Judge: Lisa R. Jaskol, Case: 21STCV44184, Date: 2023-07-20 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 21STCV44184 Hearing Date: July 20, 2023 Dept: 28
Having considered the documents submitted in support of the request for default judgment, the Court rules as follows.
BACKGROUND
On December 2, 2021, Plaintiff Christian Hernandez (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Packwoods, Lancaster Storage Properties, LLC (“LSP”), TCMZ LLC (“TCMZ”), Banc of California Stadium, John Doe 1, and John Doe 2 for assault, battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligence, negligent hiring, supervision and retention.
On May 24, 2022, LAFC StadiumCo, LLC (erroneously sued as Banc of California Stadium) filed an answer and a Cross-Complaint against Cross-Defendants ROES 1-20 for express indemnification, equitable indemnification, equitable contribution and declaratory relief.
On August 24, 2022, TCMZ filed an answer and a Cross-Complaint against Cross-Defendants Packwoods, LSP, John Doe 1 and John Doe 2 for breach of contract, express indemnification, implied indemnity, comparative contribution, total equitable indemnity and declaratory relief.
On February 3, 2023, the clerk entered default against Packwoods at Plaintiff’s request.
On February 23, 2023, the Court dismissed Plaintiff’s complaint against LAFC StadiumCo, LLC (erroneously sued as Banc of California Stadium) with prejudice at Plaintiff’s request. The Court also dismissed the cross-complaint of LAFC StadiumCo, LLC.
On June 21, 2023, the Court found that the settlement between Plaintiff and TCMZ was made in good faith.
On July 12, 2023, Plaintiff filed a request for court judgment to be heard on July 20, 2023.
PARTY’S REQUEST
Plaintiff asks the Court to enter a default judgment against Defendant Packwoods and award Plaintiff $1,010,486.78, consisting of $9,220.00 in special damages, $1,000,000.00 in general damages, $0.00 in prejudgment interest, $0.00 in attorney’s fees, and $1,266.78 in costs.
DISCUSSION
Section 2.c of Plaintiff’s CIV-100 form does not list any amount sought as interest. The proposed judgment, however, requests 10% interest beginning December 1, 2021. The CIV-100 form and proposed judgment must match.
If Plaintiff requests interest, Plaintiff must explain the basis for seeking 10% in pre-judgment interest rather than the standard 7% for non-contract cases.
Plaintiff filed proof of service of the statement of damages on Packwoods but did not file a copy of the statement of damages. Without the statement of damages, the Court cannot confirm that Packwoods was on notice of the damages amount sought.
Plaintiff has not provided sufficient evidence to support a general damage award of $1,000,000. Plaintiff’s declaration explains that, as a result of the attack, he suffered injuries that required medical treatment, he still experiences pain, and he will continue to get treatment. He states: “My life has been deterred as a result of the injuries caused in this collision [sic]. I live with perpetual trepidation of how these injuries have affected me. My life has been profoundly transformed negatively.” While Plaintiff’s declaration establishes entitlement to some amount of general damages, it does support an award of $1,000,000.
Section 7.d of Plaintiff’s CIV-100 form requests that the Court award $55.00 in costs for “postage/delivery, medical records request.” Code of Civil Procedure section 1033.5, subdivision (b)(3) prohibits recovery of postage charges.
For the reasons stated above, the Court denies the motion.
CONCLUSION
The application for default judgment filed on July 12, 2023, is DENIED.
Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of this ruling.