Judge: Lisa R. Jaskol, Case: 22STCV27249, Date: 2024-06-06 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 22STCV27249 Hearing Date: June 6, 2024 Dept: 28
Having considered the documents submitted in support of default judgments, the Court rules as follows.
BACKGROUND
On August 23, 2022, Plaintiffs Ki Sik Song, Hwa Ja Song, and Wan Ryung Song filed this action against Defendants Bok Sik Park (“Defendant”) and Does 1-10 for motor vehicle tort, general negligence, premises liability, and conspiracy. The complaint requested $100,000 in damages.
On December 12, 2022, Plaintiffs filed a proof of service showing service of the summons and complaint on Defendant by personal service on October 16, 2022.
On March 15, 2023, Plaintiffs filed a statement of damages listing $3,000 for pain, suffering, and inconvenience, $3,000 for emotional distress, $12,000 in past medical expenses, and $12,000 in property damage.
On June 6, 2023, Plaintiffs filed a proof of service showing personal service of the statement of damages on Defendant on June 4, 2023.
On January 13, 2024, the clerk entered Defendant’s default.
On April 24, 2024, Plaintiffs filed requests for Court judgment to be heard on June 6, 2024.
On May 7, 2024, the Court dismissed the Doe defendants without prejudice at Plaintiffs’ request.
PARTIES’ REQUESTS
Plaintiff Ki Sik Song’s CIV-100 form asks the Court to enter a default judgment against Defendant Bok Sik Park and award Plaintiff $18,000.00, consisting of $17,840.00 as the demand of the complaint and $160.00 in costs.
Plaintiff Hwa Ja Song’s CIV-100 form asks the Court to enter a default judgment against Defendant Bok Sik Park and award Plaintiff $4,840.00, consisting of $4,840.00 as the demand of the complaint.
Plaintiff Wan Ryung Song’s CIV-100 form asks the Court to enter a default judgment against Defendant Bok Sik Park and award Plaintiff $3,650.00, consisting of $3,650.00 as the demand of the complaint.
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.) 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.)
A. Ki Sik Song
As noted, Plaintiff Ki Sik Song’s CIV-100 form asks the Court to enter a default judgment against Defendant Bok Sik Park and award Plaintiff Ki Sik Song $18,000.00, consisting of $17,840.00 as the demand of the complaint and $160.00 in costs.
In his declaration, Plaintiff Ki Sik Song states that he incurred $3,840 in medical expenses. He has attached a bill from his medical service provider to support this statement.
Plaintiff Ki Sik Song also states in his declaration that he incurred $12,000 to repair his car. Plaintiff has provided photographs of his damaged car but he has not provided any receipts or damage estimates to support his statement that he incurred $12,000 to repair it after the accident.
Plaintiff Ki Sik Song also requests $2,000 for pain, suffering, and emotional distress.
The Court construes Plaintiff Ki Sik Song’s request for $160 in costs for “services” as a request for the cost of service of the summons, complaint, and statement of damages on Defendant.
Although Plaintiff Ki Sik Song’s CIV-100 form refers to the “demand of the complaint,” Plaintiffs served a statement of damages that put Defendant on notice of the damages Plaintiffs were requesting. Plaintiffs’ combined damages requests do not exceed the amounts listed in the statement of damages.
B. Hwa Ja Song
As noted, Plaintiff Hwa Ja Song’s CIV-100 form asks the Court to enter a default judgment against Defendant Bok Sik Park and award Plaintiff $4,840.00, consisting of $4,840.00 as the demand of the complaint.
In her declaration, Plaintiff Hwa Ja Song states that she incurred $3,840 in medical expenses. She has attached a bill from her medical service provider to support this statement.
Plaintiff Hwa Ja Song also requests $1,000 for pain, suffering, and emotional distress.
Although Plaintiff Hwa Ja Song’s CIV-100 form refers to the “demand of the complaint,” Plaintiffs served a statement of damages that put Defendant on notice of the damages Plaintiffs were requesting. Plaintiffs’ combined damages requests do not exceed the amounts listed in the statement of damages.
The Court grants Plaintiff Hwa Ja Song’s application for default judgment.
C. Wan Ryung Song
As noted, Plaintiff Wan Ryung Song’s CIV-100 form asks the Court to enter a default judgment against Defendant Bok Sik Park and award Plaintiff $3,650.00, consisting of $3,650.00 as the demand of the complaint.
In his declaration, Plaintiff Wan Ryung Song states that he incurred $2,650 in medical expenses. He has attached a bill from his medical service provider to support this statement.
Plaintiff Wan Ryung Song also requests $1,000 for pain, suffering, and emotional distress.
Although Plaintiff Wan Ryung Song’s CIV-100 form refers to the “demand of the complaint,” Plaintiffs served a statement of damages that put Defendant on notice of the damages Plaintiffs were requesting. Plaintiffs’ combined damages requests do not exceed the amounts listed in the statement of damages.
The Court grants Plaintiff Wan Ryung Song’s application for default judgment.
CONCLUSION
The Court DENIES without prejudice Plaintiff Ki Sik Song’s application for default judgment against Defendant Bok Sik Park. Plaintiff Ki Sik Song may submit a new application that contains evidence supporting his assertion that he incurred $12,000 to repair his car as a result of the accident.
The Court GRANTS Plaintiff Hwa Ja Song’s application for default judgment and awards Plaintiff Hwa Ja Song $4,840 against Defendant Bok Sik Park.
The Court GRANTS Plaintiff Wan Ryung Song’s application for default judgment and awards Wan Ryung Song $3,650 against Defendant Bok Sik Park.
The Court sets an Order to Show Cause Re: Dismissal for Failure to Resubmit Default Judgment Packet (Plaintiff Ki Sik Song only) for 08/10/2024 at 08:30 AM in Department 28 at Spring Street Courthouse.
Plaintiffs are ordered to give notice of this ruling.