Judge: Joseph Lipner, Case: 23STCV10767, Date: 2023-10-04 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 23STCV10767    Hearing Date: October 4, 2023    Dept: 72

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

DEPARTMENT 72

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff ODK Capital, LLC, a Utah limited liability company filed a request for entry of default judgment against Defendants 6C LLC, a limited liability company and Feng Li, an individual.

Plaintiff ODK Capital, LLC’s request for entry of default judgment against Defendants 6C LLC, a limited liability company and Feng Li, an individual is CONTINUED to October 16, 2023 at 8:30 a.m. to allow Plaintiff to file a summary of the case as required under CRC, rule 3.1800(a)(1).

Background

On May 12, 2023, Plaintiff ODK Capital, LLC, a Utah limited liability company (Plaintiff) filed a complaint against Defendant 6C LLC, a limited liability company; Feng Li, an individual, (Defendants); and DOES 1 to 10, inclusive, alleging a breach of contract.

On May 26, 2023, Plaintiff filed proof of service by personal service indicating that the summons and complaint were served on Defendant 6C LLC on May 23, 2023 through its authorized agent.

On July 10, 2023, Plaintiff filed proof of service by substituted service indicating that the summons and complaint were served on Defendant Feng Li on June 28, 2023 through Ricardo Doe.

          On August 17, 2023, Plaintiff filed a request for entry of default and default judgment. On the same day, default was entered against Defendant 6C LLC only. Default was not entered against Defendant Feng Li due to missing information on Item 5(b) of proof of service filed on July 10, 2023. (Notice of Rejection 8/17/23.)

          On September 14, 2023, Plaintiff filed proof of service by substituted service indicating that that the summons and complaint were served on Defendant Feng Li on June 28, 2023 through Ricardo Doe, a person in charge of the mailbox facility where Li resides.

          On September 26, 2023, filed a request for entry of default and default judgment. On the same day, default was entered against Defendant Feng Li.

Legal Standard

Pursuant to Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1800(a), “a party seeking a default judgment on declarations must use mandatory Request for Entry of Default (Application to Enter Default) (form CIV-100)…the following must be included in the documents filed with the clerk: (1) except in unlawful detainer cases, a brief summary of the case identifying the parties and the nature of the plaintiffs claim; (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 declaration of nonmilitary status for each defendant against whom judgment is sought; (6) a proposed form of judgment; (7) a dismissal of all parties against whom judgment is not sought or an application for separate judgment against specified parties under code of Civil Procedure section 579, supported by a showing of grounds for each judgment; (8) exhibits as necessary; and (9) a request for attorney fees if allowed by statute or by the agreement of the parties.”

Pursuant to Code Civ. Proc., § 1033.5(a)(1), items are allowable as costs under Section 1032 if they are “filing, motion, and jury fees.”

Discussion

Here, Plaintiff ODK Capital, LLC, a Utah limited liability company filed a request for entry of default judgment against Defendants 6C LLC, a limited liability company and Feng Li, an individual on August 17, 2023. Plaintiff requests a judgment of $32,256.41, consisting of (1) $30,350.88 in damages; (2) $605.00 in costs; and (4) $1,300.53 in attorneys’ fees.

The Court has reviewed Plaintiff’s default judgment package and the following items are sufficient for entry of default judgment:

·       Plaintiff used the mandatory CIV-100 form.

·       Item #2 of the CIV-100 form is properly filled out with the amount of damages, costs, and attorneys’ fees being requested.

·       Item #7 of the CIV-100 form consists of memorandum of costs that are allowable under CCP § 1033.5(a)(1).

·       Item #8 of the CIV-100 form properly declares the Defendant’s nonmilitary status.

·       Plaintiff filed a proposed form of judgment using the JUD-100 form.

·       Plaintiff filed a request for dismissal properly dismissing DOES 1 through 10.

·       Plaintiff filed a declaration from their custodian of records with exhibits attached to support its request for damages.

·       Plaintiff filed a declaration from counsel of record to support request for attorney fees in compliance with Local Rule 3.214.

          However, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s default package is deficient for the following reason:

·       Plaintiff did not file a brief summary of the case identifying the parties and the nature of their claim as required under Cal. Rules of Court (CRC), rule 3.1800(a)(1).

Therefore, Plaintiff ODK Capital, LLC’s request for entry of default judgment against Defendants 6C LLC, a limited liability company and Feng Li, an individual is CONTINUED to October 16, 2023 at 8:30 a.m. to allow Plaintiff to file a summary of the case as required under CRC, rule 3.1800(a)(1).