.a.)

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s Application for Default Judgment is DENIED, without prejudice. Plaintiff may submit a new default judgment application curing the above identified defect. 

Moving Party is ordered to give notice of this ruling.           

Dated this 14th day of May 2025