Judge: Lisa R. Jaskol, Case: 22STCV24741, Date: 2024-12-05 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCV24741 Hearing Date: December 5, 2024 Dept: 28
Having considered the documents submitted in support of the request for default judgment, the Court rules as follows.
BACKGROUND
On August 1, 2022, Plaintiff Interinsurance Exchange of the Automobile Club (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Jonathan Varela and Does 1-10 for subrogation recovery. The complaint demanded $51,000.00.
On March 1, 2024, Plaintiff filed a proof of service showing substituted service of the summons, complaint, and other documents on Defendant on February 18, 2024.
On June 17, 2024, the clerk entered Defendant’s default.
On September 11, 2024, Plaintiff filed an application for default judgment.
On September 18, 2024, the Court dismissed the Doe defendants without prejudice at Plaintiff’s request.
PARTY’S REQUEST
Plaintiff
asks the Court to enter a default judgment against Defendant and award
Plaintiff $59,064.79, consisting of $51,000.00 as the demand of the complaint,
$7,550.70 in prejudgment interest, and $514.00 in costs.
LEGAL STANDARD
A. Default judgment
California Rules of Court, rule 3.1800(a), provides:
“[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;
“(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)(7).)
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, 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.) 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.)
DISCUSSION
Plaintiff has provided a declaration by Melanie Olson (“Olson”), Plaintiff’s custodian of records and subrogation examiner, stating that Plaintiff paid its insured $3,500.00 for collision damage to the insured’s vehicle and $47,500.00 for bodily injuries. Plaintiff now seeks a default judgment against Defendant for these amounts.
Although Olson states in paragraph 5 of her declaration that Plaintiff paid the insured $47,500.00 for bodily injuries, Olson states in paragraph 9 of her declaration that the insured sustained bodily injury damages “of at least $41,000.00 . . . .” Plaintiff should clarify the amount of the insured’s bodily injury damages.
Olson’s declaration includes copies of medical bills for the insured’s bodily injuries. The medical bills, however, reflect charges (after adjustments) of at most $16,400.82. Plaintiff should provide evidence supporting its request for bodily injury damages of $47,500.00.
Plaintiff has provided photographs of the insured’s damaged vehicle and the traffic collision report as exhibits to Olson’s declaration. However, these exhibits do not show that Plaintiff was required to pay $3,500.00 for collision damage to its insured’s vehicle.
The Court denies Plaintiff's request for default judgment.
CONCLUSION
Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of this ruling.