Judge: Michael Shultz, Case: 19CMCV00334, Date: 2022-08-03 Tentative Ruling
INSTRUCTIONS: If the parties wish to submit on the tentative ruling and avoid a court appearance on the matter, the moving party must:
1. Contact the opposing party and all other parties who have appeared in the action and confirm that each will submit on the tentative ruling.
2. No later than 4:00 p.m. on the court day before the hearing, call the Courtroom (310-761-4302) advising that all parties will submit on the tentative ruling and waive hearing; and
3. Serve notice of the Court's ruling on all parties entitled to receive service.
If this procedure is followed, when the case is called the Court will enter its ruling on the motion in accordance with its tentative ruling. If any party declines to submit on the tentative ruling, then no telephone call is necessary, and all parties should appear at the hearing. If there is neither a telephone call nor an appearance, then the matter may either be taken off calendar or ruled on.
TENTATIVE RULINGS -- http://www.lacourt.org/tentativeRulingNet/u
Case Number: 19CMCV00334 Hearing Date: August 3, 2022 Dept: A
19CMCV00334
Torres v. Peretz, et al.
[TENTATIVE] ORDER
The complaint filed on November 26,
2019, alleges that Plaintiff entered into an oral construction agreement with
Defendants to convert Plaintiff’s garage into an apartment. Defendants
allegedly failed to obtain the required permits to complete construction and
failed to complete the work in a timely manner. Plaintiff alleges five causes
of action including claims for fraud, negligence, and breach of contract.
The court held a hearing on the fee
motion as well as Plaintiff’s Request for Court Judgment by Default on May 10,
2022, but twice continued both events to permit Plaintiff to submit evidence in
support of claimed damages.
The request for court judgment remains
defective for the reasons stated in the court’s minute order of May 10, 2022,
as the request is not supported by any documentary evidence of damages
suffered. Plaintiff’s declaration alone is not sufficient evidence to prove
damages. Code Civ. Proc., § 585(b) [“The court shall hear the evidence offered
by the plaintiff and shall render judgment in the plaintiff's favor for that
relief, not exceeding the amount stated in the complaint, … as appears by the
evidence to be just.”].
Plaintiff asks for a total judgment
of $32,105.99 for loss of rent over twelve months; $4,750 to hire other contractors
to complete the project; and $1,023.57 to reimburse Plaintiff for the cost of a
fine issued by the city. See Declaration of Martin Torres. Plaintiff did not
provide any documentary evidence to prove that he sustained these damages
including any qualified declaration attesting to the fair rental value of the
premises which Plaintiff lost as a consequence of Defendant’s conduct.
As the court stated, Plaintiff’s
request for attorney’s fees will be reduced to reflect scheduled fees set forth
in Local Rule 3.214. Reasonable fees are based on the amount of principal
damages suffered, which Plaintiff has not yet proved with documentary evidence.
Based on the foregoing, the court
continues the hearing on Plaintiff’s fee motion and request for court judgment by
default to October 7, 2022, at 8:30 a.m. in Department A of the Compton
courthouse. On the same day, the court also sets an Order to Show re: Dismissal
for Failure to Submit Evidence in Support of Request for Court Judgment. Plaintiff
shall file a supplemental declaration including documentary evidence proving
damages sustained by Plaintiff and an amended proposed judgment, to be filed 10
court days before the continued hearing date.