Judge: Lisa K. Sepe-Wiesenfeld, Case: 23SMCV04719, Date: 2024-06-12 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 23SMCV04719 Hearing Date: June 12, 2024 Dept: N
TENTATIVE RULING
Plaintiff SM 10000 Property, LLC’s Request for Default Judgment is CONTINUED to at the hearing to allow Plaintiff to address the following deficiencies.
First, Plaintiff’s proposed judgment in the JUD-100 form does not match the amount sought in the CIV-100 form submitted with this package. Plaintiff shall revise the CIV-100 and JUD-100 to seek the same amounts.
Second, Code of Civil Procedure section 580, subdivision (a), provides that relief given to a plaintiff in a default judgment cannot exceed the amount demanded in the complaint. Plaintiff prays for $200,000 in damages, but elsewhere it states that Defendant Jakob Andersen (“Defendant”) owed $116,342.34 as of the time of filing the complaint. Plaintiff must revise this default package to seek no more than $116,342.34 in compensatory damages, or it must revise the complaint.
Third, Plaintiff’s request for costs includes costs not allowable under Code of Civil Procedure section 1033.5, including costs for online research (Code Civ. Proc., § 1033.5, subd. (c)(4)), postage (Code Civ. Proc., § 1033.5, subd. (b)(3)), photocopying (Code Civ. Proc., § 1033.5, subd. (b)(3)), unnecessary electronic filing and subpoena fees given that Defendant did not answer the complaint, and costs for “litigation support vendors” without description. The Court is not inclined to award Plaintiff costs beyond service and electronic filing of the documents listed on the case docket, as any other costs cannot be considered to be reasonable and necessary to the litigation. Plaintiff shall revise the memorandum of costs to include only costs for service of the summons and complaint and electronic filing of the documents listed on the case docket.
Fourth, the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Local Rules, rule 3.214(a) sets forth the proper amount of attorney fees in a default judgment. Plaintiff’s calculation of attorney fees exceeds the schedule set forth in the rule and must be reduced accordingly.
Finally, the interest calculations provided by Plaintiff fail to clearly describe the basis of interest. If Plaintiff seeks a different amount of interest as to each month, this must be set forth in the calculations, and the basis of each amount must also be sufficiently described. Plaintiff shall also not include time for anticipated days for the Court to review the judgment request.