Judge: Lynette Gridiron Winston, Case: 23PSCV04002, Date: 2024-05-21 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 23PSCV04002 Hearing Date: May 21, 2024 Dept: 6
Plaintiff Santander Consumer USA INC.’s Request for Entry of Default Judgment
Defendant: Michael Nieto
TENTATIVE RULING
This is an action for repossession. On December 28, 2023, plaintiff Santander Consumer USA Inc. (Plaintiff) filed this action against defendants Michael Nieto (Nieto), California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), and Does 1 through 10, alleging causes of action for possession, quiet title, and declaratory relief. On March 15, 2024, Plaintiff and DMV entered into a stipulation regarding waiver of appearance by and of monetary recovery against DMV, and the Court signed an order regarding the same on the same date.
On April 29, 2024, Plaintiff filed a request for entry of default judgment against Nieto and DMV.
LEGAL STANDARD
Code of Civil Procedure section 585 permits entry of a default judgment after a party has failed to timely respond or appear. (Code Civ. Proc., § 585.) A party seeking judgment on the default by the court must file a Request for Court Judgment, and: (1) a brief summary of the case; (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) declaration of nonmilitary status; (6) a proposed form of judgment; (7) a dismissal of all parties against whom judgment is not sought or an application for separate judgment 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 attorneys’ fees if allowed by statute or by the agreement of the parties. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1800.)
ANALYSIS
Plaintiff seeks against Defendant Nieto: (1) possession of a 2020 Jeep Wrangler, VIN 1C4HJXDG8LW133221; (2) to be adjudicated the legal owner and lienholder of a 2019 Dodge Charger, VIN 2C3CDXGJ2KH506831; and (3) that if Plaintiff regains the subject vehicle, that the amount of the proceeds of sale of will be credited to Defendant Nieto’s account and judgment. With respect to DMV, Plaintiff also seeks for the Court to order DMV to: (1) accept Plaintiff’s prior security interest in the subject vehicle issued on or about 12/4/2019; (2) to the extent there is any new or conflicting ownership interest in the 2020 Jeep Wrangler, to invalidate any such conflicting ownership interest and issue a new certificate of ownership to Plaintiff as the legal owner; and (3) to the extent there is any hold on the title or registration of the subject vehicle, to remove any such hold and thereby enable Plaintiff to sell the subject vehicle once it regains possession.
The Court finds some issues with Plaintiff’s request for entry of default judgment. First, there is no mention of the 2019 Dodge Charger in the complaint. (See generally, Compl. And Vargas Decl., ¶18(b).) The only vehicle mentioned therein is the 2020 Jeep Wrangler. (See Id., ¶ 7; Id., Prayer for Relief, ¶ 1; Id., Ex. A.) Also, Pablo Murcia-Bilbao is not named as a defendant in the complaint. (See Id. and Vargas Decl., ¶¶ 11, 12.) The Court cannot award judgment over property that was not mentioned in the complaint.
The Court also notes that Plaintiff’s supporting declaration does not explain why it could not produce the original, which is required when a loan agreement is involved. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.1806; Kahn v. Lasorda’s Dugout, Inc. (2002) (2003) 109 Cal.App.4th 1118, 1123.)
The Court further finds that the likely appropriate mechanism for default judgment here is a prove-up hearing, as quiet title claims usually require a prove-up hearing. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 764.010.)
CONCLUSION