Judge: Michael Shultz, Case: 23CMCV00010, Date: 2024-02-21 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/ui/main.aspx?casetype=civil

Case Number: 23CMCV00010    Hearing Date: February 21, 2024    Dept: A

23CMCV00010 Norm Reeves, Inc. v. Jose Jesus Navarrete aka etc; Laura Rodriguez

[TENTATIVE] ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR COURT JUDGMENT

      The complaint alleges that Defendants breached a written sales contract to finance the purchase of a vehicle totaling $58,013.91. Since Defendants could not obtain financing, Plaintiff reduced the price of the vehicle and rewrote the finance contract for a financed amount of $23,920.80 which Defendants signed. Plaintiff alleges that the second signed contract contained a clerical error because it omitted the balance Defendants still owed on their trade-in vehicle. Defendants refused to sign a corrected contract. Plaintiff demanded payment of the omitted amount of $33,640.53. Plaintiff alleges claims for breach of contract and common counts.

      The clerk entered default against Jose Jesus Navarrete on October 30, 2023. Plaintiff dismissed Laura Rodriguez on December 21,2024 and dismissed all DOE defendants on January 2, 2024. Plaintiff seeks judgment against Navarrette only.

      Well-pleaded allegations are admitted by the defaulting defendant. (Carlsen v. Koivumaki (2014) 227 Cal.App.4th 879, 899.) Damages, however, “may only be awarded a well-pled cause of action, and to that end, the complaint must be examined." (Id.)

      A valid contract requires consent, a lawful object, and consideration. (Civ. Code, § 1550.) Plaintiff alleges Defendants signed a re-written sales contract for the purchase of the vehicle on August 10, 2021, for a total financed amount of $23,920.80. (Vince Marquez Decl., Exhibit B.) While Plaintiff alleges that the “rewrite” contained an error, Plaintiff admits that Defendants did not sign the “corrected” contract containing the new terms. (Complaint, ¶ 12.). Accordingly, Plaintiff is not entitled to an award of damages on terms to which Defendants admittedly did not consent.

      Therefore, Plaintiff’s request for court judgment is DENIED.