Judge: Lisa R. Jaskol, Case: 21STCV40807, Date: 2023-12-04 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 21STCV40807    Hearing Date: December 4, 2023    Dept: 28

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

BACKGROUND 

On November 5, 2021, Plaintiff Allstate Northbrook Indemnity Company (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Manuel C Carrillo (“Carrillo”), Myira Alejandra Figueroa (“Figueroa”), and Does 1-100 for subrogation and indebtedness.  The complaint demanded $107,185.39. 

On December 2, 2021, Plaintiff filed a proof of service showing substituted service of the summons, complaint, and other documents on Carrillo on December 2, 2021. 

On February 23, 2022, the clerk entered Carrillo’s default. 

On April 25, 2023, Plaintiff filed a proof of service showing personal service of an amended summons, amendment to complaint, complaint, statement of damages, and other documents on Figueroa on April 23, 2023. 

On October 4, 2023, Plaintiff filed a request for Court judgment to be heard on December 4, 2023. 

On October 9, 2023, the Court dismissed the Doe defendants without prejudice at Plaintiff’s request. 

On October 23, 2023, the clerk entered Figueroa’s default.  

PARTY’S REQUEST 

Plaintiff Allstate Northbrook Indemnity Company asks the Court to enter a default judgment against Defendants Manuel C Carrillo and Myira Alejandra Figueroa and award Plaintiff $7,716.89, consisting of $7,185.39 as the demand of the complaint, $0.00 in prejudgment interest, $0.00 in attorney’s fees, and $531.50 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), 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, supra, ¶ 5:258, p. 5-70.)  

DISCUSSION 

Plaintiff has submitted a declaration from its insured stating that, as a result of the accident, Plaintiff paid the insured $7,185.39 for the repair of property and $100,000.00 for personal injuries, for a total sum of $107,185.39. 

Plaintiff has also submitted a declaration from its custodian of records stating that Plaintiff made payments under the insured's policy for uninsured medical bene¿ts in the amount of $100,000.00 and for the repair of the property in the sum of $7,185.39, for a total sum of $107,185.39. 

Consistent with these statements, the complaint demanded $107,185.39. 

Plaintiff's application for a default judgment, however, states that the demand of the complaint is $7,185.39.  Plaintiff is requesting judgment for that amount plus costs, for a total amount of $7,716.89. 

The Court will assume that Plaintiff intends to seek a judgment that is $100,000 less than the amount demanded in the complaint.  The application is complete and contains all required attachments.  The Court grants the application. 

CONCLUSION 

The Court GRANTS Plaintiff Allstate Northbrook Indemnity Company’s request for default judgment filed on October 4, 2023.  The Court enters judgment of $7,716.89 against Defendants Manuel C Carrillo and Myira Alejandra Figueroa. 

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of this ruling.