Judge: Lisa R. Jaskol, Case: 22STCV25705, Date: 2024-03-25 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 22STCV25705    Hearing Date: March 25, 2024    Dept: 28

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

BACKGROUND 

On August 9, 2022, Plaintiff United Financial Casualty Company (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Carlos Cortez Cruz (“Defendant”), Carlos Diaz (“Diaz”), and Does 1-20 for motor vehicle tort.  The complaint demanded $40,988.76.  Plaintiff also filed a statement of damage seeking $11,008.76 for property damage and $29,980.00 for uninsured motorist bodily injury payments, for a total of $40,988.76. 

On September 28, 2022, Plaintiff filed a proof of service showing personal service of the summons, complaint, statement of damages, and other documents on Defendant on September 1, 2022. 

On October 3, 2022, the Court dismissed Diaz without prejudice at Plaintiff’s request. 

On January 22, 2024, the clerk entered Defendant’s default. On January 31, 2024, the Court dismissed the Doe defendants without prejudice at Plaintiff’s request. 

On January 30, 2024, Plaintiff filed a request for Court judgment to be heard on March 25, 2024. 

PARTY’S REQUEST 

Plaintiff United Financial Casualty Company asks the Court to enter a default judgment against Defendant Carlos Cortez Cruz and award Plaintiff $41,517.76, consisting of $40,988.76 as the demand of the complaint, and $529.00 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, 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.) 

DISCUSSION 

Plaintiff seeks reimbursement of the amount it paid its insureds in property damage and uninsured motorist bodily injury benefits as the result of Defendant’s negligence.  Plaintiff has provided evidence supporting its payment of $10,271.24 to insured Rudy Zendejas for property damage. 

However, Plaintiff has provided no evidence showing that its payments of $15,000.00 to insured Rudy Zendejas and $15,000.00 to insured Margarita Ochoa were based on the insureds’ reasonably incurred medical expenses.  (Together, these amounts are also slightly larger than the $29,980.00 for uninsured motorist bodily injury payments listed in the statement of damages.)  Similarly, Plaintiff has provided no evidence that its payment of $737.52 to insured Rudy Zendejas for “loss of use/rental” was based on reasonably incurred expenses.  Plaintiff should provide records showing that the insureds incurred these expenses. 

The Court denies the application without prejudice. 

CONCLUSION 

The Court DENIES Plaintiff United Financial Casualty Company’s application for default judgment filed on January 30, 2024 without prejudice. 

The Court sets an Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal for Failure to Resubmit Default Judgment Packet on May 16, 2024 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 28 of the Spring Street Courthouse. 

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of this ruling.