Judge Michael E. Whitaker, Case Number: 23SMCV03319, Date: 2025-02-07 Tentative Ruling

Judge: Michael E. Whitaker, Case: 23SMCV03319, Date: 2025-02-07 Tentative Ruling

Plaintiff Roman Teroganesyan (“Plaintiff”) requests for default judgment against Defendants ZG Valet, Inc. and Victor Zamora (“Defendants”) in the amount of $37,377.70, which is composed of general damages in the amount of $15,000; special damages in the amount of $21,217.47; and costs in the amount of $1,160.23.

Plaintiff’s operative First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) alleges a single cause of action for negligence, arising from the theft of valuable items from the trunk of Plaintiff’s vehicle after the vehicle was left unlocked while in Defendants’ care. Defendants were personally served with a copy of the original summons and complaint on November 18, 2023 and served with a copy of the First Amended Complaint via substitute service on October 15, 2024. Default was entered against Defendants on February 6, 2024. The First Amended Complaint dismissed the Doe defendants by omission.

The FAC seek $15,000 in general damages and special damages in the amount of $21,217.47. Therefore, Plaintiff does not seek damages that are in excess of what is pled in the Complaint. (See Code Civ. Proc., § 580, subd. (a) [“The relief granted to the plaintiff, if there is no answer, cannot exceed that demanded in the complaint”]; Levine v. Smith (2006) 145 Cal.App.4th 1131, 1136-1137 [“when recovering damages in a default judgment, the plaintiff is limited to the damages specified in the complaint”].)

In support of the request, Plaintiff has provided the Declaration Roman Teroganesyan, which provides:

3. On April 16, 2023, my family and I went to Beverly Hills for a family outing, where I made purchases at various shops.

4. After doing some shopping, my family and I drove to Avra Beverly Hills (hereinafter referred to as “Avra”) located at 233 N. Beverly Hills Drive, Beverly Hills, CA 90210 to have dinner.

6. We arrived at Avra around 4:00 P.M. when I relinquished my vehicle to ZG Valet.

7. At approximately 6:45 P.M., I reclaimed my vehicle from ZG Valet and proceeded to drive home.

9. After arriving at my house, I opened the trunk of my vehicle to retrieve my shopping bags containing valuable purchases I made earlier that day. Upon opening the trunk of my vehicle, I discovered that all of the shopping bags and valuables I had purchased were missing.

10. I am entitled to compensation for the loss of my valuable property, the violation of my privacy, and the inconvenience and emotional distress caused by this event.

12. As a result of Defendants’ negligence, I sustained damages in an amount of $37,377.70.

13. As Defendants have failed to plead or otherwise defend this action, I am entitled to a judgement by default. I have suffered special damages in the amount of $21,217.47, general damages in the amount of $15,000.00 the violation of my privacy and the inconvenience and emotional

2. On April 16, 2023, Plaintiff went to a family outing in Beverly Hills, California. After doing some shopping, Plaintiff and his family drove to Avra Beverly Hills (hereinafter referred to as “Avra”), located at 233 N. Beverly Hills Drive, Beverly Hills, CA 90210 to have dinner. When Plaintiff arrived at Avra around 4:00 P.M., he relinquished his vehicle to ZG Valet. At approximately 6:45 P.M., Plaintiff reclaimed his vehicle from ZG Valet and proceeded to drive home. When Plaintiff arrived at his house, Plaintiff opened the trunk of his vehicle to retrieve shopping bags containing valuable purchases he had made earlier that day. Upon opening the trunk of his vehicle, Plaintiff discovered that all of the shopping bags and valuables he had purchased were missing.

3. At the time of the incident, Defendants, and each of them, so negligently, carelessly, and improperly failed their duty to exercise ordinary care in the use, maintenance, and management of the premises and Plaintiff’s vehicle in order to avoid exposing persons to an unreasonable risk of harm. Defendants negligently and carelessly owned, operated, managed, maintained, selected, hired, supervised, its employees on the premises and Plaintiff’s vehicle on April 16, 2023.

4. During ordinary use of the premises, and while conducting intended use of temporary parking, Plaintiff sustained damages due to Defendants’ negligence, and careless supervision of the premises, Plaintiff’s vehicle, and their employees.

(Holguin Decl. ¶¶ 2-4.) Attached to the Holguin Declaration is correspondence with Defendants outlining the items lost that includes copies of the receipts for the items purchased in Beverly Hills on April 16, 2023. (Ex. 13 to Holguin Decl.) Plaintiff contends the following items were lost:

· Plaintiff purchased the Chanel sunglasses for $810.30 (including tax) at Chanel Beverly Hills at 3:34 PM on 4/16/23.

· Plaintiff purchased the Chanel bag for $7900 and the Chanel cardigan for $5150 from Chanel Beverly Hills at 3:25 PM on 4/16/23. That transaction also involved a return, but CA sales tax was charged on that purchase at a rate of 9.5%. 9.5% of ($7900 + $5150) = $1,239.75. $7,900 + $5,150 + $1,239.75 = $14,289.75, not $14,290.25.

· Plaintiff purchased the Chrome Hearts (sweaters and shirts) from Chrome Hearts on Robertson Boulevard on 4/16/23 at 2:23 PM for $2,734.22, including tax

· Plaintiff purchased the Louis Vuitton backpack from Louis Vuitton Las Vegas on 12/26/18 at 2:07 pm for $2,560 plus sales tax. This transaction also involved a return. The subtotal for the entire transaction was $760, and the sales tax was $62.70, representing a Nevada sales tax rate of 8.25%. 8.25% of $2,560 is $211.20. $2,560 + $211.20 = $2,771.20.[1]

The Court notes that $810.30 + $14,289.75 + $2,734.22 + $ 2,771.20 = $20,605.47.

Thus, Plaintiff has substantiated the requested $15,000 in general damages, but has only demonstrated special damages in the amount of $20,605.47.

Plaintiff also requests $1,160.23 in costs, composed of $655.23 in filing fees and $505 in process server’s fees. (CIV-100.) Plaintiff is entitled to recover these costs as Plaintiff is the prevailing party in this action. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1032, subd. (a)(4).)

Plaintiff’s request for default judgment is granted in part. Plaintiff has demonstrated entitlement to a judgment in the amount of $36,765.70 representing general damages in the amount of $15,000; special damages in the amount of $20,605.47; and costs in the amount of $1,160.23.

The Court shall enter the Default Judgment in conformance with the ruling unless Plaintiff objects.

[1] In arriving at the $3,382.70 figure, Plaintiff apparently mistakenly added the price of the backpack ($2,560) to the $822.70 total for the transaction, which represents the $2,560 cost of the backpack, minus an $1,800 return, plus $62.70 in sales tax on the differential between the backpack and the returned item. In other words, the $3,382.70 figure improperly adds the $2,560 cost of the backpack twice, subtracts the $1,800 return, and then does not account for the additional sales tax on the full cost of the $2,560 backpack.

DEPARTMENT	207
HEARING DATE	February 7, 2025
CASE NUMBER	23SMCV03319
MATTER	Request for Default Judgment