Judge: Joseph Lipner, Case: 24STCV11951, Date: 2025-04-25 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 24STCV11951    Hearing Date: April 25, 2025    Dept: 72

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

DEPARTMENT 72

TENTATIVE RULING

Plaintiff Salas & Company LLC (“Plaintiff”) seeks default judgment against Defendants Teodoro Eugenio Diaz Yanza (“Yanza”) and MTI Contracting Corp (“MTI”) (collectively, “Defendants”).

Plaintiff requests:

(1) money judgment in the amount of $60,085.41, consisting of:

(a) damages in the amount of $45,242.21;

(b) prejudgment interest in the amount of $11,700.97;

(c) costs in the amount of $1,395.00; and

(d) attorney’s fees in the amount of $1,747.23.

The Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s request for default judgment.

Background

This is a contract case. The following facts are taken from the allegations of the Complaint.

On April 15, 202, Plaintiff and Defendants entered into a secured loan agreement (the “Agreement”), whereby Plaintiff provided a business loan to Defendants in the amount of $49,800.00. Per the terms of the loan, Defendants were to make monthly payments with interest.

Plaintiff alleges that Defendants failed to make all of the payments and defaulted on August 31, 2022 with $45,242.21 remaining unpaid.

Plaintiff filed this action on May 13, 2024, raising claims for (1) breach of contract; and (2) common counts.

Default was entered against Defendants on December 17, 2024.

Legal Standard

Code of Civil Procedure, section 585 permits entry of a judgment after a Defendant has failed to timely answer after being properly served. A party seeking judgment on the default by the Court must file a Form CIV-100 Request for Court Judgment, and:

(1) Proof of service of the complaint and summons;

(2) A dismissal of all parties against whom judgment is not sought (including Doe defendants) or an application for separate judgment under CCP § 579, supported by a showing of grounds for each judgment (CRC 3.1800(a)(7));

(3) A declaration of non-military status as to the defendant (typically included in Form CIV-100) (CRC 3.1800(a)(5));

(4) A brief summary of the case (CRC 3.1800(a)(1));

(5) Admissible evidence supporting a prima facie case for the damages or other relief requested (Johnson v. Stanhiser (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 357, 361-362);

(6) Interest computations as necessary (CRC 3.1800(a)(3));

(7) A memorandum of costs and disbursements (typically included in Form CIV-100 (CRC 3.1800(a)(4));

(8) A request for attorney’s fees if allowed by statute or by the agreement of the parties (CRC 3.1800(a)(9)), accompanied by a declaration stating that the fees were calculated in accordance with the fee schedule as per Local Rule 3.214.  Where a request for attorney fees is based on a contractual provision the specific provision must be cited; (Local Rule 3.207); and

(9) A proposed form of judgment (CRC 3.1800(a)(6));

(10) Where an application for default judgment is based upon a written obligation to pay money, the original written agreement should be submitted for cancellation (CRC 3.1806). A trial court may exercise its discretion to accept a copy where the original document was lost or destroyed by ordering the clerk to cancel the copy instead (Kahn v. Lasorda's Dugout, Inc. (2003) 109 Cal.App.4th 1118, 1124);

(11) Where the plaintiff seeks damages for personal injury or wrongful death, they must serve a statement of damages on the defendant in the same manner as a summons (Code Civ. Proc. § 425.11, subd. (c), (d)).

(California Rules of Court, rule 3.1800.)

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.”

A party who defaults only admits facts that are well-pleaded in the complaint or cross-complaint. (Molen v. Friedman (1998) 64 Cal.App.4th 1149, 1153-1154.) Thus, the complaint must state a claim for the requested relief.

Discussion

Service of the Complaint and Summons

            According to the proofs of service filed on December 11, 2024, Yanza was served on October 26, 2024 at 1338 Gates Avenue, 2nd Floor, Brooklyn, New York 11221 via personal service, and MTI was served on the same day and at the same place via personal service on Yanza, its agent for service.         

Dismissal of Other Parties

The Doe defendants were dismissed from the action on April 11, 2025, pursuant to Plaintiff’s request.

Form CIV-100

Plaintiff has filed a form CIV-100 seeking default judgment.

Non-Military Status

Alexander v. Hettena avers to Defendants’ non-military status.

Summary of the Case

Plaintiff provides a brief summary of the case the Declaration of Miguel Cespedes. Plaintiff adequately pleads its causes of action in the Complaint.

Evidence of Damages

“Code of Civil Procedure section 580 prohibits the entry of a default judgment in an amount in excess of that demanded in the complaint.”  (Kim v. Westmoore Partners, Inc. (2011) 201 Cal.App.4th 267, 286.) Moreover, “a statement of damages cannot be relied upon to establish a plaintiff's monetary damages, except in cases of personal injury or wrongful death.” (Ibid.) “In all other cases, when recovering damages in a default judgment, the plaintiff is limited to the damages specified in the complaint.” (Ibid.) Moreover, a plaintiff must submit admissible evidence supporting a prima facie case for the damages or other relief requested (Johnson v. Stanhiser (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 357, 361-362.)

Miguel Cespedes, a custodian of records for Plaintiff, declares that the outstanding loan amount is $45,242.21 and provides a copy of the account statement for Defendants. (Cespedes Decl. ¶ 5, Ex. B.) Cespedes provides a copy of the Agreement. (Cespedes Decl. ¶ 2, Ex. A.)

Plaintiff has adequately evidenced its damages.

Prejudgment Interest

“(a) A person who is entitled to recover damages certain, or capable of being made certain by calculation, and the right to recover which is vested in the person upon a particular day, is entitled also to recover interest thereon from that day, except when the debtor is prevented by law, or by the act of the creditor from paying the debt. This section is applicable to recovery of damages and interest from any debtor, including the state or any county, city, city and county, municipal corporation, public district, public agency, or any political subdivision of the state.

(b) Every person who is entitled under any judgment to receive damages based upon a cause of action in contract where the claim was unliquidated, may also recover interest thereon from a date prior to the entry of judgment as the court may, in its discretion, fix, but in no event earlier than the date the action was filed.”

(Civ. Code, § 3287.)

“(a) Any legal rate of interest stipulated by a contract remains chargeable after a breach thereof, as before, until the contract is superseded by a verdict or other new obligation.

(b) If a contract entered into after January 1, 1986, does not stipulate a legal rate of interest, the obligation shall bear interest at a rate of 10 percent per annum after a breach.”

(Civ. Code, § 3289.)

            Plaintiff requests interest in the amount of $11,700.97. The Complaint demands interest on the unpaid loan balance. (Complaint at pp. 3-4.) The damages can be made certain because they are stated in the account statement on the loan. Interest is therefore available.

            Alexander Hettena provides Plaintiff’s interest calculations at a rate of 10 percent per annum. (Second Hettena Decl. ¶ 8 (PDF pp 3-4).)

Memorandum of Costs and Disbursements

Plaintiff includes a memoranudum of costs in the Form CIV-100. Alexander Hettena avers that Plaintiff expended $1,395.00 in costs.

Attorney’s Fees

            Plaintiff requests $1,747.23 in attorney’s fees.

This is an action on a contract. Because the judgment is between $50,000.01 and $100,000, the maximum recovery of attorney’s fees is equal to $1,890 plus 2% of the excess over $50,000. (Local Rule 3.214.) Plaintiff’s request is within this amount.

Proposed Form of Judgment

            Plaintiff has submitted a proposed form of judgment.

Submission of the Written Agreement

            California Rule of Court 3.1806 states that “unless otherwise ordered” judgment upon a written obligation to pay money requires a clerk’s note across the face of the writing that there has been a judgment. Here, Plaintiff has not submitted the original documents. The Court does not discern any practical need for such a clerk’s note on the written obligation in the current case and therefore orders that it need not be included. If this causes any issues for any party or non-party, they are authorized to bring the matter to the Court’s attention. 

Statement of Damages

Plaintiff does not need to submit a statement of damages because this is not a personal injury or wrongful death case.