Judge: Lisa R. Jaskol, Case: 21STCV22412, Date: 2023-10-19 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV22412    Hearing Date: October 19, 2023    Dept: 28

Having considered the documents submitted in support of a default judgment, the Court rules as follows. 

BACKGROUND 

On June 16, 2021, Plaintiff Miguel A. Madera-Escamilla (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Inocencio Dizon, Inocencio G. Dizon, and Does 1-30 for motor vehicle negligence. 

On August 15, 2022, Plaintiff filed proofs of service showing substituted service on Inocencio Dizon and Inocencio G. Dizon of the summons, complaint, statement of damages and other documents on July 3, 2022. 

On October 13, 2022, the clerk entered the defaults of Inocencio Dizon and Inocencio G. Dizon. 

On January 3, 2023, the Court dismissed the Doe defendants without prejudice at Plaintiff’s request. 

On July 18, 2023, Plaintiff filed a request for Court judgment against Inocencio Dizon and Inocencio G. Dizon (“Defendants”). 

PARTY’S REQUEST 

Plaintiff Miguel A. Madera-Escamilla requests that the Court enter a default judgment against Defendants and award Plaintiff $30,382.77, consisting of $11,950.24 in general damages, $17,957.53 in special damages, $0.00 in prejudgment interest, $0.00 in attorney’s fees, and $475.00 in costs. 

LEGAL STANDARD 

A.      Default judgment 

“[With exceptions that do not apply here,] [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 plaintiff's 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.” 

(Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1800(a).) 

B.       Damages 

          On a request for default judgment, “[w]here a cause of action is stated in the complaint, plaintiff merely needs to introduce evidence establishing a prima facie case for damages.”  (L. Edmon & C. Karnow, Cal. Practice Guide: Civil Procedure Before Trial (Rutter 2023) ¶ 5:213.1, p. 5-56 (Cal. Practice Guide: Procedure), citing Johnson v. Stanhiser (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 357, 361 [trial court erred in applying preponderance of the evidence standard].) 

          The relief granted to a plaintiff upon entry of a defendant's default cannot exceed the amount demanded in the complaint or, for personal injury cases where damages may not be stated in the complaint, the amount listed in the statement of damages. (Code Civ. Proc., §§ 580, subd. (a), 585, subd. (b).) “The notice requirement of section 580 was designed to insure fundamental fairness.” (Becker v. S.P.V. Construction Co. (1980) 27 Cal.3d 489, 494 (Becker).) The statute insures that “defendants in cases which involve a default judgment have adequate notice of the judgments that may be taken against them. [Citation.] ‘If a judgment other than that which is demanded is taken against him, [the defendant] has been deprived of his day in court—a right to a hearing on the matter adjudicated.’ ’’ (Id. at p. 493.) A trial court exceeds its jurisdiction if it awards damages in excess of the amount specified in the complaint or statement of damages. (Id. at p. 494; see Cal. Practice Guide: Procedure, supra, ¶ 5:258, p. 5-70.) 

The court “shall hear the evidence offered by the plaintiff, and shall render judgment in the plaintiff’s favor for that relief, not exceeding the amount stated in the complaint, in the statement required by Section 425.11, or in the statement provided for by Section 425.115, as appears by the evidence to be just. If the taking of an account, or the proof of any fact, is necessary to enable the court to give judgment or to carry the judgment into effect, the court may take the account or hear the proof . . . .”  (Code Civ. Proc., § 585, subd. (b).) 

DISCUSSION 

Plaintiff has submitted a completed default judgment packet with all applicable attachments. The evidence supports the requested judgment. The Court grants the motion. 

CONCLUSION 

The Court GRANTS Plaintiff Miguel A. Madera-Escamilla’s application for default judgment filed on July 18, 2023.  The Court enters judgment against Defendants Inocencio Dizon and Inocencio G. Dizon in the amount of $30,382.77. 

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of this ruling.