TENTATIVE 

Plaintiff Defu Zhang (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against Defendants Cao Xianbao, Xiang Fei Cao, and Does 1 through 25 for damages arising from assault and battery. Plaintiff alleges that on July 11, 2021, Cao Xianbao and/or Xiang Fei Cao struck Plaintiff in the head with a beer bottle, causing Plaintiff injury to the head that required staples to close. Plaintiff filed requests for dismissal to dismiss Cao Xianbao and Does 1-25. 

Plaintiff now seeks default judgment against Defendant Xiang Fei Cao (“Defendant”) in the amount of $95,681 for special damages, $1,190,000 in general damages, and $659.85 in costs.  

The request for default judgment, submitted on January 18, 2024, is CONDITIONALLY GRANTED in the following amounts: 

First, the Court notes that Plaintiff is necessarily limited on default judgment; the amount sought cannot exceed the amount set forth in the Statement of Damages. (Code Civ. Proc., § 580(a); Airs Aromatics, LLC v. CBL Data Recovery Technologies, Inc. (2018) 23 Cal.App.5th 1013, 1018.) The Statement of Damages served on Defendant prior to entry of default provides Plaintiff is seeking “$17,520.30+” in medical specials, “$150,000+” in future medical expenses, and “$46.98+” in medication. The “+”does not allow Plaintiff to seek more than the stated value on default judgment. The purpose of the statement of damages is to ensure that a defendant who declines to contest an action does not thereby subject himself to open ended liability. (Schwab v. Rondel Homes, Inc. (1991) 53 Cal.3d 428, 435 (quoting Greenup v. Rodman (1986) 42 Cal.3d 822, 826.) Section 425.11 requires special and general damages to be specified, including stating the amount sought to be recovered. (Plotitsa v. Superior Ct. (1983) 140 Cal. App. 3d 755, 761.) 

Second, Plaintiff appears to be seeking loss of income or earning capacity based on his calculation of his life expectancy. However, the medical records do not support a claim for any type of permanent injury to necessitate payments based on life expectancy, nor does the statement of damages provide for any loss of earnings/loss of future earning capacity. Therefore, the Court will not consider this request.  

Third, Plaintiff alleges he suffered a laceration to his left frontal scalp and injuries to his left ring finger as a result of the incident. Plaintiff declares he still suffers from generalized pain to his left hand and head over two years after the incident. Plaintiff claims past medical expenses of $95,681.43. In support of his past medical specials, Plaintiff provides medical bills evidencing amounts exceeding $17,520.30. However, as previously stated, the Statement of Damages acts as a cap on Plaintiff’s damages. Thus, Plaintiff has sufficiently provided enough evidence to be awarded the cap of $17,520.30 in past medical specials.  

However, there is lack of support for past pain and suffering for $190,000, or future pain and suffering for $1 million. The Court will therefore reduce the request to $10,000.  

Further, the Court notes that Plaintiff’s March 16, 2022 medical report by William I. Wong, D.C. found that Plaintiff’s injuries “were the result of a vehicle accident which occurred on July 11, 2021.” (Plaintiff’s Decl. Exh. 5.) The allegations in the complaint pertain to assault and battery with a beer bottle, not an automobile accident. Although a defaulting defendant admits liability, Plaintiff must still introduce admissible prima facie evidence of damages. (Johnson v. Stanhiser (1999) 72 Cal.App.4th 357, 361.) Here, not all of the medical records correlate with the allegations against Defendant. 

Fourth, in terms of costs, Plaintiff seeks $437.25 for clerk’s filing fees, $85.95 for process server’s fees, and $129.39 for “Other”. Plaintiff did not specify “Other” costs, and the Court will not award this portion of unknown costs.  

Lastly, Plaintiff previously submitted a proposed order, properly using JUD-100. However, instead of using JUD-100 on this current request for court judgment, Plaintiff instead filed a proposed order on pleading paper. The request for default judgment will be granted upon Plaintiff properly filing a proposed order on JUD-100 [Rev. January 1, 2024]. 

Provided that the proposed order defect is cured, the application for default judgment filed on January 18, 2024 is GRANTED in the principal amount of $27,520.30, and $523.20 in costs, against Defendant Xiang Fei Cao.¿ 

Plaintiff is ordered to give notice of this ruling.¿¿¿¿