Judge: Michael E. Whitaker, Case: 24SMCV02135, Date: 2025-01-07 Tentative Ruling
Case Number: 24SMCV02135 Hearing Date: January 7, 2025 Dept: 207
TENTATIVE RULING
|
DEPARTMENT |
207 |
|
HEARING DATE |
January 7, 2025 |
|
CASE NUMBER |
24SMCV02135 |
|
MATTER |
Request for Default Judgment |
Plaintiff Laurence M. Berman APC
dba Berman Litigation Group (“Plaintiff”) requests for default judgment against
Defendants Joseph Rubin (“Rubin”) and The Coachella Lighthouse, LLC (“Coachella”)
(together, “Defendants”) in the amount of $320,346.05, which is
composed of special damages as alleged in the Complaint in the amount of $302,096.67;
prejudgment interest in the amount of $17,380.90; and costs in the amount of $868.48.
A.
Damages
This case arises from allegations that Defendants failed
to pay Plaintiff for legal services rendered.
Plaintiff’s Complaint alleges two causes of action for (1) Breach of
Contract and (2) Common Count. Coachella
was served with a copy of the summons and complaint via substitute service on
May 31, 2024, and Rubin was served via substitute service on June 3, 2024. Default was entered against Defendants on August
23, 2024, and the Doe defendants were dismissed on December 2, 2024.
Plaintiff’s Complaint seeks $302,096.67
in special damages. (See Compl.) 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 of Laurence M. Berman,
attached to which are billing records substantiating $255,124.69 in legal fees
and $13,812.14 in unreimbursed costs, for a total outstanding principal balance
of $268,936.83.
To this
principal balance, Plaintiff has also charged interest at an annual rate of 10%
from March 1, 2023 through the May 6, 2024 filing of the Complaint in the
amount of $33,159.84.
However,
Plaintiff has not provided an authenticated copy of any written agreement to
substantiate the requested 10% interest rate.
Further,
$268,936.83 principal balance x 10% ÷ 365 days/year = $73.68 daily interest,
and $73.68 daily interest x 432 days from March 1, 2023 through the May 6, 2024
filing of the Complaint = $31,830.33, not $33,159.84.
Therefore,
the Court finds that Plaintiff has not demonstrated entitlement to the
requested $302,096.67 in damages.
B.
Prejudgment Interest
The interest computation for the $17,380.90
requested is stated as follows:
·
$302,096.70 principal x 10% annual interest ÷ 365 days/yr =
$82.77 daily interest
As
a threshold matter, as discussed above, Plaintiff has not provided an
authenticated copy of a written agreement to substantiate the 10% contractual
interest rate, as opposed to the 7% non-contractual interest rate. Further, $82.77 daily interest x 205 days
from May 6, 2024 when the Complaint was filed to November 27, 2024 when the
Default Judgment package was filed = $16,967.85, not the requested $17,380.90.
Therefore, Plaintiff has not
demonstrated entitlement to the requested prejudgment interest.
C.
Costs
Plaintiff also requests $838.22 in costs composed of $435 in filing fees and $404.22 in process server fees. (CIV-100.) Plaintiff’s request for costs is granted as
Plaintiff is the prevailing party in this action. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1032,
subd. (a)(4).)
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, the Court continues the Order
to Show Cause re Entry of Default Judgment to February 18, 2025 at 8:30 A.M. in
Department 207.
Further, the Court orders Plaintiff to file a
supplemental declaration in support of the default judgment request and a
revised proposed default judgment in conformity with the Court’s ruling on or
before February 4, 2025.
DATED: January 7, 2025 ________________________________
Michael
E. Whitaker
Judge
of the Superior Court